Subjective bias is at the heart of all representations.
Through the representation of language to manipulate a text, several diverse agendas and interpretations are shaped. Varying representations arise through events, personalities or situations are shaped through contextual form, language features, altering the meaning and creating textual integrity. The composers construction of various mediums allows responders to perceive a text to form their own particular view and depiction of these conflicting perspectives create meaning. In Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, the persuasion of beliefs surrounding the assassination of Caesar, allow responders to interpret meaning and individual view points. Shakespeare manipulates the conventions of drama and language structure to alter perspectives regarding the events leading up to Caesars assignation. The conflicting political agendas of Cassius in Julius Caesar demonstrate the relationship between state and citizen and create motifs for actions undertaken throughout the play. Cassius disproval of Caesar running Rome is depicted throughout carefully crafted rhetoric gambits persuading Brutus to join him against Caesar. The fears of Brutus are played upon by Cassius who envies Caesar’s power. “We petty men/ Walk under his huge legs...dishonourable graves.” Emotive language highlights Caesars all-consuming power, the juxtaposition of ‘huge legs’ and ‘petty men’ conveys the assassination as a personal plot and persuades Brutus to join him in his quest for vengeance. The series of words builds up images of jealousy and inferiority. By using faulty reasoning Cassius was able to make Caesar appear to be a tyrant to the people of Rome. This conflicts with Brutus as he is caught in between his love for Rome and his love for Caesar. Cassius’ views on Caesar were conflicting towards the Elizabethan audience as his hatred for the leader opposed supporting views of a monarchical system. Throughout the play Cassius repeatedly express...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document