| Papers [1-13] of 13 | Search results on "BRUTUS": |
|
|
Brutus, 2002.
A character analysis of Brutus in William Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar".
700 words (approx. 2.8 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 24.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In the story of "Julius Caesar" by William Shakespeare, Brutus is essential to the plot development of the play. The paper shows that his character is gullible in the way he lets people take advantage of his naivete towards other characters in the play. Brutus is also facing an inevitable death due to the fact that he has a dying patriotism to his country. The paper examines Brutus' conflict between being a friend to Rome and a friend to a Caesar. This conflict made Brutus agonize over the idea of Caesar being murdered. It shows that this conflict led to the tragedy in Brutus? life. Brutus inflicted the wound that may have been the one that killed Caesar and eliminated the one thing that Rome required - Caesar.
From the Paper
"In the play, Brutus has the utmost pride in and love for his country. On p.11 lines79-80, Brutus states ?What means this shouting? I do fear the people choose Caesar for their king.? This is earlier in the story when Brutus first fears Caesar blooming into a king. Brutus acknowledges at this point that he does have some sort of hatred brewing inside of him towards Caesar. On p.11, lines 88-89 he states ? For let the gods so speed me as I love the name of honor more than I fear death.? He would rather die with honor then to wallow in his life with a great dishonor. He must return to the vociferate ways which Brutus had before. If he had loved Caesar he would have made an outcry for help and to at least influence Caesar?s head with rumors of a conspiracy. There is no doubt that he tried his best to make the government not suffer by Caesar?s death. Brutus always will have a dying love for his country."
| |
|
Marcus Brutus, 2005.
A character analysis of Marcus Brutus from William Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar".
1,174 words (approx. 4.7 pages), 0 sources, $ 40.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar" and in particular, examines the qualities of Marcus Brutus. It looks at how some qualities can be good or bad, but in Brutus? case his idealism is his flaw. It shows how Brutus is a very true and honest man and how he was always trying to look out for Romans and seek the best for them. Brutus never put his loyalty or nobility to Romans at stake; he always chose the right thing to do according to his morals.
From the Paper
"Since Marcus Brutus assumed everyone was pure and honest like him, he in his idealistic state of being, made three major mistakes during the play. The first mistake was not to swear an oath. He thought an oath was not needed because he believed everyone was honest and would keep a secret. His second mistake was not to let Cicero join the conspiracy. He did not want him in the conspiracy because he thought it would appear that the conspirators were trying to buy the crowds support by having Cicero speak. If Cicero would have been in on the conspiracy he may have swayed the crowd in their favor after Caesar?s death with his excellent speaking skills. Brutus? last and most foolish mistake was not to kill Antony."
| |
|
Cassius and Brutus, 2004.
An analysis of the characters Cassius and Brutus in William Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar".
1,844 words (approx. 7.4 pages), 0 sources, $ 59.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines William Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar" and in particular looks at how the characters of Cassius and Brutus change from Act one Scene two and Act two Scene one. It discusses how throughout the whole play there are lots of power struggles and betrayal and how the characters of both Cassius and Brutus both develop greatly. It show how the relationship between them changes in many ways and how Brutus always seems to like to be in control of whatever is going on.
From the Paper
"Cassius is being so obsequious and sycophantic here that he almost seems insincere. This is suggesting that the plebeians of Rome would rather have Brutus as a dictator than Caesar. An actor would emphasise the stinging ?except immortal Caesar?. Brutus gets very agitated by this as he feels if anyone is above him then he is denigrated and base. Brutus does not want to be inferior to Caesar in any way. It goes against all of Brutus?s personality traits to take the submissive role to anyone or to let anyone seem above him. The way Cassius says ?immortal Caesar? presents him in almost a god like position. This is again reiterating the point that Caesar is above Brutus. This represents the manipulative and duplicitous side of Cassius? character."
| |
|
Shakespeare's Brutus. His Maturation into Tragic Hero, 2002.
This paper examines how Shakespeare paints Brutus as the tragic hero in "Julius Caesar".
1,900 words (approx. 7.6 pages), 2 sources, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This is evident by Shakespeare's sympathetic portrayal of Brutus, who is shown to act out of loyalty to ideals, rather than out of selfishness. Shakespeare creates a tragic hero out of Brutus by blending in him the strength of virtue and the weakness of naivete. Brutus ultimately dies for his love of justice. 8 pgs. Bibliography lists 2 sources.
| |
|
The Speeches of Antony and Brutus, 2001.
Examines the differences in Antony and Brutus' speech styles and effectiveness in "Julius Caesar".
1,430 words (approx. 5.7 pages), 1 source, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This is a paper comparing and contrasting the two major speeches of Marcus Brutus and Antony in William Shakespeare?s "Julius Caesar". The author makes several interesting points and discusses how Antony ?s method of toying with the audience?s emotions prevailed over Brutus? attempt to use the audience?s pride and patriotism.
From the Paper
"Great speakers are remembered throughout history for making speeches that touch the audience, or get the audience to believe something that before seemed like nonsense. People like Martin Luther King Junior and Abraham Lincoln changed history, and are remembered to this day for their historic speeches. In William Shakespeare?s play, Julius Caesar, two such speeches were made. In the play, both Marcus Brutus and Antony made speeches that moved the crowd, but they used different techniques to accomplish their goals. Brutus? and Antony ?s speeches differed vastly in their emphasis, content, and writing style."
| |
|
Brutus and Cassius, 2003.
Critically analyzes the characters from William Shakespeare's "The Tragedy of Julius Caesar".
725 words (approx. 2.9 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 25.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In "The Tragedy of Julius Caesar" by William Shakespeare, we see the characters of Brutus and Cassius as having the same goals to rid Rome of Caesar, but each for a different reason. The paper shows that Brutus wants Caesar dead for the good of Rome; the audience can see this when Brutus carefully and thoughtfully weighs his decision to join the conspiracy. It shows, on the other hand, that Cassius is jealous of Julius Caesar and his power and therefore wants to kill him.
From the Paper
"Throughout the conspiracy, Brutus and Cassius make many more important decisions besides murdering Caesar. Between the two, Cassius, unlike Brutus, has a more realistic outlook on the world. In the decision to allow Mark Antony to speak at Caesar?s funeral, Cassius realizes that this is not a good idea and Cassius says to Brutus, ?You know not what you do. Do not consent / That Antony speak in his funeral / Know you how much the people may be moved / by that which he will utter?? (III. i. 234 ? 237). In contrast to Cassius? quick, decisive nature, the audience sees that Brutus carefully weighs and agonizes over his decisions before he makes them. Although Brutus? decisions might not be the wisest, they are definitely the most carefully considered. Brutus? weighing of his decisions is apparent when he is debating whether he should join the conspiracy (II. i. ll 10 ? 30)."
| |
|
Logic vs. Emotion in Shakespeare, 2005.
An overview of the speeches given by Antony and Brutus in William Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar".
733 words (approx. 2.9 pages), 0 sources, $ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar". The paper analyzes the speeches given by Antony and Brutus. The paper contends that while Brutus does not comprehend the power of human emotion and is completely possessed by reason, Antony has a very good understanding of emotion and ironically, he uses logic to harness and manipulate it.
From the Paper
"Who says that sensitive, emotionally perceptive men don't succeed in the political arena? In William Shakespeare's tragedy, Julius Caesar, Brutus and his fellow conspirators murder Julius Caesar and an oration then follows at which Brutus and Antony speak. After the speeches, sides are drawn and a civil war follows in which the second triumvirate (Antony, Octavius, and Oepidus) prevails. Shakespeare writes this play to illuminate the assassination of Julius Caesar and the resulting history that follows. The play demonstrates that when dealing with fickle human beings, emotion will more often overrule logic in matters of moral justice. Brutus does not comprehend emotion in the least and relies solely on logic, which inevitably leads to his downfall. Antony however, understands and is able to utilize emotion, this makes him the more effective orator which results in his success."
| |
|
The Measure of Manliness, 2006.
A study of the Shakespeare play "Julius Caesar", focusing on the characters of Brutus and Cassius.
2,500 words (approx. 10.0 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 75.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper analyzes the play "Julius Caesar" by Shakespeare, exploring two variant conceptions of manhood. The paper provides a textual analysis of Cassius, who exemplifies a manhood based in physical prowess and achievement, while Brutus exemplifies a manhood characterized by a deep stoicism. A contrast of these two types of manhood (and indeed, the two characters) is a theme that runs as the play's backbone. Their ideas on manhood direct their decisions; it causes Brutus to rush into the assassination without practical planning, thus manliness (and male conceptions of manhood) is the indirect source of much of the conflict in the play.
From the Paper
"It would be an incomplete discussion to address the issue of manhood in the text, especially within the context of ancient Rome, if one does not look to the concepts of honor and virtue. The Oxford English Dictionary defines honor in the context of Elizabethan idiom in several ways, the most applicable to our exploration of Julius Caesar being "[g]lory, renown, fame; credit, reputation, good name," and "[e]xalted rank or position; dignity, distinction." Virtue means "[c]onformity of life and conduct with the principles of morality; voluntary observance of the recognized moral laws or standards of right conduct[..,]" or "the possession or display of manly qualities; manly excellence, manliness, courage, valour." In Julius Caesar, we see the working out of these concepts through the characters of Brutus and Cassius. Brutus, who longs to have the reputation of a man of morals and of internal dignity, tries to operate with a moral compass. He attends mostly to the principle behind an action and not its outward show. He believes this will be sufficient. His implicit trust in the Romans to recognize a worthy man doing a worthy action when they see it is not politically astute and naive. Because of his naivety in things political (and his belief that the people of Rome are a judicious body as opposed to a fickle mob), we see him making disastrous mistakes such as trying to reason with the crowd even as the body of Caesar lies warm and bloody on the ground."
| |
|
"The Tragedy of Julius Caesar", 2004.
An examination of the character of Brutus in Shakespeare's "The Tragedy of Julius Caesar".
987 words (approx. 3.9 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper provides a character analysis of Brutus in Shakespeare's play. It argues that Brutus should be considered the main character of the play. It explains that he is a very powerful character and can be considered the tragic hero of the play.
From the Paper
"My purpose was to show how Marcus Brutus was the main character found in the Shakespeare?s Julius Caesar. Brutus believed in the idea of Rome and the power of the republic, which lead to his joining of the conspiracy and murdering of Caesar. Throughout the play we can see examples to see how Brutus is linked to being the main character. As a result of being the main character, we see how he is associated with being the tragic hero, as like in all of Shakespeare?s plays where the hero dies in the end."
| |
|
The Motivation for the Murder of Julius Caesar, 2008.
An examination of the motivation for the 'liberators' in their assassination of Julius Caesar.
1,842 words (approx. 7.4 pages), 8 sources, APA, $ 59.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses whether Julius Caesar was assassinated out of fear, idealism or jealousy. It argues that fear, idealism and jealousy were all present among the 'liberators' when they assassinated Caesar. It specifically looks at the idealism of Brutus, the fear of Cicero and the jealousy of Cassius in their responsibility for causing the final downfall of Caesar.
Table of Contents:
Introduction
Probable Causes Of Caesar's Assassination:
Historical Background/Political Situation
Idealism Of The 'Liberators' Or The Conspirators
The Opposing View And The Role Of Jealousy Or Fear
Fear Among Friends
Jealousy Amidst The Power Seekers
Understanding The Underlying Factors
Conclusion
From the Paper
"According to Taylor, though the struggle against Caesar was triggered by idealism, in course of time it became more influenced by 'personal interests' rather than any ideal of Free State. Storch suggests that 'relative depravity' possibly played a role in Caesar's assassination. He explains that those who were pardoned or favored by Caesar were not happy as they in many cases did not get as much as they wanted. Moreover even inside the inner circle of friends dissatisfaction remained because of advancing someone's career over others, like that of Anotony's. Though there were many eligible people in line to be chosen as consul, violating the tradition Caesar appointed Antony for the position, which enraged Labienus, one of the hopefuls for consulship and a member of Caesarian camp."
| |
|
Concepts of Loyalty, 2003.
Examines conflicting loyalties in fictional characters.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 0 sources, $ 23.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Discusses common problems characters face in deciding how to behave when faced with conflicting loyalties. Examines the character of Brutus in Shakespeare's Elizabethan drama, "Julius Caesar", and political ideals.
From the Paper
"Loyalty signifies one's duty and fidelity to a cause, a person, a place or an ideal. There are times, however, when more than one object of loyalty is present, and the result is conflicting loyalties. This paper will examine conflicting loyalties in two..."
| |
|
The Rhetoric of Machiavelli and Shakespeare, 2005.
This paper compares the use and abuse of rhetoric by two Renaissance geniuses: Machiavelli in "The Prince" and Shakespeare in "Julius Caesar".
4,845 words (approx. 19.4 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 123.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that the primary use of rhetoric is to convince the reader to take the author's side of an opinion; but sometimes the author, as in Machiavelli's "The Prince", has hidden his opinion so deeply in the rhetoric that it is misunderstood. The author points out that Shakespeare used rhetoric in his plays, especially in his political tragedies, to demonstrate how easily men and women were corruptible by power. The paper relates that in "Julius Caesar" Cassius was totally corrupted by his quest for power and brought down ignominiously in battle; however, Brutus, whose flaw was poor judgment and needed to be "one of the gang", was permitted to honorably commit suicide rather than be tried and executed. Many long textual examples.
Table of Contents
Uses and Abuses of Rhetoric
Rhetoric in "Julius Caesar"
Machiavelli's "The Prince"
Rhetoric Unveiled
From the Paper
"If Johnny Cochrane were playing to both the jury and the country in this use of a crude rhetorical device, certainly a playwright like Shakespeare would be playing to both royalty and the average playgoer when he wrote "Julius Caesar". Advertisement was limited to a few playbills posted on walls and what the town crier could yell to the generally illiterate common rabble. In looking at any of Shakespeare's plays as Renaissance commercial theatrical adventures, memorable lines would have been good selling points for the literate as was word of mouth of the great fight and death scenes to the common man. Even today our far more sophisticated tastes run from high action adventure to the deeply philosophical in our entertainment."
| |
|
Octavian's Rise to Power, 2006.
A brief history of how Octavian became the first emperor of Rome.
3,577 words (approx. 14.3 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 100.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper describes the rise to power of Octavian in 27 BCE, looking at how Cicero first supported Octavian as a potential leader of the Roman Republic and a bulwark against the threat of Antony's dictatorship over Rome and later opposed him when Octavian took sides with Antony. The paper then describes the defeat of Brutus at the hands of Antony and Octavian, the demise of Antony at the hands of Octavian and Octavian's final ascent to power.
From the Paper
"Cicero hated tyrants and spent much of his later political life seeking a leader who would restore the Roman Republic. To this end, he tried to use Octavian as a potential bulwark against the threat of Antony's dictatorship over Rome, but to Cicero's great dismay, Octavian was only the lesser of two evils. He, too, sought absolute political power and, using Cicero's popularity and controlling the Senate, he reached his goal (in 27 BCE, crowning himself princeps, and later, emperor.) In many ways, Cicero opposed Octavian's rise to power, especially when Octavian joined forced with Antony in a triumvirate with Lepidus. In 43 BCE, this "second" triumvirate had Cicero executed as an enemy of the state. "
|
|
|
If you can't find your topic here, try another search
or try our affordable, unique custom paper alternative
Custom Research Services include:
- Papers written from scratch, according to your specifications.
Every paper is UNIQUE - Guaranteed
- Professional, top-notch writers
- All topics covered
- Any deadline
- Your satisfaction guaranteed
Place a Custom Research order now
Find out more about Custom Research
|
|
|
