Two Voices, One Coin. Although it is speculated that Julius Caesar was the tragic hero of The Tragedy of Julius Caesar; it has now come to attention that he wasn’t the only one in the spotlight, but Brutus was also a worthy nominee for the title, and possibly a better fit than Caesar. Throughout the span of the play, the reader mainly focusses on Caesar and his own personal ideas and struggles with being a leader. However, what most fail to notice is that Brutus is the one mostly pulling the strings behind the scene. What it means; basically, is that Brutus was really the one going through more of the emotional and physical strains than Caesar himself. He has to make extremely stressing decisions that ultimately result in his downfall; Brutus’s
…show more content…
As expected, along with using his emotions to make decisions he also has the tendency to want to change things for the better. To put it better into words, Brutus is an individual who prefers constant change rather than a constant state of mind. Though, he ended up causing what he was trying to prevent in the very end after killing himself - with the Roman Republic dissolving and Octavius becoming the first emperor of Rome. Tragically, Brutus never got what he wanted. He fought, cried, suffered and made sacrifices that in the end turns against him. In contrast to what most believe, Caesar never really did anything to further advance the story and make it more interesting to learn about. He always kept the status quo; which Brutus wants to …show more content…
With the names Caesar and Brutus thrown across the room like rag dolls, it’s hard to decide who is more suited for the title. Both characters hold major flaws that affect their overall life span in the play. Caesar was too cocky; and Brutus was too naive and controlling. To add, Brutus and Caesar were very close to one another in the play. One could say Caesar was the tragic hero because he was betrayed by his closest friend. But simultaneously, one could also say Brutus was the tragic hero because he wanted to make things for the better instead of the worse but instead “paved the way to hell with good intentions” (Saint Bernard of Clairvaux,
As expected, along with using his emotions to make decisions he also has the tendency to want to change things for the better. To put it better into words, Brutus is an individual who prefers constant change rather than a constant state of mind. Though, he ended up causing what he was trying to prevent in the very end after killing himself - with the Roman Republic dissolving and Octavius becoming the first emperor of Rome. Tragically, Brutus never got what he wanted. He fought, cried, suffered and made sacrifices that in the end turns against him. In contrast to what most believe, Caesar never really did anything to further advance the story and make it more interesting to learn about. He always kept the status quo; which Brutus wants to …show more content…
With the names Caesar and Brutus thrown across the room like rag dolls, it’s hard to decide who is more suited for the title. Both characters hold major flaws that affect their overall life span in the play. Caesar was too cocky; and Brutus was too naive and controlling. To add, Brutus and Caesar were very close to one another in the play. One could say Caesar was the tragic hero because he was betrayed by his closest friend. But simultaneously, one could also say Brutus was the tragic hero because he wanted to make things for the better instead of the worse but instead “paved the way to hell with good intentions” (Saint Bernard of Clairvaux,