Analysis Of William Shakespeare’s Presentation Of Cassius In The Tragedy Of Julius Caesar
In William Shakespeare’s tragedy, Julius Caesar, we are presented with Cassius, a cunning and manipulative character who catalyzes the downfall of the emperor Caesar. Cassius’ misgivings of the royal status and power that has been bestowed upon Caesar lead him to conspire to assassinate him in the name of Rome, even though his personal feelings of jealousy and resentment arguably cloud his judgement. Shakespeare piques our interest in Cassius as a character who uses his unique ability to discern the true motives of men by appealing to Brutus’s sense of pride, honor and nobility in an effort to conspire against a common friend whom they have both known for years. Yet his shift of Cassius’ persona from his exploitative relationship with Brutus to one of sincere friendship and loyalty not only reveals the extent humans would go to achieve a goal driven by emotion, but also the potency of human connectedness to change a person over time. Cassius is initially presented as a sly character who is willing to turn to manipulation and deception to gain influence over others for his benefit. By placing the first of many intimate duologues between Brutus and Cassius, Shakespeare establishes the significance of their relationship as the play unfolds. Shakespeare insinuates Cassius’ distrust of Caesar when he speaks of how his “breast. . Hath buried thoughts of great value, worthy cogitations” after learning that “poor Brutus” is “with himself at war. ” The choice of the word war reflects a metaphor of Brutus locked in an intense internal conflict within himself about something he considers meaningful yet detrimental to his character. Through Cassius’ reply, we see the first sign of Cassius’ tactful yet scheming nature when he replies that he has worthy cogitations, suggesting their common animosity of Caesar. Building upon Cassius’ misleading words, Shakespeare creates irony in his offer to be Brutus’ “glass” to reveal his “reflection” after Brutus affirms that “the eye not sees not itself, but by reflection, by some other things. ”
The irony in this dialogue is that a mirror is meant to show an unbiased view of a person, yet Cassius’ word is tainted with a desire to flatter Brutus and alleviate his insecurities in order to gain his trust. Shakespeare also creates juxtaposition in the qualities of the two characters, as Cassius goes on to describe Brutus’ honourable traits in the name of the Roman people while he is displaying opposing traits of unscrupulousness and immorality. Shakespeare further reveals the extent of Cassius’ deceptive nature when he contradicts himself by suggesting that men are “masters of their fate” and that their “fault” is not in the “stars”, but rather “in ourselves” for being “underlings”. In Act 1 Scene 3, Shakespeare introduces supernatural imagery which is interpreted by Cassius as a sign of a “lion in the capitol,” making known of Cassius’ tendency to twist the nature of the surrounding events on the basis of who he is interacting with. In addition, the line about the fault not being in the stars is hypermetric, highlighting its oddity and belied nature. Shakespeare also uses informal words such as “our” to create a sense of intimacy and develop Cassius’s quality of rhetoric. Throughout the opening of the play, Shakespeare portrays Cassius as a misleading yet pivotal character, foregrounding his presence in the scheme of things and setting up his role as the catalyst of Caesar’s eventual downfall. However, Shakespeare shows that it is the familiarity and history between Cassius and Caesar that sets up tension through mutual distrust of one another, and how Cassius uses this to gain support in his endeavor. Shakespeare uses duologues to create a parallel of Caesar and Antony with Cassius and Brutus when Caesar talk about having men around him that are “fat,” and how Cassius has a “lean and hungry look” about him. There is a tension in this description as Shakespeare uses near animalistic imagery to talk about Cassius’s intellectual abilities, reflective of Caesar’s high regard for himself and contemptuous view of others. Shakespeare also uses metonymy through the description of fat men to reveal how Caesar gives everything to the men who surround him to ensure they are always satisfied and always impose control. Shakespeare further nuances Cassius’s character by using anecdotes that subvert Caesar as justification despite his lack of moral conscience when he describes how Caesar cries “Help me, Cassius, or I sink” and compares him to a “sick girl” when recalling how “shook” like a “coward” in Spain. The use of expressive physical description in isolation undermines the godlike conception of Caesar and shows Cassius is able to pinpoint his fatal flaw, a common attribute of Shakespeare’s characters in his tragedies. The choice of Cassius likening Caesar to a sick girl suggests that he can distinguish his true personality apart from the god that Caesar is made to be, something people can only do when they deeply understand one another.
A final example of how Shakespeare uses Cassius to erode Caesar’s caliber is how Caesar “carelessly nods” on him as if he is a “wretched creature” who must “bend his body” for Caesar. The pattern of vile imagery evokes sympathy for Cassius as he is labelled as a creature who Caesar does not care for, a stark contrast to the heroism and boldness reflected in his actions. The use of implicit stagecraft suggests how Cassius deplores bending down to Caesar, and this foreshadows how Cassius later rises up with his conspirators to make Caesar fall. Shakespeare overtly indicates that Cassius’s potentially fatal flaw in his character is his fickle and envious mindset towards Caesar, yet this fuels his determination to kill Caesar and thus eventually succeed. Shakespeare’s development of Cassius’ relationship with Brutus creates a shift in his character as his political pragmatism is hampered by Brutus’s moral rigour. Shakespeare chooses to let Cassius forego his “shrewd” “misgivings” by complying with Brutus’ decision to allow Antony to speak at the funeral despite knowing “how much the people may be moved” and the uncertainty of “what may fall. ” Throughout the course of the play, Shakespeare has shown that Cassius is a character who has not faltered when it comes to his judgement, and this is the first break in pattern of his normally smooth and persuasive character. Shakespeare explicitly reveals his struggles when we see Cassius not speaking in iambic pentameter during his aside with Brutus, suggesting that he is losing his ability to wield his control over Brutus as their friendship develops. Thereafter, we see Shakespeare complicating Cassius’ state of mind through the manner in which he opens up in an intense confrontation that results in him displaying eternal loyalty to Brutus. Brutus accuses “the name Cassius” of honouring corruption and proclaims that he is “armed so strong in honesty” that threats are an “idle wind,” to which Cassius responds that Brutus has “rived” his heart that is “dearer than Pluto’s” and “richer than gold. ” This is a pivotal point in the play because it is when Shakespeare shows Cassius moving on from an exploitative relationship with Brutus to one of true friendship, as shown through the use of metaphor of Cassius’ heart. Shakespeare uses Brutus’ unwavering stance being virtuous to incite a value for relationships within Cassius, epitomizing the intricate nature of human beings. In a final twist of Cassius’ character, Shakespeare encapsulates his complexity through the nature of his death. Despite adapting Cassius into a more honorable character in Act 4, Shakespeare chooses to make him die by guiding “the sword” “that ran through Caesar’s Bowels”, fittingly reflecting the complicated nature of his character. During the Elizabethan Era, Christianity was the most prevalent religion and suicide was considered cowardly and weak in it. Shakespeare creates irony in the fact that he is meant to be the hero, the one who catalyzed Caesar’s death yet instead of dying like one, he is stabbed by one he knows with a sword, just like Caesar was.
Furthermore, Shakespeare uses dramatic irony through Cassius’ perception of Titinius being captured, when in reality, he never was. This creates a parallel to Caesar’s death as both men seem helpless, and this is further supported by Cassius’ use of the informal thou, signifying a state of being resigned to die. Moreover, Shakespeare ends both Cassius’ and Brutus’ final moments in the play by thinking about Caesar though Cassius’s declaration that Caesar has been “revenged with the sword that killed” him and Brutus revelation of not killing Caesar with even “half so good a will. ” Although Shakespeare builds up reasoning and justification within Cassius and Brutus over the course of the play, the choice of recognizing Caesar in their final moments reveals the prevalence of his character even after his brutal murder, implying that Cassius could have made a mistake and perhaps his emotions did indeed cloud his judgement. Through Brutus’ last words of how he is more willing to kill himself than Caesar, Shakespeare makes us understand Cassius’ feat of managing to convince one of the most honourable men in Rome to kill his close friend and a well loved leader amongst the Roman public: Caesar. Ultimately, Shakespeare concludes Cassius’ appearance in the play by exposing his true personality through his actions in moments of despair, implicating a broader theme of justice being served in his death. Shakespeare uses Cassius as as a reflection of the complexity and the intricacies within humans, displaying the power and ability to regulate other people by incorporating the valued skill of rhetoric into his character. Although his initial Machiavellian representation and his distrust of Caesar makes him stand out, it is how Shakespeare uses his interactions with other characters to shape his personality to include value for loyalty and friendship that make him one of the most dynamic characters in the play. It is Shakespeare’s ability to respect the complexity of humans though his themes and ideas that forms a key part of why his plays have endured for so long, and how a character like Cassius is still applicable in our world today.
