<doc.id=0310.b4>
<title> Julius Caesar </title>
The following essay will be a close reading analysis of a short extract from the play Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare. The part I've chosen is act 2, scene 1, lines 112-191 (references to the New Penguin Shakespeare). What has happened just before my analysis starts is that Brutus has stayed awake all night, trying to make up is mind about whether or not Caesar will become an unjust ruler and if this in that case should make him feel he ought to join the conspiracy. He has read a letter reminding him of his ancestor who drove out the last king of Rome and after doing this decided that he needs to go through with it.

The extract starts with Brutus making a very fateful comment that makes you aware of that something important is about to happen, 'Give me your hands all over, one by one.' (II.i.112). Cassius shows a feeling of disbelief, in men able to keep to the plot at the crucial moment, since he suggests swearing an oath. This compared to Brutus, who believes that all the reasons they have for committing this deed should be enough. This also shows the difference in character between Cassius and Brutus. Brutus is an idealist, with a strong belief in the good in people, while Cassius is more of a realist. He suspects that the men may change their minds in the last minute if they don't have something more tying them to their agreement. To convince them of the superfluous of an oath, Brutus makes a splendid speech, that is a direct respond to Cassius suggestion as well as a means of convincing Brutus himself of the right in proceeding with their plans.

No, not an oath; if, not the face of men
The sufferance of our souls, the time's abuse, -
If these be motives weak, break off betimes,
And every man hence to his idle bed:
So let high-sighted tyranny rage on,
Till each man drop by lottery. (II.i.114-19)

	Brutus picks out all the reasons for acting for the common good. He makes it sound as if he is saving mankind from a catastrophe and with that, deaden his own sorrow and bad conscience of being about to kill his own best friend. He even imagines the tyranny already there, since he feels the need for a strong motif if he should consent to this malicious intent and stay part of it. Through the whole passage Brutus builds up a feeling of no return. No-one can object to the evil deed they are about to commit and nobody can no longer feel the need of an oath, since Brutus appeal to their innermost. He does this not only with the choice of words, but also with the balance in his speech, that really emphasises what he wants to say. He makes them feel that they would be exactly what honourable Brutus detests - 'cowards' (line 121), noble Romans unable to keep a secret (line 125), dishonest (line 127) - if they would consider for but a second more to swear the oath. Brutus is also careful to express that only men fighting for evil things, men that can't be trusted, are those who needs to swear oaths. This is also a thing he says to justify his own way of acting. If they can come to this decision with good reasons to support it, they can't be accused of doing anything but good for the people, for staying honourable men:

Swear priests and cowards and men cautelous,
Old feeble carrions and such suffering souls
That welcome wrongs; unto bad causes swear
Such creatures as men doubt; but do not stain
The even virtue of our enterprise, (II.i.129-133)

Many of the traitors suggests they should invite Cicero as well, 'for his silver hairs' (line 144) Metellus fills in. This signals that they still are uncertain of the rightfulness of what they are about to commit. They feel the need for someone to defend their action, someone with the indisputable support from the people because of his age. It could also be seen as a distrust in Brutus, a questioning of his earlier so praised hounourableness will be enough to defend their deed in the eyes of the public. Now his reputation as a man of honour isn't good enough, something which he feels and is quick to respond to:

Oh name him not; let us not break with him,
For he will never follow any thing
That other men begin. (II.i.150-52)

Note also he change in writing technique that very well expresses Brutus' sudden feeling of uncertainness. The shortened lines, the abrupt endings, of course with some sort of rhythm, but not even close to the balance of speeches known of Brutus.
	The question of removing some other person as well is brought up - Decius comes with the suggestion and Cassius quickly agree. As the realist Cassius is, and as he skilful judge of character, he knows that to make the conspiracy successful also Mark Antony will have to be removed from the scene. He is not that skilful an orator though, since he can't convince Brutus to go through with this operation. Brutus however counter with yet another splendid speech and appeal to the sense of honour and grace of the men around him, most clearly shown in the following extracts from lines 166-180:

Let us be sacrificers, but not butchers, Caius....
Let's kill him boldly, but not wrathfully;...
We shall be called purgers, not murderers.

To kill not only Caesar, but Antony as well would not only be very wrong, it would make them seem as they were exactly butchers and not honourable men acting for the common good of the people. It would also make them appear in a more disadvantageous light. To even more stress the importance of what he has to say, he uses a number of metaphors like 'To cut the head off, and then hack the limbs' (line 103), 'Let's carve him as a dish fit for the gods, Not hew him as a carcass fit for hounds' (lines 173-174) and 'For he can do no more than Caesar's arm when Caesar's head is off' (lines 182-183). In Brutus' second speech (from line 102-183) his weaknesses as a leader shows itself. His sense of idealism and compassion makes him overlook awkward, yet important, facts to make a conspiracy of this kind successful. Maybe it's his sense of guilt and heavy-heartedness over the coming assassination of his own best friend that awakens this.
All these reasons for letting Antony live don't convince Cassius. Then Brutus, as the skilful orator he is, speaks in a totally different manner, short and precise and reveals other sides of Mark Antony that suits his own purposes and also seems to please the group of traitors. He suggests that the only thing Mark Antony could be expected to do is to kill himself out of love for Caesar, but that even that wouldn't occur since he is too fond of the pleasures of life. Trebonius ends the discussion with the words 'There is no fear in him; let him not die, For he will live, and laugh at this hereafter.' (lines 190-191) and with these words it's settled. Caesar is to be removed but Antony spared whatever Cassius may think of it.

	 
Some of the central themes in the play of Julius Caesar are the ones of power, what it does to people. Of course the whole discussion is about corrupted power, or rather what can be done to prevent it. This is pictured in this extract as a fear for Antony's expected actions and of course for Caesar's who is the coming victim of their actions. The play is also about who tells the truth, which interpretations is the right one, is it Brutus' or Cassius' in this case? It shall later in the play be revealed that Cassius were right about Antony, but on the other hand would they have gained the confidence of the people if they had killed both the men? Yet another central theme, where I would say this section is one of those best illustrating this theme, is the private conflict within Brutus himself, his private feelings versus the general good. This is where he for the first time need to choose sides officially. The climax of a long time of ambiguity in him is reached, a whole sleepless night of weighing the good aspects against the bad ones, where he finally takes a stand has come to an end. This passage is of great importance for the whole play, since it is here the final decision is taken. The prerequisites of the whole play is set up, that Caesar is to be killed and Antony not and all the consequences it will cause.
</doc>