Mead's Argument Essay: Defending Trump As Julius Caesar

Defending Trump as Julius Caesar In this play Julius Caesar died by the hands of some of his friends and people he was close to. Having Trump be put in place of Julius Caesar did not change the story line it was still the same story just with a Trump like person playing the role of Caesar. This play showed all of the properties of a dramatic production which are to make someone feel something or to make someone be able to relate to what the actors are performing, and I believe that it should be defended just like it was in Rebecca Meads article. Throughout her article, Rebecca Mead builds an argument to persuade her audience that a “Trump-like Caesar” does not endorse the death of our current president. She supports her thesis throughout her article by bringing up facts to support that the play didn’t support killing our current president. In one part of her article she states “It hardly bears pointing out that art is not life, and that to give “Julius Caesar” a contemporary resonance does not amount to an endorsement of the assassination it depicts.” In her statement she is proving that by trying to relate the play “Julius Caesar” to current times, it is not saying that the killing of our president or of anyone in general, is okay; As well as them relating Trump to the original play doesn't have to symbolize …show more content…
One of her statements in her article that proves this is when she states, “Delta Airlines, kanother corporate backer of the Public, had pulled its support for the theatre as a whole a few hours earlier. (Than Bank of America) By giving examples of companies that withdrew their support she shows that many people did not understand the reasoning of the play, and how it wasnt supporting the killing of the president that it was just a performance, and was taken too