The Borgia Codex, Precolombian Treasure

Julius Caesar, by William Shakespeare and The Life of...

No matter how hard one tries to avoid being manipulated, it is impossible to avoid all sources such as documents, leaders and friends. Manipulation, the ability to alter the position or influence a person, occurs everywhere one goes. Throughout Julius Caesar by Shakespeare and The Life of Caesar by Plutarch, the theme of manipulation was revealed through countless instances showing both its sources and effects. Several of the characters in both accounts, such as Brutus, Caesar, and the people of Rome, were manipulated one time or another, by sources such as their close friends who merely desired their ideas and plans to continue forward. Cassius, an envious and ambitious man, did not approve of what Caesar was doing as ruler and believed†¦show more content†¦Decius came and distorted the interpretation to make it seem positive and that nothing bad would happen to him. One of the aspects of the dream that Decius altered to focus on positive outcomes, was his statue spouting blood in many pipes. He changed the idea so that the blood symbolized reviving blood, that all would use for benefit. Caesar trusted Decius’ explanation of the dream and exclaimed â€Å"How foolish do your fears seem now, Calpurnia! I am ashamed I did yield to them. Give me my robe, for I will go.† (Shakespeare 31) Decius made his interpretation appear much more desirable than Calpurnias and tricked Caesar. Even though it was only a miniscule change in the eyes of Caesar, little did he know it would send him to his death. After Caesars death, Brutus brought out the body and showed it to the people. He gave a speech and told the people â€Å"If there be any in this assembly, any dear friend of Caesars, to him I say, that Brutus love to Caesar was no less than his. If then that friend demand why Brutus rose against Caesar, this is my answer: not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more.† (Shakespeare 45) Brutus told the people this to manipulate into thinking that he had done this to protect Rome, because Caesar was stealing all of the authority and leaving everyone else powerless. This was not theShow MoreRelatedA Historical Overview Of Julius Caesar Essay1452 Words   |  6 PagesA Historical Overview of Julius Caesar (Shakespeare style) The fate of a nation determined by one man. With classic alliances and betrayals, the tale of Julius Caesar is still regarded as one of the greatest betrayals in human history. The fate of Rome was heading toward a dictatorship. Only the Roman Republic could stop Julius Caesar from ruling Rome. Little did the Roman Republic know that this assassination would later cause Octavian Caesar to become the first Emperor of the Roman Empire in 27Read MoreLiterary Analysis of the Tragedy of Julius Caesar773 Words   |  4 PagesAnalysis of The Tragedy of Julius Caesar William Shakespeare wrote his play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, so that his readers could have an idea of the lives, wars, and conflicts during the roman times. Shakespeare may have written the play because of his interest in history. He studied the writings of the historian Plutarch, who was alive at the same time as Caesar and wrote about his life. He also needed a job and money, and he had a fear of Queen Elizabeth dying. Shakespeare loved her and he fearedRead MoreJulius Caesar s Death And The Fallout After It1721 Words   |  7 PagesWilliam Shakespeare’s play Julius Caesar is one of his most monumental plays that cover Julius Caesar’s death and the fallout after it. He got the material for this play from a Greek writing called the Life of Julius Caesar. This was actually a famous biography written by Plutarch in the first century, I was later translated by Sir Thomas North in 1579. Published in 1599 this play is assumed to be the first to be ever preformed in the famous Globe Theater, it was a smash success that moved audiencesRead MoreThe Cleverness of Marcus Brutus735 Words   |  3 Pageswanted Julius Caesar to die, therefore when Cassius and the other conspirators tried to get him to get in on the plan he took advantage of it. It may seem that he was very uneasy about the plan that, but that is what he wanted people such as Casca, Cassius, Trebonius, etc. to think. He did very well at taking the blame off of himself. Marcus Brutus was a very political guy in reality. He was good at addressing a crowd in public. He was good at being on point. This of course is the real life BrutusRead More Female Power, Maternity and Genderbending in Shakespeares Antony and Cleopatra3164 Words   |  13 PagesFemale Power, Maternity and Genderbending in Shakespeares Antony and Cleopatra The 19th century essayist and literary critic William Hazlitt wrote of Cleopatra, She is voluptuous, ostentatious, conscious, boastful of her charms, haughty, tyrannical, [and] fickle, which are great and unpardonable faults (Hazlitt 2-3). Much of the criticism of Antony and Cleopatra has recycled this judgement, depicting Cleopatra as a villainess uses her eroticism and sexuality to motivate Antony toRead MoreComparing the Speeches of Mark Antony and Brutus in Julius Caesar2122 Words   |  9 PagesSpeeches of Mark Antony and Brutus in Julius Caesar The play Julius Caesar was first performed in 1599 at the Globe theatre in London. The Globe theatre was built earlier that year and Julius Caesar was one of the first plays performed there. This gives us reason to believe that the play was written towards the end of 1598 and beginning of 1599. William Shakespeare wrote the play Julius Caesar because Plutarchs Lives, William Shakespeares source of history, allowedRead MoreThe Renaissance and It’s Affect on William Shakespeare’s Works2369 Words   |  10 PagesIt’s very easy to see William Shakespeare as an amazing literary genius who had a perspective on life that, to simply put it, no one else has ever had. However Shakespeare was the product of the English Renaissance. The English Renaissance was a cultural and artistic movement spanning from the later 15th century until the early 17th century, it is associated with the Italian Renaissance which started in the 14th century. Like most of northern Europe, England did not get the full effect of the RenaissanceRead More Julius Caesar: The Peoples Dictator Essay example2917 Words   |  12 Pages Julius Caesar has always been an important, well-known figure in history. His name still lives on, two thousand years after his death. Even the terms Kaiser and Tsar are renditions of Caesar. To this day, the name C aesar conjures images of ancient Rome, conspiracies, intrigue, and murder. Thanks to William Shakespeare, most people know that he was betrayed and killed by his friends. But what made Caesar so fascinating that Shakespeare would choose to write about Caesar over fifteenRead MoreEssay about The Life of William Shakespeare1274 Words   |  6 Pages William Shakespeare was a very talented man known for his various works of literature. His works include poems, plays, and sonnets. His works are then broken down into tragedies, comedies, and histories. Shakespeare left this world centuries ago, but his writings continue to live throughout the world today. He has greatly impacted the world of literature and his existence will forever be remembered. In 1564, William Shakespeare was born in Stratford-upon-Avon (Hazell 32). It seems thatRead More Corruption and Ambition in Macbeth Essay examples2125 Words   |  9 Pagesis not an easy task. The works of William Shakespeare (1564-1616) have, more than once, proved worthy of the title classic. Not only does his work hold up, as he wished, a mirror to his own society, but manages to reflect what is going on much later, and indeed, may be relevant well into the next millennium, if civilization continues to peruse Shakespeares writing. A study of the character of Macbeth, essentially reveals the parallels that Shakespeare draws with the human condition through

A Character Analysis Free Essays

One of the most significant characters within Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar is that of Brutus, a very complex individual whose actions have significant impact upon the events on the play. This paper examines the character of Brutus and assesses both the good and bad elements of his character. A critique of how these qualities present inner conflict within Brutus is offered together with an explanation of the ways in which these conflicts manifest themselves. We will write a custom essay sample on A Character Analysis or any similar topic only for you Order Now It is the intention of this paper to prove that despite the fact that Brutus was able to murder his closest friends, he is essentially a moral man who maintained his honor to the end. One of the most significant elements of Brutus’ character is his strict ideals. He is a nobleman, â€Å"the noblest of Romans† (V. v. 75) who is strongly guided and influenced by matters of honor. He demonstrates a continual obsession with acting in a way that is right and just and speaks regularly of the need to create a republic in Rome that is ruled by the votes of the senate as opposed to a single dictator. This creates a problem in his relationship with Caesar. Despite their close friendship, Brutus is concerned that Caesar will rise to power and then commit an act of betrayal by enforcing a dictatorship on the people of Rome, â€Å"climber-upward†¦ He then unto the ladder turns his back†¦ † (II. ii. 24,26). It is clear that, for Brutus, his moral and ethical ideals are of higher importance than his friendship and love for Caesar and thus he is able to commit the inhumane act of murder. However, whilst the murder itself is wrong, the fact that Brutus himself believes so strongly in the fact that his actions are for the good of Rome, entails that he does, to an extent, maintain his honor. Brutus’ single minded obsession with morality entails that he can be easily persuaded by others to carry out their will, provided it is presented as being for the good of Rome. This reveals a further, negative, element to his character; he is naive. Cassius is able to manipulate Brutus’ obsession with honor in order to persuade him to murder Caesar, an ironic turn of events that on face value is anything but honorable. Brutus fails to recognize that he is being used by Cassius and Antony and seems to accept everything on face value, failing to question facts or consider the possibility that he could be deceived. This can be seen in the way he blindly accepts the letters from Cassius as being sent from the people of Rome and thus demonstrative of their will for Cesar to be removed. His nativity entails that he allows others to play upon his ideals in order to convince him to perform the act of murder. Despite the fact this murder causes him anguish, â€Å"Our hearts you see not; they are pitiful; and pity to the general wrong of Rome†¦ † (III, i, 185-186), he allows Cassius and Anthony to convince him that committing such acts will win the hearts of the people of Rome, â€Å"If then that friend demand why Brutus rose against Caesar, this is my answer: not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more. † (III. ii. 21-24). Brutus’ gullibility is something that he carries with him to the grave, even on his deathbed he believes that he has shared his life with true and honorable men, â€Å"My heart doth joy that yet in all my life I found no man but he was true to me† (V. v. 38-39). Such a naive and trusting nature allows the audience to perceive Brutus as honorable. He is innocent and trusting and truly believes that he is acting on behalf of the people of Rome. A further negative element of Brutus’ character is his poor judgment. He believes that he will win the support of the people of Rome because he acts in their interests. This is evident when he addresses the Roman citizens in the forum and in his general treatment of the Roman crowds. He incorrectly perceives them as intelligent individuals who will be able to understand his reasoned approach to the murder of Caesar. However, the reality is that the crowd is not able to understand his intellect and is thus left vulnerable to the words of Antony. Here, despite Cassius’ advice to the contrary, he allows Antony to have the last word at the funeral and is thus once again betrayed as a direct result of his naivety. Antony is able to utilize Brutus’ words and actions against him and generate hatred and animosity in the crowd. The same crowd that Brutus judged to be reasonable and intellectual. A further significant component of Brutus’ character is that of his philosophical nature. He is a believer in Stoicism, a philosophy that dictates living side by side with nature and existing in a carefree and indifferent manner. Such a philosophy manifests itself in an unemotional manner. This can be observed when Brutus hears of the death of his beloved wife and simply replies, â€Å"Why farewell Portia, We must die, Messala† (IV. iii. 218). His stoic nature can be seen as a possible explanation for the way in which he is able to restrict his focus to the political and ethical reasons for his murder of Caesar. Brutus’ stoic nature is further enhanced by the fact that he is able to put the good of the public before his own personal feelings. He does not think of Caesar as a man or a friend, but as a political entity, a future dictator, who threatens the good of Rome. This is one possible explanation for why he appears to show no grief for the acts he has committed or for his dead friend; he is too entrenched in his political objectives. The political focus of Brutus’ character proves to be a further flaw that allows others to use him to their advantage. His apparent lack of emotion is something that Cassius is able to utilize when he addresses the crowd and convinces them that Brutus is inherently bad. As readers though we have an insight into Brutus’ actions and understand the causes for his lack of emotion. He is so intent on doing what he believes to be right that, in our eyes, he maintains an honorable image. One of Brutus’ biggest faults is his inflexible nature. His stubbornness and inability to adapt to the events that occur ultimately leads to his downfall. Despite the fact that he is so politically focused, he fails to play the game of politics himself and thus leaves himself open to manipulation. Unlike Antony and Cassius, he is unable to strategically plan the best means of achieving his intentions, instead acting upon his blind faith that what he is doing is what the people want. However, although this is a flaw, it is something that maintains his honor; he is not a cheat or a conspirator at heart. This paper has discussed a number of Brutus’ character traits, both good and bad. A number of his qualities both serve in his favor and lead to his downfall. Whilst he is trusting, true to his beliefs and resolute, his naivety, poor judgment and single mindedness entail that he leaves himself vulnerable to the dishonest actions of those around him. However, it is such naivety that allows the readers to maintain an image of Brutus as an honorable man, who tries to act in the best interests of his people. The last word on the character of Brutus is expressed extremely well by the words of Mark Antony: â€Å"This was the noblest Roman of them all:? All the conspirators, save only he? Did that they did in envy of great Caesar,? He, only in a general honest thought? And common good to all, made one of them† (V,V, 68-72) For the characters in the play, and for the reader, Brutus maintains an element of honorability that even his most disgraceful acts cannot eradicate. How to cite A Character Analysis, Papers

Resistance to change free essay sample

Resistance to change has been renowned as an organizational challenge; however, a comprehensive understanding of the different ways that resistance can be manifested is commonly practiced and highly beneficial to companies. A U. S. mining company, Ajax Minerals realized just how beneficial it is to understand the components of how changes affect all branches of their company. Ajax Minerals recognized their organization was operating at full capacity and in the next couple years were going to have major competitive threats from another company. If the matters of the future  challenges that Ajax Minerals were anticipating werent addressed and handled appropriately, the organization would be expecting to experience grave danger. What it all boils down to are the issues concerning how Ajax Mineral organization would react regarding resistance of changes that would ensure competitiveness and livelihood for the company. If this subject matter about how employees and management adapt to change werent predicted and then addressed, Ajax Minerals future looked bleak. Scott and Jaffe (1988) describe the process as consisting of four phases, namely: initial denial, resistance, gradual exploration, and eventual commitment. Resistance is a natural and normal response to change because change often involves going from the known to the unknown (Coghlan, 1993; Steinburg, 1992; Myers and Robbins, 1991; Nadler, 1981; Zaltman and Duncan, 1977). Not only do individuals experience change in different ways (Carnall, 1986), they also differ in their ability and willingness to adapt to change (Darling, 1993). This paper investigates whether a relationship exists between an individuals cognitive and affective processes and their willingness to adapt to major organizational change. This topic is important because the failure of many corporate change programs is often directly attributable to employee resistance (Maurer, 1997; Spiker and Lesser, 1995; Regar et al. , 1994; Martin, 1975). For example, a longitudinal study of 500 large organizations found employee resistance was the most frequently cited problem encountered by management when implementing change (Waldersee and Griffiths, 1997). More than half the organizations in that survey experienced difficulties with employee resistance. Successfully managing resistance is a major challenge for change initiators and is arguably of greater importance than any other aspect of the change process (OConnor, 1993). Management usually focuses on the technical elements of change with a tendency to neglect the equally important human element which is often crucial to the successful implementation of change The research register for this journal is available at http://www. mcbup. com/research_registers Abstract Most previous studies of organizational change and resistance take an organizational perspective as opposed to an individual perspective. This paper investigates the relationship between irrational ideas, emotion and resistance to change. Nine organizations implementing major change were surveyed providing data from 615 respondents. The analysis showed that irrational ideas are positively correlated with behavioural intentions to resist change. Irrational ideas and emotion together explain 44 percent of the variance in intentions to resist. Also outlines an intervention strategy to guide management in developing a method for approaching resistance when implementing major change. (Levine, 1997; Huston, 1992; Steier, 1989; Arendt et al. , 1995; Tessler, 1989; New and Singer, 1983). As Nord and Jermier (1994) express it, resistance is resisted rather than being purposively managed. Therefore, in order to successfully lead an organization through major change it is important for management to balance both human and organization needs (Spiker and Lesser, 1995; Ackerman, 1986). Organizational change is driven by personal change (Band, 1995; Steinburg, 1992; Dunphy and Dick, 1989). Individual change is needed in order for organizational change to succeed (Evans, 1994). This paper reports on a study that aimed to identify, measure and evaluate how human elements including cognitive and affective processes are associated with an individuals level of resistance to organizational change. Conceptual framework The conceptual model developed for this paper is illustrated in Figure. It provides a framework for empirical testing and consists of four constructs (in bold type) namely perception, cognitions, affect and resistance. The operationalized variable for each construct is also included in the model (in italic type). Figure 1 is an illustration of human processes described in the literature. For example, Schlesinger (1982) in his psychoanalytic paper entitled Resistance as process, outlines classical theory favouring the sequence: interpretation, cognition, affect and action. Ellis and Harper (1975) state that humans have four basic processes, namely, to erceive or sense, to reason or think, to feel or emote, and to move or act.