Julius Caesar Rhetorical Analysis

453 Words2 Pages
Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar,” was a very historical play that also showed the complexity of human emotions and character. The characters in the play used pathos, ethos and logos to argue their way through at different times, which resulted in the murder of Julius Caesar. Shakespeare very accurately portrayed the diversity in humans and their thinking pattern. Nobody in the story was a full on hero or an antihero, everybody was a mixture of both. Throughout the story, we learn a lot about the characters through their conversations. Most of the conversations that were happening close to the Ides of March had to do with the planning Caesar’s assassination. Here we see a lot of persuading going on, as Cassius is trying to manipulate his noble friends against Caesar, because he needs more people to execute the plan. He…show more content…
He uses pathos, while also portraying the ugliest human trait, envy. Cassius did not like Julius from the start, he called him “an average man,” saying how he was nothing special, and anyone, for example Brutus, could do such things as Caesar did, and greater. He used false analogy during his convincing; he called the emperor physically weak, just because he couldn’t swim, and had epileptic attacks. He was angered to find out that Caesar took his legions. He was jealous of how much Caesar has accomplished. Yet Brutus still extracted logic out of this. He always thought of Caesar as a good Roman that only thinks about the empire, he was a faithful comrade to Brutus. Brutus thought that Caesar was ambitious, that his ambition was growing larger than the ambition of the empire. He did not think this was good for Rome, he had a very hard time making the decision, but he thought it was best to just kill Caesar. Brutus’ motive was very different from Cassius’; it was driven by what might have been the wrong logic but it still was not just

More about Julius Caesar Rhetorical Analysis

Open Document