Upon reading Shakespeare’s “The Tragedy of Julius Caesar” one would agree that Marcus Brutus is the character which, at first glance, appears to be most likeable. Honour as value is something that turns up frequently throughout the play, especially with regard to Brutus. Being the one that murders a friend in order to free the people from tyranny, he acts according to his personal conception of honour. It is not without facing an inner conflict that he decides to put aside his personal feelings of friendship in order to serve the common good. This is what one could say about Brutus if matters were as clear as that. On closer inspection, however, one quickly takes notice of discrepancies as to Brutus’ character and actions.
Carrie Pestritto states that “Brutus’s honour […] gives him an almost Christ-like aura“ whereas others see him as ambiguous and his character as not to be defined unequivocally. The idea of honour can be interpreted in many different ways and the characters’ understanding of honour differ immensely. “’Caesar was ambitious […] and Brutus is an honourable man’ (3.2.79-88). Are things really as simple as that?” Kullmann, referring to Pestritto here, poses a question that will be discussed in this paper. The focus is to be on Brutus and his view of the events, evaluating his actions and the reasoning they are based on. It will be possible to see that his only way of coming to a decision and carrying out the assassination is by means of self-delusion. To open himself up to and reconcile with the idea of committing a murder, he has to construct his own fiction, ending up living in a fool’s paradise. For him the way things appear to be weighs down what they are in reality.
Important in the above mentioned context is Brutus’ part in the conspiracy, which is going to be worked out in detail. Since the question of honour is such an essential factor, it is necessary to clarify the fact that there are various ways of defining honour and accordingly each character has their own sense of honour. Gradually, Brutus is dragged into the conspiracy, a process on the basis of which we are able to learn a lot about his character and his moral concepts.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. “Good Brutus, Can You See Your Face?” – Brutus’ Role Within the Conspiracy
2.1. The Question of Honour
2.2. From Being Pulled to Pulling the Strings
3. “Fashion it Thus” – Brutus’ Reasoning and Justification
3.1. Constructing a Moral Purpose
3.2. Intention vs. Consequences
4. Conclusion
Objectives and Themes
This paper examines the character of Marcus Brutus in Shakespeare's "The Tragedy of Julius Caesar," specifically focusing on his role within the conspiracy to assassinate Caesar. The central inquiry explores the paradox of Brutus acting out of a perceived sense of honour while resorting to self-delusion and the fabrication of a moral purpose to justify murder.
- The influence of personal concepts of honour on political action.
- Cassius' role as a manipulator and the subsequent shift in power dynamics within the conspiracy.
- The psychological process behind Brutus' rationalization of tyrannicide.
- The discrepancy between Brutus' noble intentions and the catastrophic consequences of his actions.
Excerpt from the Book
3.1. Constructing a Moral Purpose
Right at the beginning of Julius Caesar, Brutus names honour as the drive for his actions. Honour is going to be his point of reference during his whole process of justification. By saying that he loves honour more than he fears death (JC 1.2.88f) Brutus clarifies right away that he would always act in the cause of honour. The orchard scene (JC 2.1) is the most revealing one concerning Brutus and his self-justification. The decisional process here seems to be reversed, with the conclusion coming before the reasoning making it even more shocking for us to read since it hits us without any preparation. We do not know this for sure but it appears as if this is a result of Cassius’ influence, his words having been what was needed to completely convince Brutus of the idea of tyrannicide.
Considering the rest of his soliloquy it catches the eye that Brutus starts and ends the part, in which he thinks of Caesar as a possible danger, with an image of a snake. Caesar is compared to a poisonous animal in order to emphasise the threat he poses to Rome and her people. Brutus, after having described what might happen if Caesar gets crowned, says that for this reasons one should “think him as a serpent’s egg” (JC 2.1.32, my italics). At this point the fact that he merely tries to make it look like Caesar is harmful is evident. He is not saying “Caesar is dangerous”, but “think of him as dangerous.” This is a proof of Brutus not basing his decision on real facts but on the mere imagination of what could happen.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter introduces Marcus Brutus as a conflicted, seemingly honourable character and outlines the paper's focus on his self-delusion and moral justification.
2. “Good Brutus, Can You See Your Face?” – Brutus’ Role Within the Conspiracy: This section analyzes the manipulation of Brutus by Cassius and the contrasting views on honour that drive their participation in the plot.
2.1. The Question of Honour: This chapter defines the differing concepts of honour held by Brutus and the other conspirators, emphasizing how these internal definitions motivate their actions.
2.2. From Being Pulled to Pulling the Strings: This section traces the shift in power, detailing how Brutus evolves from a manipulated participant into the decisive leader of the conspiracy.
3. “Fashion it Thus” – Brutus’ Reasoning and Justification: This chapter examines the psychological strategies Brutus employs to render his participation in the assassination morally acceptable to himself.
3.1. Constructing a Moral Purpose: This section analyzes how Brutus uses internal dialogue and imagery to transform the assassination into a perceived necessity, based largely on imagination rather than fact.
3.2. Intention vs. Consequences: This chapter addresses the tragic failure of Brutus' plans, arguing that his noble intentions could not prevent the chaotic consequences that followed Caesar's death.
4. Conclusion: The final chapter synthesizes the arguments to conclude that Brutus’ self-delusion ultimately underscores the moral failure of his actions, proving that the end does not justify the means.
Keywords
Marcus Brutus, Julius Caesar, Honour, Conspiracy, Tyrannicide, Self-delusion, Moral Purpose, Manipulation, Cassius, Responsibility, Shakespeare, Roman Plays, Intention, Consequences, Ethics.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the central focus of this academic paper?
The paper explores the character of Marcus Brutus in Shakespeare's "The Tragedy of Julius Caesar," focusing on how he navigates his role within the conspiracy and the moral justifications he constructs for himself.
What are the primary themes discussed in the work?
The core themes include the conflicting definitions of honour, the nature of political manipulation, the psychological process of self-delusion, and the failure of idealistic intentions when faced with the realities of power.
What is the research question addressed by the author?
The paper seeks to reconcile Antony's description of Brutus as "the noblest Roman of them all" with the reality of his actions, examining whether his motives were truly noble or clouded by self-deception.
Which scientific methodology is applied in this analysis?
The author employs a literary analysis approach, drawing upon text-based evidence from the play and integrating critical perspectives from scholars such as John Alvis, Carrie Pestritto, and David Lucking.
What is the scope of the main chapters?
The main body of the work covers Brutus' recruitment into the conspiracy, the evolution of his leadership, his rhetorical strategies for moral justification, and an evaluation of the disastrous consequences resulting from his political idealism.
What define the keywords for this study?
The keywords reflect the intersection of character psychology and political philosophy within the context of Shakespearean tragedy, highlighting the tension between personal honour and public violence.
How does Brutus justify the assassination of Caesar to himself?
Brutus constructs a "moral purpose" by characterizing Caesar as a potential tyrant who must be killed "in the shell," effectively using self-delusion to frame a brutal murder as a noble act of preventive sacrifice.
Does the paper conclude that Brutus' actions were justified?
No, the paper concludes that while Brutus' intentions may have been noble, the means he employed were not, ultimately asserting that the end does not justify the means given the negative consequences that follow.
- Quote paper
- Anne Decker (Author), 2012, Brutus’ Role in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/264410
