Act+4-5+Julius+Caesar+(Finale)

Q1. What are your feelings towards Brutus at the end? Do you feel a tragic sense of loss at his death? Why or why not? (do you admire his suicide as noble and necessary act? How far do you agree with Anthony's description of Brutus at the end of the play?)

Q2. How does the end of the play make you feel? Given that octavius becomes the new ruler of Rome, what kind of leader do you think he will be? Why?

Q3. History is littered with dictators who ruthlessly killed actual, potential or imaginary enemies to maintain their power. Can you name some of them? Which people or groups did they persecute and why? What methods did they employ? Were the punished for their crimes? Are there differing viewpoints towards these leaders and why?

Please put your answers down in this page :)

1.While it is commonly said that Brutus is the tragic hero of the play, and that his death signified the tragic loss of one of the noblest man of all, I beg to differ. In my opinion, Brutus brought his death upon himself and he was not as noble as we are told. Throughout the play, Brutus’ nobility seemed to be more of a con than a pro. In my opinion, Brutus nobility made him very naïve and too idealistic. He believed that all the conspirators were driven by the love for Rome and also did not think Antony would seek revenge for Caesar. As such, he made many mistakes in the play, and at the end of the play, we cannot help but wonder, whether the biggest mistake by Brutus was actually his decision to kill Caesar. I feel that if Brutus was really noble, he would know what he wanted for Rome after Caesar’s death, and not just kill Caesar and leave Rome in chaos, also, I feel that Brutus could have instead just overthrow Caesar and exile him from Rome instead of ending his life. Brutus’ nobility seems to me to be rather detached from reality, and my impression of him is more of a rigid and conformist rather than a noble character. However, perhaps his death can be considered noble as it sort of placed Antony, Octavius and Lepidus in power and stop the chaos in Rome.

Brutus’ suicide does not really seem to be considered noble as it was just the other alternative to being killed by the enemy. It just portrayed him to be so rigid in his ideals of being noble and would die than surrender to the enemy. In this sense, I feel more of pity for Brutus rather than respect at the end of the play. huiqi

1. I believe that in nature, Brutus is noble. He killed Caesar out of good intentions and wanted the best for Rome. However, this nobility of his is so conformed by his rigid character and naivety that it becomes his weakness. His suicide was unneccesary and may even cause Rome to suffer. If he were alive, and stopped believing that "when he once attains the upmost round, he then unto the ladder turns his back", he may have become a good leader! Again, it is proven that Brutus was killed by his own weakness- his rigid character. He assumed that Caesar's ghost had appeared in front of him for the purpose of warning him that Caesar's ghost will avenge his own death and wholeheartedly believed in it, hence deciding to kill himself since he also wanted to keep his pride till the very end instead of dying in the hands of his opponent. That leads me to wonder whether when Brutus had made the decision to kill Caesar, did he ever decide who was going to rule Rome? Did he decide to leave Rome in a state of anarchy? Or was he himself interested in being the ruler? Then, why didn't he continue to fight for the sake of Rome, but instead, chose to commit suicide? His act of commiting suicide didn't seem to be noble at all. In fact, it was contradictory of his act of assasinating Caesar. By killing himself, he was giving away Rome to Octavius, leaving it in the hands of another Caesar!

1) At the end of the play, I feel that Brutus is not as noble as most of us thought he was. Brutus himself said it was cowardly and vile to kill oneself just because one is afraid of what might befall, but yet he rather die than allow himself to be dishonourably dragged through the streets of Rome as Antony's captive. Antony said that Brutus is the noblest Roman of them all. Yes, Brutus was the only one who killde Caesar not because of envy or jealousy, but because it was for the good of Rome. But his noble act is never justified because Caesar was killed, and no one could say he became corrupted due to power. Thus, we could say Brutus was naive and he never knew what he did was actually right. At the same time, I do not admire his suicide and do not think that it is a necessary and noble act. He could have helped Rome, and not kill himself, as a revenge for Caesar. He was too tormented and troubled after killing Caesar, that he never thought of the good of Rome.

1. Whether Brutus brought his death upon himself is disputable. However, i feel that his death is a tragic loss to Rome. In this play, we can see that Brutus is one of the minority in Rome who truly cares about Rome and its people. All the other conspirators joined in the conspiracy for personal or selfish reasons; all but Brutus. Throughout the entire play, Brutus is concerned about the welfare of Rome. He is willing to do anything for the good of Rome, up to the extent of killing his friend, Caesar, for the perceived good of Rome. Yes, one can argue that Brutus brought about the war when he decided to kill Caesar, resulting in chaos and death of several Roman soldiers. One can argue Brutus's poor judgement brought unrest for the people in Rome. However, Brutus was also the one who always focused on the good of Rome. Thus, i feel that the death of such a noble and patriotic man is a great loss for Rome.

1) Though I really hated Brutus and felt that he was cold blooded when he joined in the assassination of Caesar, my opinions of him changed after this scene. I felt that he killed Caesar out of his greater love for Rome and all Romans. It is really a pity that his life was taken, since I’m convinced that he was not a bad guy after all. His speech at the end, “Caesar, you can rest now. I didn’t kill you half as willingly,” really touched me. This sentence, though short, reflects a lot about Brutus. His conscience could not go to rest, as he the ghost of Caesar came to him for many times and he felt guilty for killing Caesar. The latter part of his sentence moved me the most. “I didn’t kill you half as willingly,” reflects that he never wholeheartedly wanted to kill Caesar, but it was a choice he was mentally forced into making for the better of Rome. I admire his death as a noble one as in my opinion, he was bearing his responsibility by giving a life for a life. His death is also necessary to prove that he is not half as bad as the man whom readers thought him to be initially. I agree with what Brutus said, especially the line :” This was the noblest Roman of them all. All the rest of the conspirators acted out of jealousy of great Caesar. Only he acted from honesty and for the general good.” Having read the whole book, and knowing about the different conspirators, I can tell that Brutus was one of a kind. He was the only one who had reasons beside jealousy that led him to kill Caesar. As he had said “Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more,” this extract from his speech at Caesar’s funeral clearly tells us that he did love Caesar, but it was not a choice of his to kill Caesar, Caesar’s death was crucial. -Shih Han

2. I feel relieved that all the chaos, war and conflict has seemingly come to an end as the play concludes. However, in the meantime, I am curious and worried about how Rome will be like in the future after all the conspirators have died and under the rule of Octavius. Will there be conflict between Anthony, Lepidus and Octavius? Will the same thing happen to Octavius? These are some questions that flashed across my mind as the play draws to an end.  I think Octvaius will probably be a tyrannic ruler. When Anthony orders Octavius to "lead your battle softly on, Upon the left and of the even field" in Act 5 Scene 1, Octavius decides to march on the right hand side instead. Octavius replies that "I do not cross you, but I will do so". This statement foreshadows how Octavius will eventually cross Antony by removing him and Lepidus from of power. He disagreed even with his allies and this shows how much he yearn for power and a position above the rest. By the end of Act 5, Octavius rules singly. Unlike Caesar, with whom the audience saw a personal side, Octavius is depicted as ruthless politician without moral scruples or emotional conflict. Initially, Octavius is referred to as "young Octavius". But when asking Antony if he should give the sign of battle, Antony replies to Octavius, "No, Caesar, we will answer on their charge". Octavius is named as "Caesar", and for the rest of the play is referred to similarly, even by Cassius. This shows the power that Octavius has over the rest and in my opinion, Octavius is someone who would use unscrupulous means to achieve superiority, hence implying the possibility of corruption of power.  ﻿ (michelle)

3. Qin Shi Huang is one of them. He persecuted the scholars especially those that studied Confucianism as he distrusted them and hated Confucianism also because it opposed his style of rule. He not only killed the scholars and even burnt all their books so that no one can study Confucianism in the future. He eventually died after eating his fake immortality pill which was made of mercury. Adolf Hitler is another one. He persecuted the Jews as the Jews stole victory from Germany in the First World War. He also hated the Jews because a Jewish doctor, Eduard Bloch, unsuccessfully treated his mother Klara who was stricken with breast cancer and died from the disease in 1907. He burned the Jews, killed their children, treated them worse than animals and made them naked. He even wanted to wipe out all the Jews. However, in the end, to avoid being captured by the Soviet forces, he committed suicide. Nevertheless, there are differing viewpoints towards these two leaders. Hitler was only known for his cruelty towards the Jews and not for anything he did for Germany whereas for Qin Shi Huang, he may be known for killing the scholars studying Confucianism but he was also known for building the Great Wall of China which protected the people against invaders, for standardizing writing with one kind of language so that everyone can understand and would not have problems communicating. Thus, Qin Shi Huang has a good viewpoint compared to Adolf Hitler. Isabelle

3. Kim Jong Il is one of the dictators that is still in power today. According to websites, a South Korean filmmaker, Shin Sang-ok, was kidnapped by Kim Jong Il, sent to prison, and eventually forced to make a film called Pulgasari that was basically a communist propaganda version of Godzilla. After Shin and his wife managed to escape North Korea while location scouting in Austria, Kim Jong Il shelved Pulgasari and all of Shin’s other work. Kim Jong Il has since given specific instruction to his Ministry of Culture and his communist filmmakers to make more cartoons. He had also disabled and short people deported from his capital. In preparation for the World Festival of Youth and Students in 1989, Kim Jong Il had disabled residents removed from Pyongyang. The government also distributed pamphlets advertising a wonder drug that would increase the height of short people. Those who responded to the pamphlets were sent away to different uninhabited islands along with the disabled in an attempt to rid the next generation of their supposedly substandard genes.

He also maintains a city that was built just to be looked at. Kijong-Dong is a propaganda city that was originally built in the 1950s by Kim Jong Il’s father right on the border, this was to display the North’s superiority to the South and also to encourage people to defect. It has no actual residents, but an extensive effort has been put forth to simulate a functioning city, including lights on set timers, and street sweepers to create an illusion of activity. The use of modern telescopes has revealed that the units lack window glass, and some buildings are just concrete shells that don’t even have interior rooms. The city also houses the world’s largest flagpole, complete with a 300lb. North Korean flag.

Kim Jong Il's regime continues to be one of the world’s most repressive. Hundreds of thousands of citizens, including children, are imprisoned in labour camps for such “crimes” as hoarding food and “anti-socialist” activities. - Simin

====3. Another dictator that had similar practices is the HongWu Emperor in the Ming dynasty, Zhu Yuan Zhang. He established the Ming dynasty. As time went on, Hongwu became increasingly fearful of rebellions and coups, even going so far as to order the execution of those of his advisers who dared criticise him. Hongwu also noted the destructive role of court [|eunuchs] under the previous dynasties. He drastically reduced their numbers, forbidding them to handle documents, insisting that they remained illiterate, and executing those who commented on state affairs. In addition, he never consented to any of his imperial relatives becoming court officials. Hongwu attempted, and largely succeeded in, the consolidation of control over all aspects of government, so that no other group could gain enough power to overthrow him. He also buttressed the country's defenses against the Mongols. As emperor, Hongwu increasingly concentrated power in his own hands. He abolished the [|chancellor]'s post, which had been head of the main central administrative body under past dynasties, by suppressing a plot for which he had blamed his chief minister. He executed tens of thousand officials and their relatives over sedition, treason, corruption and other charges. He was extremely authoritarian, a virtual dictator, and governed directly over all affairs. ====