Social Classes
In The Taming of the Shrew and Julius Caesar, roles and social classes are very important. Both plays include strong male rolls that the commoners look up to during the course of the play. Caesar from Julius Caesar and Baptista from The Taming of the Shrew are being compared because they are both high class men that are respected by many. “He would be crowned: How that might change his nature, there’s the question.” Brutus said this about Caesar and a lot of people did feel this way. Just because Caesar was popular among many, did not mean that he would have been a good leader. The commoners were people that lived in low and middle class, so they wanted someone in high class to lead them. If Caesar would have been anything …show more content…
One of those being that both plays include something to do with love and relationships. Caesar was involved with more than one woman in Julius Caesar, and that included Calpurnia and Cleopatra. Although that play did not revolve around love as much, it was still evident in the play. The Taming of the Shrew on the other hand revolved around the arranged marriage of the girls. Different relationships included Katherine and Petruchio, Lucentio and Bianca, and Hortensio and his widow. This play was all about marrying Katherine and Bianca off, as stated in the movie, but made it more interesting with Katherine being a shrew. Another similarity would be the men being powerful in both plays. Caesar was going to be crowned King of Rome, so he made a lot of important decisions that they would not let just anyone deal with. An example of decision making would be in the Julius Caesar movie when Caesar decides to let the soldier from the enemy side leave without harm. Baptista made all of the rules for Kate and Bianca, the biggest one being that Kate had to marry before Bianca did. Both plays included love, relationships, and a powerful male …show more content…
One difference involves women and social class. The Taming of the Shrew had stronger female roles than Julius Caesar. Katherine and Bianca were the main focus of their play, while Calpurnia and Cleopatra were just accessories to Caesar. One play was focused solely on the daughters while the other was more towards war and a strong male role. A second difference would be what kind of power was wanted in each play. Caesar wanted power over Rome as their leader, while Baptista just wanted power over his daughters and their marriages which is discussed in both plays and both books. Caesar fought for his power which was much bigger and served the whole country of Rome while Baptista’s was more subtle and was just a family issue. The third difference would be that Shakespeare wrote the two plays differently. The plot of The Taming of the Shrew was to be funny and overall a comedy which can be seen in the silliness of the movie and arguments of the book. The plot of Julius Caesar was on a more serious note and a drama play which can be noted in the mood of the movies and serious tones of the
In The Taming of the Shrew and Julius Caesar, roles and social classes are very important. Both plays include strong male rolls that the commoners look up to during the course of the play. Caesar from Julius Caesar and Baptista from The Taming of the Shrew are being compared because they are both high class men that are respected by many. “He would be crowned: How that might change his nature, there’s the question.” Brutus said this about Caesar and a lot of people did feel this way. Just because Caesar was popular among many, did not mean that he would have been a good leader. The commoners were people that lived in low and middle class, so they wanted someone in high class to lead them. If Caesar would have been anything …show more content…
One of those being that both plays include something to do with love and relationships. Caesar was involved with more than one woman in Julius Caesar, and that included Calpurnia and Cleopatra. Although that play did not revolve around love as much, it was still evident in the play. The Taming of the Shrew on the other hand revolved around the arranged marriage of the girls. Different relationships included Katherine and Petruchio, Lucentio and Bianca, and Hortensio and his widow. This play was all about marrying Katherine and Bianca off, as stated in the movie, but made it more interesting with Katherine being a shrew. Another similarity would be the men being powerful in both plays. Caesar was going to be crowned King of Rome, so he made a lot of important decisions that they would not let just anyone deal with. An example of decision making would be in the Julius Caesar movie when Caesar decides to let the soldier from the enemy side leave without harm. Baptista made all of the rules for Kate and Bianca, the biggest one being that Kate had to marry before Bianca did. Both plays included love, relationships, and a powerful male …show more content…
One difference involves women and social class. The Taming of the Shrew had stronger female roles than Julius Caesar. Katherine and Bianca were the main focus of their play, while Calpurnia and Cleopatra were just accessories to Caesar. One play was focused solely on the daughters while the other was more towards war and a strong male role. A second difference would be what kind of power was wanted in each play. Caesar wanted power over Rome as their leader, while Baptista just wanted power over his daughters and their marriages which is discussed in both plays and both books. Caesar fought for his power which was much bigger and served the whole country of Rome while Baptista’s was more subtle and was just a family issue. The third difference would be that Shakespeare wrote the two plays differently. The plot of The Taming of the Shrew was to be funny and overall a comedy which can be seen in the silliness of the movie and arguments of the book. The plot of Julius Caesar was on a more serious note and a drama play which can be noted in the mood of the movies and serious tones of the