Julius Caesar Conflicting Perspectives Analysis

Module C - REPRESENTATION AND TEXT: Conflicting Perspectives.
You are to produce a contribution to an online HSC Tutorial. You are to record and upload an answer to the question below. It is to be no longer than seven minutes and no less than five minutes.

Conflicting perspectives exist within texts and their representation is affected by the context of the composer.
Using your prescribed text and a related text of your own choosing, assess the impact of this statement on a contemporary audience.
Hello user coolkitty96, and the rest of HSC tutorial users who will stumble across this video, you seem to be having some trouble with Julius Caesar in Module C, are you not? Well no fear of Shakespeare, as I am here! I believe what you should
Now, Shakespeare was a famous playwright of the time and it seemed logical for him to express his ideologies through his popular plays to comment on his society. Shakespeare was able to use scenes such as the Brutus vs. Antony orations to stress the conflicting ideals between truth and propaganda, as well as their effects on society. Shakespeare captures Brutus’s honesty when he states “I honour him; but as he was ambitious, I slew him” through his use of prose within the speech. Prose reveals to the audience of plebeians Brutus’ rational and logical thinking behind assassinating Caesar, to which he emphasised “not that I loved Caesar less, but I loved Rome more.” The way in which Brutus excuses his actions appears to be beneficiary to the population instead for his selfish purposes, as well as depicting Caesar as a negative influence to the Roman Empire. This is soon contradicted by Antony’s oration which was written in blank verse. The speech mocks as well as contrasts Brutus’ intentions implicitly though the repetition of “But Brutus is an honourable man” which follows conflicting contradictory statements. This depicts Antony’s oration skills as both more superior and authentic to Brutus’s speech as it exposes the contrast between higher and lower order rhetoric. Brutus’s and Antony’s orations, create a powerful
Carlos Latuff began satirically cartooning this issue after his visit to the Gaza strip in the 1990’s. He is of Mexican descent; therefore his background doesn’t affect his views as much as if he was Israeli or Palestinian, though his perception of what is true and what is right drive his work. Through the picture “Israeli side vs. Palestinian Side” (2009) his focus on anti-capitalism, anti-globalisation and anti-US military intervention is highlighted. This representation is heavily critical on Israel, who is associated with all of that, as it depicts a “spot the difference” situation; by displaying two similar cartoons in essence, which then have been altered to depict Latuff’s perspective on the events. On the left side, the Israeli perspective on the war, according to the composer, is shown with a small bomb, appearing to be faulty, landing in the street, surrounded by a shocked crowd with no apparent visible damage. On the right side, labelled “Palestinian side” a distressing scene is depicted with crumbling buildings, fire, blood and death present within the visual. The way in which the cartoon is composed suggests to the audience an exaggeration of the situation, a common form within political cartoons. Having said