Leadership most important position you can hold,
Leadership role in any era is the most important position you can hold, good leaders and bad ones both have at least one thing in common. Every leader knows how to use the deadliest weapon of all and that is the tool of manipulation. Being Able to affect one’s way of thought cant compare to a gun nor a sword. Cassius being the slimy, grimy, sorry excuse of a man he is, knew the exact words to tell brutus for him to turn against his best friend Caesar and backstab him. In the historical play of Julius Caesar, William Shakespeare goes onto talk about a fearless leader who gets betrayed and murdered by his best friend. Brutus didn’t just turn on him for no reason, but cassius manipulated him into turning against caesar by saying rome would be better off without him because he would abuse his power and be a poor leader. After the murder of Caesar Brutus goes onto try an attempt Antony who was also a close friend of Caesar and the rest of the community that they murdered him for the better of Rome. Antony didn’t fall for it, but he played into the trap so that he could build a plan and expose him and his rebellion. Antony and Brutus both went to the people hoping that they would side with them and understand why their side was more representable. Antony and Brutus both know how to manipulate and persuade people with their words, but Antony’s use of exaggeration Rhetorical questions, and pronouns sets his over the edge. Brutus and Antony were like mirrors to one another just fighting for the opposite belief, neither one could get into the peoples heads without the use of assertion. Antony goes on to say in his speech “but here’s a parchment with the seal of Caesar;/ I found it in his closet, `tis his will:/ Let but the commoners hear this testament–/Which pardon me, I do not mean to read–” (JC 3.2.57-60). Antony was fibbing there was never a will. He did this to make Brutus seem like a more honorable man who never should have been murdered. The people fell for it and began to question the rebellion. This makes the speech that Brutus gave similar because he said, “Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved/Rome more”(JC 3.2 11-12). Brutus was trying to persuade the people of Rome that the murder was “for Rome” and that they should all rejoice and be happy that someone like Caesar isn’t the leader anymore. Assertion for both Antony and Brutus played the most important role, the commoners weren’t getting that there was never really any evidence for what neither one of them was saying. That isn’t the only similarities that the two men hold they also used rhetorical questions as another form of persuasion. Rhetorical questions are when your asking a question that doesn’t exactly have an answer behind it. Brutus spoke and said “Who is here so base that would be a/ boldman? If any, speak; for him have i offended./ Who us here so rude that would not be Roman?”(JC 3.2.20-22). Brutus used this as a method of going after all the Romans specifically trying to find the ones who labeled themselves as nationalists. Using the Rhetorical question as a way to get them thinking and wondering, am I really a true patriot if I just allow my beloved leader to be murdered in cold blood? Antony used Rhetorical question as well with his speech and said “You all did see that on the Lupercal/ I thrice presented him a kingly crown./ Which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?”(JC 3.2 23-25). The question was used to make the people open their eyes and realize that Caesar was too honorable of a king and person to be murdered. This helped both sides get the peoples heads spinning and thinking about all of the things that has happened. When things are alike there is always gonna be something different and in this one Brutus and Antony also had some differences. Brutus used generalization as his way of persuading the people and Antony took another path of loaded words. In Brutus’s speech he said “I have done nomroe to/ Caesar than you shall do to Brutus”(JC 3.2 27-28). Brutus used generalization by saying that all the citizens were just going to do what he did to Caesar and murder him along with the rest of the rebellion which would show that murder is a solution that obviously isn’t as bad because they did it too. Antony used an approach of loaded words to get his point across the people. Loaded words allows the speaker to get you in your feelings, and involve a lot of emotion so that you feel what they feel. In the lines between 6-22, he repeats “ambitious” and “honorable” but didn’t really think the men were near the level of honorable and ambitious. The method did not only use loaded words but it used sarcasm in its own way. The methods worked but not in the same way as the other one did. The debate on whose speech was better is an ongoing thing when this topic is brought up. There’s no doubt that Antony had the better speech not only cause of his better persuasive methods but because he knew how to connect to the people. During the influential speech he said “I will not do them wrong; I rather chose/ To wrong the dead, to wrong myself and you, / Than i will wrong such honorable men”(JC 3.2 54-56). The Sarcasm that he used made it obvious that he didn’t respect nor listen to the group and that the community shouldn’t either. The speech went over and beyond because of the exaggeration, sarcasm and way he just slithered around the people and got into their heads while using valid points. The exaggeration went on to continue Antony said “My heart is in the coffin with Caesar”(JC 3.2 34). Saying that to the people allows the people to feel what he’s feeling and start to give him sympathy. Controlling someone’s feelings is something that will always get them to side with you, blinding them with the sorrow and sympathy they give u allows you to get what you want and he understood this. While I think that Antony’s speech was a lot better other may think that Brutus had a better all around persuasive and controlling speech. There’s many ways that the other people could think this mainly because the use of generalization. Well when he tried throwing the murder up back into the communities face it could have offended them and made it feel like he was trying to take advantage of them, which would just piss them off even more. Not considering both ways something could go really can bite you in the butt. They could be to the point where right after he says that it makes them switch sides and that makes the whole speech pointless. Antony used many different types of persuasive ways in which all built him and the audience a relationship and that’s why his speech was all around so much better. For better or for worse what happened to Caesar was just a cold hearted murder and deserved the justice that was served. Killing the king is one thing but being killed by your bestfriend is something that is just unbearable to think of. Antony goes to the people so that they understood what really happened and the rebellion couldnt one side rally them. This went on to change Rome’s path forever, from leaders to conspirators. It also opened up many peoples eyes and showed how manipulation can really affect people’s lives in good and or bad ways.