The inter textual perspectives between both texts portray the consistent ideas. About leadership and political power irrespective of the distinctive context. However, both texts express their distinctive values towards the notion of leadership. And the mannerism in which power should be obtained. Which ultimately enhances our appreciation. Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar (1623) portrays the influence of nobility. And the need for stability on leadership. Contrastingly, The Prince an essay by Niccolo Machiavelli (1513) utilises realpolitik. Advice on the maintenance of power and virtu. Ultimately, both texts offer us an appreciation through their intertextual perspectives as we engage with their distinctive contexts and values.
Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar explores the notion of nobility through the characterisation of Brutus. Brutus is represented as a “noble Roman” throughout the play as he decides to assassinate Caesar to support the Republic system instead of a monarchy. Shakespeare utilises Brutus to mirror his own political fears of a lack of heir for Queen Elizabeth and uses Julius Caesar as a futuristic political commentary on the civil unrest that arises, without a ruler. Furthermore, Brutus’s nobility is explored as he wrestles with Cassius’s idea of assassinating Caesar and his personal morality.
Brutus’s lines of “Vexed I am” and “Veiled my look” are pronouns to metaphorically portray his disturbed mind. Also, Cassius’s manipulative nature is portrayed in his sardonic tone of “noble Roman” and repetition of the abstract noun of “love” which reinforces dramatic irony in the play. Subsequently, Shakespeare continues to reinforce the value of nobility in leadership through Brutus as he says, “It is not that I loved Caesar less, but I love Rome more”. The quantitative metaphor of “less” and “more” symbolises Brutus’s faith and his idealism in support the republic political system. The purpose of Shakespeare is to raise questions about the influence of nobility in leadership through Brutus wrestling with his personal morality and his idealism. As a result, this portrays the perspective of the value of nobility in leadership through his political commentary.
127 our experts are availableright now
However, in The Prince Machiavelli offers contradictory advice to Shakespeare as he focuses on realpolitik and the ends justifying the means, rather than nobility. Machiavelli’s purpose with The Prince was to gain favour with Lorenzo Di Medici and enter into politics. He utilises rhetoric and wit to demonstrate his perspective on leadership and explores the distinctive value of a focus on maintaining power rather than concern about morality. This is evident as he examines the rhetorical question of whether a ruler should be feared or loved and says, “Fear means punishment and that is something people will never forget”.
The high modality and blunt tone reveal Machiavelli’s harsh perspective using fear to control people. Furthermore, he continues to say, “but he must take care… that people don’t come to hate him”. The high modality and emotive language of “hate” indicates that the support of the people is required to maintain power. Machiavelli’s statement is confronting in relation to his context as he challenges traditional Christian virtues throughout the essay as he says, “So get the violence over with as soon as possible”. The symbolism of “violence” continues to reinforce Machiavelli’s realpolitik advice and complete disregard for values such as nobility and sense of personal morality which Brutus demonstrates. Machiavelli and Shakespeare both portray the intertextual perspective on the notion of leadership and the maintenance of power with both distinctive values and context. Thus, this enhances our appreciation of both texts as we gain a deeper understanding of their intertextual perspectives.
