Register to read the introduction…
(I.iii.28-32)
With these lines, Casca proves himself to be an exemplary foil to Caesar. He is cowardly where Caesar’s bravery is undying; he is cruel and selfish where Caesar is for the good of the people. He is also, conveniently, the first of the conspirators to stab Caesar. Shakespeare, in this event, creates a greater degree of sympathy for Caesar in his audience. A third character developed and utilized well as a result of prophecy would be Cassius. Unlike Caesar and Casca, Cassius undergoes change that reveals itself to the public through his responses to prophecies. In his conversation with Casca about the omens of late he notes, “But men may construe things after their fashion, / Clean from the purpose of the things themselves” (I.iii.34-35). By this, he disregards Casca’s worries and moves forward with confidence as true as Caesar’s. For Cassius, unfortunately, this confidence does not last. Before he engages in war with Antony and Octavius, he frets:
Two mighty eagles fell, and there they perched,
Gorging and feeding from our soldiers’ hands,
Who to Philippi here consorted us.
This morning are they fled away and …show more content…
After all, the defeatist attitude of Cassius, being so unlike him, shakes the Elizabethan viewers and allows them to notice the true nature of Cassius as a person with insecurities. As such, he is humanized just in time to acquire sympathy for his death as well. The fourth and final person requiring discussion is Brutus, the honorable man. In his concern there is only one particular moment in which response to prophecy is significantly utilized. This moment of course refers to the visit of Caesar’s ghost, and in fact, Brutus’ response isn’t so much worth mentioning as his lack of response. He says only, “Why, I will see thee at Philippi then” (IV.iii.286). The importance of this anticlimactic acceptance lies within its trusting nature. Because the ghost has said nothing about any sort of harm coming to Brutus, he does not fear the ghost. This lack of response thus once again portrays Brutus’ admirable belief in the fundamental good of all people. As with Cassius, actions taken by Brutus as a result of prophecy serve to create more sympathy for him at the time of his
With these lines, Casca proves himself to be an exemplary foil to Caesar. He is cowardly where Caesar’s bravery is undying; he is cruel and selfish where Caesar is for the good of the people. He is also, conveniently, the first of the conspirators to stab Caesar. Shakespeare, in this event, creates a greater degree of sympathy for Caesar in his audience. A third character developed and utilized well as a result of prophecy would be Cassius. Unlike Caesar and Casca, Cassius undergoes change that reveals itself to the public through his responses to prophecies. In his conversation with Casca about the omens of late he notes, “But men may construe things after their fashion, / Clean from the purpose of the things themselves” (I.iii.34-35). By this, he disregards Casca’s worries and moves forward with confidence as true as Caesar’s. For Cassius, unfortunately, this confidence does not last. Before he engages in war with Antony and Octavius, he frets:
Two mighty eagles fell, and there they perched,
Gorging and feeding from our soldiers’ hands,
Who to Philippi here consorted us.
This morning are they fled away and …show more content…
After all, the defeatist attitude of Cassius, being so unlike him, shakes the Elizabethan viewers and allows them to notice the true nature of Cassius as a person with insecurities. As such, he is humanized just in time to acquire sympathy for his death as well. The fourth and final person requiring discussion is Brutus, the honorable man. In his concern there is only one particular moment in which response to prophecy is significantly utilized. This moment of course refers to the visit of Caesar’s ghost, and in fact, Brutus’ response isn’t so much worth mentioning as his lack of response. He says only, “Why, I will see thee at Philippi then” (IV.iii.286). The importance of this anticlimactic acceptance lies within its trusting nature. Because the ghost has said nothing about any sort of harm coming to Brutus, he does not fear the ghost. This lack of response thus once again portrays Brutus’ admirable belief in the fundamental good of all people. As with Cassius, actions taken by Brutus as a result of prophecy serve to create more sympathy for him at the time of his