Marcus Brutus In Shakespeare's Julius Caesar

984 Words4 Pages
Julius Caesar, Acts I, II, and III, offers an interpretation of politics and human nature presented with the realistic touch of historical relevance. Two primary characters, Marcus Brutus and Caius Cassius, are introduced in the early pages of the novel as starkly different personalities united by a common cause. A prominent politician of Rome around 44 B.C, Brutus is a trusted friend of the soon-to-be emperor Julius Caesar. He strongly believes that there is a right solution for every dilemma, and devotes himself to finding these ‘right answers’ even when they endanger himself. Cassius, a skilled Roman general and friend of Brutus, harbors severe hatred for Caesar and Caesar’s power. He is less considerate than Brutus and holds a more ‘Machiavellian’…show more content…
One of these triumvirs, Pompey, was defeated by Caesar in a civil war. This victory brought Caesar towards becoming the emperor of Rome, a first for their government. William Shakespeare, famed playwright of the 1500s, wrote Julius Caesar with relative historical accuracy, but the time gap allowed for fictional interpretation on Shakespeare’s part. In the first acts of the play, Marcus Brutus faces several issues which begin with an internal conflict over whether or not he should kill his dear friend Caesar. In Act II, Brutus performs a monologue regarding the righteousness of killing Caesar. Brutus is not sure whether Caesar deserves to die, but due to the risk that Caesar may rule as a tyrant, Brutus tries to “therefore think him as a serpent’s egg / … / And kill him in the shell.” (19). Another struggle that Brutus faces involves the differences between his perception of the world and its actual state of existence. Brutus believes that people are inherently good, and does not see how he is being used by Cassius and Antony. By thinking that life can easily be understood, Brutus submits himself to idealistic naivety and cripples his ability to respond properly to the mischief of others. Additionally, Brutus faces a discrepancy in his thoughts relating to Caesar, more colloquially known as cognitive dissonance. Because of this, in Act III Brutus…show more content…
Cassius’ envious nature proves to be a driving force for the plot of Julius Caesar. Strongly opinionated, Cassius attempts to convince Brutus to scheme against Caesar, saying “Brutus, and Caesar: what should be in that Caesar? / Why should that name be sounded more than yours?.” (8). Cassius initially struggles with himself as he recognizes his role simply as a catalyst for action and not a prominent actor. With his manipulative and intelligent qualities, Cassius is very skilled at convincing others to take action for things that only Cassius himself is extremely passionate about. However, Cassius tends to pull back as a follower after a leader for his cause (such as Brutus) has been established. Additionally, Cassius is very perceptive of human nature. This trait leads him to distrust many, and Julius Caesar speaks of Cassius with “Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; / He thinks too much: such men are dangerous.” (9). Unlike Brutus, Cassius operates between levels three and four of the Kohlberg scale of moral development. He does not like to follow constraints set by others and does what he wants. However, Cassius obviously fears the opinion of the public, going paranoid when he suspects Popilius has uncovered the conspirators’ schemes. Likewise, Cassius tries desperately to avoid reprisal from the common folk of
Open Document