No perspective is complete without its corresponding varying reflection. The validity of any one view is ironically made more lucid through its contradictory comments.   These perceptions are subject to an audience’s perception of the event, situation or personality which is shaped to evoke a fervently passionate response. Such notions are depicted in Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar”, and the reconciliation speeches presented by former political leaders, Kevin Rudd (SMH article: 13/02/08) and Brendon Nelson (SMH article: 13/02/08), that mirror similar but also differing views on one issue.
“Julius Caesar” explores the nature of conflicting perspectives through the funeral orations by both Brutus and Antony. The power of persuasion is implemented in order to manipulate meaning of both speeches so as to evoke emotional responses. Brutus employs the art of rhetoric as a device to veil intent and to persuade the audience about his perspective on Caesar’s assassination. His patriotic approach in justifying the killing of Caesar through an antithesis in his claim that it’s “not that I loved Caesar less but I loved Rome more”, conflicts with Antony’s emotive claim that “My heart is in the coffin there with Caesar, and I must pause till it come back to me” which is engineered to allow the plebeians to think and is a clever tact used by antony to gauge their response. because he “loved,” him while the latter presents an enigmatic action by pausing which confuses the audience but for a purpose. Antony waits for a response in order to weigh up the public’s feelings. Shakespeare’s purpose is to demonstrate to the audience Brutus’s naivety and innocence in the ways of men relying only on truth and Antony’s shrewd mastery of a soldier and a politician.
Brutus’s rhetoric asks for the judgement of his audience leaving himself relying on their approval and judgement. His sympathetic manner encapsulated in his softer tones as he questions, ‘“Who here is so rude that would not be a...