Literature: Coriolanus
Note #15
What is the larger purpose of Shakespeare's characterization of Coriolanus in Act 1?
Coriolanus is potrayed throughout the play as being a singularily important character around whom the plot revolves. The two main conflicts in the plot are between the partricians and plebians and the Romans and Volsces. Coriolanus' ventures throughout the course of the play and the contrasts in his personality in the context of the battlefield and the city are major aspects that foreshadow how the two conflicts culminate with him at the center of it all. The decisions that Caius Martius takes are central to the plot development and ultimately determine the course of the play, thus making him an active character that is pivotal to the events in the build up of the play.
Set in the newly formed Roman Republic, this play is of a highly political nature and attempts to show the power struggles between different classes of the hierarchy. Coriolanus' demeanour towards the plebians can be thought of as representative of the attitudes held by the nobility regarding those they considered to be beneath them.
Right off the bat, Caius Martius is introduced as a character that is a bane to the commonality. He is shown to be both apathetic and provoking in his attitude towards the plebians. One of his principal character traits is pride, an aspect of his personality that he almost religiously preserves as seen when he goes so far as to align himself with the Volsces when he is demeaned in Rome. His proud demeanour is vilified and his arrogant and scathing dismissal of the plebians as seen when he says, "What's the matter, you dissentious rogues, That, rubbing the poor itch of your opinion, Make yourselves scabs?" make him seem like a petulant character. His unfavourable public profile can be attributed to his qualitative features that render him an anti-hero, atleast in the context of the city. Despite his great successes on the battlefield, the commonality remains skeptical of his desire to work for the people. This censoriousness towards the plebians later insinuates the impending doom he is going to face later on in the play. This tragic flaw becomes the cause of his eventual downfall.
On the battlefield however, Caius Martius is a man to behold. The majority of his supposedly positive qualities seem to be fixated in the context of the battlefield. His disposition on the battlefield is much more befitting of a classical hero than his conduct towards the citizens. In battle, he is valiant and brave. Adhering to a moral code of conduct, he is honourable and he unifies and inspires courage in his men. The character trait of arrogance that Shakespeare assigns to him manifests itself in the form of audacity on the battlefield. Coriolanus is dauntless in his ventures, as it can be seen when he charges into Corioles all by himself and returns victorious. His abilities in battle cannot be called into question. His assertive and imposing nature along with his successes on the battlefield render him as a character that is undefeatable. This impeccable potrayal of Coriolanus as a demigod is characteristic of the way other classical heroes were depicted at the time. His unyielding nature in the pursuit of his goals and absolute dominance on the battlefield were the reasons he was selected to be instated as the Consul, a position he failed to obtain because his arrogance towards his citizens was perceived to outweigh his achievements in war.
What is the larger purpose of Shakespeare's characterization of Coriolanus in Act 1?
Coriolanus is potrayed throughout the play as being a singularily important character around whom the plot revolves. The two main conflicts in the plot are between the partricians and plebians and the Romans and Volsces. Coriolanus' ventures throughout the course of the play and the contrasts in his personality in the context of the battlefield and the city are major aspects that foreshadow how the two conflicts culminate with him at the center of it all. The decisions that Caius Martius takes are central to the plot development and ultimately determine the course of the play, thus making him an active character that is pivotal to the events in the build up of the play.
Set in the newly formed Roman Republic, this play is of a highly political nature and attempts to show the power struggles between different classes of the hierarchy. Coriolanus' demeanour towards the plebians can be thought of as representative of the attitudes held by the nobility regarding those they considered to be beneath them.
Right off the bat, Caius Martius is introduced as a character that is a bane to the commonality. He is shown to be both apathetic and provoking in his attitude towards the plebians. One of his principal character traits is pride, an aspect of his personality that he almost religiously preserves as seen when he goes so far as to align himself with the Volsces when he is demeaned in Rome. His proud demeanour is vilified and his arrogant and scathing dismissal of the plebians as seen when he says, "What's the matter, you dissentious rogues, That, rubbing the poor itch of your opinion, Make yourselves scabs?" make him seem like a petulant character. His unfavourable public profile can be attributed to his qualitative features that render him an anti-hero, atleast in the context of the city. Despite his great successes on the battlefield, the commonality remains skeptical of his desire to work for the people. This censoriousness towards the plebians later insinuates the impending doom he is going to face later on in the play. This tragic flaw becomes the cause of his eventual downfall.
On the battlefield however, Caius Martius is a man to behold. The majority of his supposedly positive qualities seem to be fixated in the context of the battlefield. His disposition on the battlefield is much more befitting of a classical hero than his conduct towards the citizens. In battle, he is valiant and brave. Adhering to a moral code of conduct, he is honourable and he unifies and inspires courage in his men. The character trait of arrogance that Shakespeare assigns to him manifests itself in the form of audacity on the battlefield. Coriolanus is dauntless in his ventures, as it can be seen when he charges into Corioles all by himself and returns victorious. His abilities in battle cannot be called into question. His assertive and imposing nature along with his successes on the battlefield render him as a character that is undefeatable. This impeccable potrayal of Coriolanus as a demigod is characteristic of the way other classical heroes were depicted at the time. His unyielding nature in the pursuit of his goals and absolute dominance on the battlefield were the reasons he was selected to be instated as the Consul, a position he failed to obtain because his arrogance towards his citizens was perceived to outweigh his achievements in war.
This of course is a very good piece of work considering your profound usage of vocabulary (diction). I enjoyed reading all of your text, but the key piece in this text is where you establish the distinction between Coriolanus as a gladiator and as a person regarding his social relationship with the plebeian citizens. I cannot think of any specific area that requires improvement, just remember that when creating any piece of work in this course, to use more proof. In terms of proof, I specifically mean citing the line numbers or acts just to give even further justification to your arguments in the future. Otherwise, well done, an enjoyable piece of work to read.
ReplyDelete