Jake Kuenzl 3/28/14

Julius Caesar: Tensions and Ambiguities

Although Shakespeare is viewed and studied in most stages of academia, there are things that can be uncovered no many how many times the text is revisited. There are many different interpretations of Shakespeare that highlight different themes more heavily than others. In this way, Shakespeares works present a great deal of ambiguity. However, Shakespeare also weaves ambiguities and tension into his work through his masterful use of language and vocabulary. A word can take on a number of different meanings, which can prove to change the entire message, statement, or interpretation of characters. In the case of Julius Caesar, Shakespeare uses language as a tool to weave ambiguities into the play through characters and dialogue. Act 3 in the play proves to contain a great deal of ambiguity that is highlighted by the language of Antony and others. At the point in the play where the assassination plot seems to be coming to a high point, and is about to take effect, Antony is grief stricken. He sends word that, although he loved Caesar, he would align himself with Brutus, provided he not be punished for previous allegiances. He spends a great deal of time either talking to the departed spirit of Caesar, or pledging his allegiance to the conspirators. He predicts that, as long as this wrongful deed go unavenged, Caesars spirit will bring chaos to Rome. During the discussion with Caesars body, he uses language that seems straight forward. However, when the language is examined, it is clear that Shakespeare has woven alternative meanings and ambiguity.

The first thing I notice about the two passages is the reoccurrence of the image of blood. In the first selection, the blood is highlighted by the shaking of hands between the conspirators and Antony. The obvious symbolic meaning of this seems to be the blood of Caesar being murdered being on the conspirators hands. I took it as Antony taking a share of the responsibility for the death of Caesar. I also find it interesting the inner conflict he seems to be going through in doing so. He asks a number of rhetorical questions throughout the passage. I believe Shakespeare did this to display the emotional distress and disarray that Antony is feeling around and after the time of Caesars death. To me, the entire monologue is Antony trying to sort out everything that has happened, grieve for the loss of Caesar, while also make the right decision moving forward. After he shakes the hands of the conspirators, he says Gentleman all- alas, what shall I say? My credit now stands on such shaky ground (210). To me, this is a great line to support the struggle he is experiencing, highlighting the rhetorical aspect of the passage, and the contrast between the statement and the previous action of shaking the hand of those who committed the act. In this passage Shakespeare also manages highlights the sense of chaos present throughout the third act through the language of one character. In the second selection, it is interesting that Shakespeare returns to the image of blood. Throughout the two selections, blood does not merely mean physical blood (although it does mean that too). Blood in some of these instances means the guilt that the men have to carry due to being involved, as well as responsibility for the death. In this scene he is alone with the corpse of Caesar and it seems that his true feelings about the matter come forward in the absence of the conspirators. He returns to the blood image again, saying Woe to the hand that

shed this costly blood! (284). Through exclaiming this statement, Shakespeare is able to show the grief Antony is experiencing, while also showing the nature of the murder. It shines through also that he is experiencing some shame for aligning himself with the conspirators, when he says, Pardon me, thou bleeding piece of earth, That I am meek and gentle with these butchers. (282). Here Shakespeare shows Antony apologizing to the corpse of a man, which the action in itself shows that he is quite unsettled by the crime. From here, Shakespeare shows Antony in a different light. There is a theme of prophesizing and warning for future events throughout the play. Here, Antony joins that thread when he cautions for what is to come of Rome in the aftermath of the act against Caesar. He warns of civil backlash once the truth is uncovered. Throughout the rest of this monologue, there is a sense of tension that comes across only through the language that Shakespeare uses. When he says Mothers shall but smile when they see their infants quartered with the hands of war;, he appeals to the fear and emotional senses of his audience through using the relationship between a mother and child to display the regularity of horror that will soon be known throughout Rome. He goes on to show that this all will be a result of Caesar haunting the city for the fell deed brought against him. He describes Caesar as ranging for revenge, with ate by his side come hot from hell,.. (294). The sharp images brought forth through the language Shakespeare uses work in giving the reader an image of the horror that could be to come. These two monologues, especially the latter, when put into context do a great job of setting the stage for the funeral scene. The disarray that Antony is experiencing continues during his speech, and he is ultimately overcome with grief, and his true feelings begin to show.

When they do, he is able to sway the opinion of the audience, and the play takes another turn. It is interesting to see how Shakespeare is able to achieve meaning beyond the actual words on the page. Through imagery, repetition, and even the actions of the characters, we are able to get a sense of what characters are thinking and feeling, even if they do not necessarily say it out loud or directly.