Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Dylan Rivera
Ms. Woelke
AP English Language
15 April 2018
The most amazing superpower is the one of human language. It can read minds, persuade
others, build bridges, or bear destruction. Whoever masters it inevitably will master rhetoric, a
true showcase of the artistic use of language. In the play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, the clash
between trust and loyalty is displayed between Julius Caesar, soon to be emperor of Rome, and
Brutus, Caesar’s trusted friend who struggles with his loyalty between Caesar and Rome - both
loyalties are not compatible, as Brutus will go on to believe. Although it can be seen throughout
the play, playwright William Shakespeare demonstrates the power of human rhetoric specifically
in the war of words between Calphurnia (Caesar’s beloved wife) and Decius (a trusted
go? By the end of the selected passage, Decius overcomes Calphurnia’s inferior argument so that
Caesar goes on to be coronated all due to Decius’s extensive use of emotional connections to
In the beginning of the passage Calphurnia makes several fatal rhetorical errors which
weaken her persuasive ability over Caesar. The fact that Calphurnia’s argument is based on a
narrative of her dream (which Caesar and Decius both reference in 2.2.38 and 2.2.45) already
presents itself as a weak basis for Caesar to feel strongly for her cause - in her dream, as
Calphurnia describes, death would come upon Caesar if he goes to the coronation ceremony. A
Rivera 2
narrative presented in this fashion is inherently distinct from any logical approach: it largely
relies on the inner emotions of Calphurnia and offers no concrete evidence to support that Caesar
would indeed be murdered. The dream itself, explained through this narrative, emotional style
does not make a lasting impact on Caesar’s mind. Furthermore, Calphurnia’s desperate tone
makes her have a weak, unattractive argument. Her tone is largely based on an emotional plea
and can be seen when an exclamation mark is used when she cries, “O Caesar!” (2.2.13) and
fightful diction in the phrases “they frighten me” and “I do fear” (2.2.2 and 2.2.14, respectively).
This exclamation mark conveys a sense of urgency and indicates the raising of Calphurnia’s
voice, signaling her emotional distress and representing the desperateness of her plea. This
desperation may work on Caesar on the short term but would quickly crumble once Decius
presents his argument. Another weak point of Calphurnia’s use of rhetoric lies in her extremely
limited point of view: personalized pronouns (me, I, my) adhering to Calphurnia’s subjective,
fearful point of view over the situation. This is demonstrated in several lines throughout the
passage, including but not limited to, “Yet now they frighten me” (2.2.2), “And I do fear them”
(2.2.14), and “Let me, upon my knee, prevail in this” (2.2.34). These first person point of view
pronouns do not appeal at all to Caesar himself and are limited to Calphurnia, which is a mistake
since Caesar values himself and his ambitions highly. If Calphurnia focused more on second
person point of view pronouns while addressing Caesar - you are, your ambitions, etc - her
argument may have been more convincing. However, her argument remains in her personal
Halfway through the passage Calphurnia makes her final arguments and Caesar claims he
will listen and stay back - until Decius enters the picture. Calphurnia delivers a final blow to her
Rivera 3
argument when she uses an antecedent to refer to Caesar’s reason for not going: “Do not go forth
today. Call it my fear / That keeps you in the house, and not your own” - as “it” refers to the
reason for Caesar not to go (2.2.50-51). This declaration assumes that Calphurnia takes
responsibility for the reasoning behind staying back and “it” is justified through her personal
fears. This reason alone is irrational as a fear itself does not imply anything will happen -
Calphurnia’s dream was simply a false attempt at a foreshadow, in Caesar’s view. Thus, the
antecedent in this case does not work and not sufficiently represent a valid reason for Caesar to
Decius on the other hand presents a much more rhetorically persuasive argument for
Caesar to go to the senate building as he starts off by using powerful, personalized imagery as he
describes a fountain “spouting blood… in which so many smiling Romans bathed” (2.2.47-48).
This imagery is a direct spin on Calphurnia’s vision that blood would spill from Caesar’s statue,
but in a way signifying his downfall - in Decius’s reasoning, blood spilling from the fountain
will actually represent the glory of Rome once Caesar takes power and Roman’s pride in their
emperor. This imagery, in Caesar’s personal ambition’s favor, is compelling for Caesar as it not
only promotes Caesar’s personal goals but also vividly describes a scene of blood, a substance
Caesar is familiar with from the battlefield. Since this form of imagery is personalized to
Caesar’s ambitions, and strikes a chord within him as the power of spilling blood is a glory that
Caesar understands and even used to seek for on the battlefield, Caesar is more inclined to
appreciate this use of imagery for a reason for him to go. Overall, it is Decius’s more confident
and positive tone which captures Caesar’s attention and provide a smooth ambiance for Decius to
stake his claim by the end of his rhetorical speech. Decius’s tone can be seen in several lines and
Rivera 4
is already established through lines 2.2.45-52 due to the fact that Decius makes no desperate
statements and even - perhaps arrogantly - dismisses Calphurnia’s dream as “all amiss
interpreted” and suggests a more positive view of her dream as instead an omen for Caesar to go
to the senate building, even boldly interpreting the vision for himself, “It was a vision fair and
fortunate” (2.2.45-46). Decius’s confident tone overrides Calphurnia’s desperate tone, appealing
immediately to Caesar (as Caesar is a confident, respectful man himself) and inevitably makes
By the end of the passage, Caesar is convinced by Decius that he should go to the senate
building, thus changing his mind and not adhering to Calphurnia’s wishes. Decius seals the deal
by using positive, emotionally powerful diction in his discourse, such as by saying “mighty
Caesar”, where the word “mighty” appeals to Caesar’s pride and strokes his ego by essentially
openly boasting his dominance (2.2.56). Other words are also used in this fashion, notably in a
more positive and uplifting way than how Calphurnia presented her argument. This is critical
because Decius’s speech immediately differs itself from Calphurnia’s choice of words, which
were more concerned with fear - one may even interpret them as counterintuitive to Caesar’s
grand ambitions. Decius’s positive word choice is hence more attractive than Calphurnia’s
diction and is what grabs and maintains Caesar’s attention. In addition, Decius poses a rhetorical
question used in order to make Caesar reflect on his image and his high held ego: “Lo, is Caesar
afraid?” (2.2.63). This rhetorical question is something that the senate would ask themselves if
Caesar did not show up to his coronation, thus inducing a subtle fear that the senate may even
question Caesar’s character and thus merit at deserving role of emperor of Rome. Contrary to
Caesar’s ambitions, this rhetorical question would immediately make Caesar consider this
Rivera 5
Caesar’s switch to Decius’s argument. To end his reasoning, Decius declares, “And reason to my
emotional connection to Caesar (2.2.66). Decius effectively reaffirms his devotion to Caesar by
saying this, implying he only has good intentions and would not to anything to harm Caesar as he
“loves” him. This is an emotional plea to Caesar as Caesar is confronted with a verbal
affirmation of Decius’s claimed loyalty. Due to its friendly, virtuous nature, Caesar takes this as
a sign of loyalty and allegiance to a good friend that would not betray him, which compels him
go to the senate building in spite of Calphurnia’s plea for Caesar to stay back. This would go
perfectly in Decius’s favor and lay the stage for the eventual murder of Caesar. Clearly, the
Calphurnia-Decius rhetorical presentations are prime examples of the power of rhetoric and
human language - in this case, it convinced a man to choose a path that would lead to his death.
Decius consistently manifests this power via his delicate control over emotional affections to
Caesar himself and logical reasoning for Caesar to go to the ceremony. Although this is a rather
extreme example, it should be heeded as a warning to others to be wary of human words and yet