Barbarity vs. Superiority: Exploring the Disparities of the Roman and Gothic Culture within Titus Andronicus
Besides the vivid display of ferocious violence that can be acquired from William Shakespeare’s Titus Andronicus, the audience can develop a distinct separation between the Roman and Gothic culture through the families of the characters of Titus and Tamora. Titus, as a general, and his family are members of high Roman society. As Roman citizens, they stand at the pinnacle of civilization in the ancient world. The contrasting side, Tamora and her fellows are Goths, a Germanic tribe existing on the northern borders of the Roman Empire (Meister,1). It has often been argued within the scholarship that while the Goths were racially different,
…show more content…
While it could be argued that Tamora displays female otherness and masculinity once she becomes the Empress of Rome, Tamora is largely made authoritative and masculine through her sexuality and infidelity. Those who honor or serve her specifically Aaron and even Saturninus, honor her only by her lust. She is able to manipulate others through her lust and her unrequited desire for retaliation, not necessarily by being independent and respected. It could be disputed that her sons Chiron and Demetrius also find supremacy in their sexual desires through their ravenous rape of Lavina. On the contrary, Titus makes it inadmissible that his family’s honor would be blemished by Lavina’s devastating rape and sexual embarrassment as he breaks her neck and kills her in act five. He …show more content…
Within Act I alone the audience is exposed to the Romans make a human sacrifice, and the play's apparent “hero,” Titus, thinks nothing of killing his own son. He also refuses to care about his daughter’s well being when offering her hand to Saturninus. It could be argued that this suggests that the Romans are just as barbaric as the Goths. However, this supports the idea that the Roman culture is centered on pride and supremacy and more specifically honor to the country it’s self. Titus’ sacrifices remain consist throughout the entire play as mentioned above as he ends up killing Lavina to protect their honor. Tamora, on the other hand, continuously struggles to bring justice to her son’s death. Tamora presents the much more feminine trait of being focused the condition of her family and her
Shakespeare’s complex play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar contains several tragic heroes; a tragic hero holds high political or social esteem yet possesses an obvious character flaw. This discernible hubris undoubtedly causes the character’s demise or a severe forfeiture, which forces the character to undergo an unfeigned moment of enlightenment and shear reconciliation. Brutus, one of these tragic heroes, is a devout friend of the great Julius Caesar, that is, until he makes many execrable decisions he will soon regret; he becomes involved in a plot to kill the omniscient ruler of Rome during 44 B.C. After committing the crime, Mark Antony, an avid, passionate follower of Caesar, is left alive under Brutus’s orders to take his revenge on the villains who killed his beloved Caesar. After Antony turns a rioting Rome on him and wages war against him and the conspirators, Brutus falls by his own hand, turning the very sword he slaughtered Caesar with against himself. Brutus is unquestionably the tragic hero in this play because he has an innumerable amount of character flaws, he falls because of these flaws, and then comes to grips with them as he bleeds on the planes of Philippi.
In contrast to the publicity spin of today’s tabloids, ‘losers attract notoriety,’ (Fear, 2008, p, 6) Roman society was no different with one’s reputation of paramount importance and continually defended. Antony and Cleopatra’s union was ammunition for Octavian and propaganda used against the couple in their pursuing battle of Actium. (Fear, 2008, p.7.)
Livy’s The Rise of Rome serves as the ultimate catalogue of Roman history, elaborating on the accomplishments of each king and set of consuls through the ages of its vast empire. In the first five books, Livy lays the groundwork for the history of Rome and sets forth a model for all of Rome to follow. For him, the “special and salutary benefit of the study of history is to behold evidence of every sort of behaviour set forth as on a splendid memorial; from it you may select for yourself and for your country what to emulate, from it what to avoid, whether basely begun or basely concluded.” (Livy 4). Livy, however, denies the general populace the right to make the same sort of conclusions that he made in constructing his histories. His biased representation of Romulus and Tarquin Superbus, two icons of Roman history, give the readers a definite model of what a Roman should be, instead of allowing them to come to their own conclusion.
On that first fateful day, when Romulus struck down his own brother Remus, the cauldron of Rome was forged in blood and betrayal. The seeds on the Palatine hill cultured one of the most potent and stretching empires of human history. Though this civilization seemingly wielded the bolts of Zeus, they were infested with violence, vanity, and deception. Yet, one man—or seemingly “un”-man—outshone and out-graced his surroundings and everyone within it. He brought Rome several victories and rescued his beloved country from an early exodus, thus providing her a second beginning. This man was Marcus Furius Camillus, and against a logical and emotional mind, he was oft less than loved and celebrated. At times he was disregarded, insulted and even exiled—irrevocably an unwarranted method to reward Rome’s “Second Founder.” This contrast of character between hero and people was perhaps too drastic and too grand. The people were not yet ready to see Marcus Furius Camillus as a model of behavior to be emulated—to be reproduced. Hence, much of Livy’s Book 5 provides a foundation for the Roman people to imitate and assimilate a contrasting, honest, and strong behavior and temperament
The reader is introduced to an insight of Titus Andronicus’ cruel nature, after he ignores Tamora’s cry to have her first-born son saved from his sacrifice to revenge the lives of his sons that her Goth people took. This new interpretation of Titus as a ruthless murderer heavily contradicts the reader’s first impression of Titus that Marcus gave the reader. Marcus initially leads the reader to except that Titus is good and honorable man. Titus’ sudden act of violence makes the reader realizes that he has two sides to his character: the relentless warrior and the beloved hero. However as the play unfolds, an individual can realize that everything that occurs throughout the play is connected to the initial sacrifice. It is evident that Titus’ character goes through many changes, the not one but many sides of his personality are revealed.
...haracters to compliment Shakespeare’s work. With the opening she captures the aspect of war without using the original opening. Instead she uses a child and modernizes it. In ACT III SCENE I. Rome. A Street, she examines every word and portrays the art of revenge, loss and justice. She digs into the bible and relates them to Titus and his morals and actions. Taymor made many interesting choices when directing Titus, many staying true to the book, and character analysis bringing Titus Andronicus to a visual art.
‘Titus Andronicus ‘is a play by William Shakespeare that went to become very popular during his time. The play was performed in Rome after the defeat of the Goths by the Romans. The Goths were people from German who invaded their country. Throughout the play, violence can be seen inform of brutal murders, sexual violence and mutilation, suicide, wars and conflicts. This is normally heightened by the urge of the characters to revenge. Examples of such cases include: the raping and mutilation of Lavinia, Titus’s daughter and the killing of Alarbus. Shakespeare presents stage violence that makes the audience concentrate and understand in a better way.
The account of Roman women is a fascinating facet of the greater saga of the Roman Empire itself. During the Roman Empire, the economy, politics and civilization as a whole, was dominated almost entirely by men. As a result, a number of expectations were placed on women, detailing how they should look, behave and with whom they should associate. These expectations were reinforced and affected by both the social and political fixtures of the Roman Empire. Although women made a number of important social and legal advances in Ancient Rome, the development of the Empire proved to be detrimental to the emancipation of women as the pre-existing social expectations were altered in order to impose a more conservative moral order. These antecedent expectations were crafted from a number of ideals concerning female intellect, sexuality and influence, that existed in society prior to the development of the Roman Empire.
Emilia, one of only three female characters in Shakespeare’s Othello, plays a vital role both thematically and in the advancement of the play’s plot. Although her blind loyalty to her husband turns the wheels of this tragedy, it is not a static quality throughout it. When examining the gender roles in the world of this play, the change in Emilia’s allegiances, which determine her actions, reveals the divergence between duty and integrity for women. Throughout most of the play, Emilia is loyal to a fault. She remains subservient to Iago until her duty to him causes her to betray the one she has to her friend and mistress, Desdemona. After becoming cognizant of her involvement in Iago’s villainy, Emilia abandons all loyalty she previously held to patriarchal forces and is motivated exclusively by morality and dedication to Desdemona.
Shakespeare illustrates the injustices done to women by demonstrating the treatment Desdemona and Emilia received after having been framed of adultery. Because both women are though of cheating on their husbands, they no longer fit in society’s model of an exemplary wife. Despite having proved their affection for their husbands countless of times, not having a pure image led to Iago and Othello mistreating of the women they once loved. Once both women began to stand up for themselves and challenge the authority of their husbands, the repercussions of their bravery were both women’s death. Which shows, women’s only source of authority was their reputation as a wife. Once they lost that status, they no longer held any form or respect in society or with their husband’s.
Within both Titus Andronicus and Othello both by William Shakespeare the reader is introduced to the concept of a black man within a white society. Stigmas and stereotypes are attached to the black characters of Aaron and Othello. Although each black character has a similar stigma, the characters are very different from one another. Aaron is portrayed as evil, conniving and malevolent, while Othello has none of these traits. Othello's fault lies in the fact that he is very gullible and easily led.
The premise of the play Titus Andronicus can be easily summed up in one word. That word is simply ‘honor’. Honor means a different thing today than it did during the Roman Empire or Shakespeare’s life, but it is important to know honor’s definition in order to understand Titus Andronicus. Honor was used to justify murdering multiple times throughout the play. Titus killed two of his own children to protect his honor. Titus’s honor was also destroyed by Lavinia being raped and mutilated and Aaron tricking Titus into cutting off his hand, an important symbol of his honor. The word ‘honor’ has a huge impact on the play Titus Andronicus.
Livy’s narration of the rape is different from Ovid’s as it clearly describes the effort put forth by Romulus to appease the women that were taken. Livy is able to develop the significance of the women taken by showing how his treatment of the gender roles is a direct reflection of what is acceptable in Rome, and that his narrative is not simply marital based but also has themes in the political and social realms. In the world today western culture recognizes persecution and oppression. Yet, the allegorical characterization of victims is not identified or taken as seriously. The Sabine woman are not viewed as victims for sexual innuendos in Livy’s tale. Instead they take the role of a counterfeit desire that seems ...
The purpose of this essay is to intricately elaborate on the culture of the Romans, along with its similarities and discrepancies, or uniqueness, in relation to Ancient Greek culture. This is achieved by providing background to both Roman and Greek culture, analyzing how Rome technically purloined Greek culture, describing how unique Roman culture is, and explaining its long lasting impact on today's society.
The basis of Shakespeare’s plays appears to focus mainly around the dominant male character and his conflicts, which tend to deal with a woman. There are only three women in the play Othello; Desdemona, Emilia and Bianca. The way in which these women behave and present themselves strongly reflects the ideological expectations of women within Shakespeare’s imagined Venetian society as well as the Elizabethan society in which he lived. This patriarchal Venetian society presented in the play depicts women as possessions of men who should remain submissive and meek at all times. The women are expected to unselfishly and unreservedly devote their lives to serve their fathers until they are of age to do so, their husbands. All three women love their respective partners; however, all three are also rejected by them because they each devote more to their men than their men are capable of returning. Desdemona and Emilia display genuine emotions toward each other that are not reflected in any of the male to male associations.