Julius Caesar Rhetorical Analysis

584 Words2 Pages

In Shakespeare's “Julius Caesar”, Julius gets murdered.So the consequence of that somebody needs to take over the country and rule it. There are two options that can rule the country, Marcus Brutus and Marc Antony. Marc Antony is the better option. He brings in better points like, he says that Brutus is an honorable man being sarcastic and using parallelism. Antony uses a ton of rhetorical devices like logos and ethos. Antony uses diction trying to use reverse psychology by saying he doesn't want the country in mutiny but, in reality, he does. Antony mentions how their congress slaughtered Julius Caesar, and he used metaphors to make the citizens feel strongly about his speech.

During Brutus’s speech the audience did not feel the intense emotions that they did during Antony’s speech. Therefore, I feel as Antony did exceedingly better. Brutus tried to make the audience feel as he was equal and the same as Caesar. He attempted to make himself seem like a victim and like he was personally affected by Caesar's death, “ As Caesar loved me, I weep for him; as he was fortunate, I rejoice at it; as he was valiant, I honour him; he was ambitious, I slew him. There is tears for his love; joy for his fortune; honour for his valour; and death for his ambition.” He is trying to emphasize how he claims he felt about Caesar. He tries to

2 …show more content…

Brutus tries to make the citizens feel emotion by bringing up Caesar, he tries to make them feel sorrow but, also feel empathetic for Brutus because he claims that he and Caesar were extremely close. Consequently, the citizens end up thinking that Marc Antony is the better

Open Document