Home > Sample essays > The Aristotelian Lens in Julius Caesar and Medea

Essay: The Aristotelian Lens in Julius Caesar and Medea

Essay details and download:

  • Subject area(s): Sample essays
  • Reading time: 4 minutes
  • Price: Free download
  • Published: 1 April 2019*
  • Last Modified: 23 July 2024
  • File format: Text
  • Words: 1,184 (approx)
  • Number of pages: 5 (approx)
  • Tags: Julius Caesar essays

Text preview of this essay:

This page of the essay has 1,184 words.



In Poetics, Aristotle explains what a successful tragedy has: plot, character, thought, diction, song, and spectacle. He also describes what a tragic hero is and other elements that should be considered like catharsis and peripeteia. His lens can be focused in on the famous works Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar and Euripides’ Medea. Although Aristotle’s definition of tragedy may not be applied to all plays, Julius Caesar and Medea are prime examples of dramas that can be clearly interpreted through the Aristotelian lens with their uses of tragic heroes, peripeteia, anagnorisis, and catharsis.

Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar can be interpreted through the Aristotelian lens since it contains a tragic hero, peripeteia, anagnorisis, and catharsis. This work evidently has the six elements of tragedy and three unities within a plot. Aristotle states in his Poetics that a character should go through stages in order to be considered as a tragic hero. First, the character should initially be good and have respected achievements. The character will then be in his downfall due to his tragic flaw. Brutus, the main character, is the tragic hero because he was originally admired for his true character in the Civil War. He also has a strong belief of doing what is right, even if it risks his own life, “…as I love the name of honor more than I fear death.” (Shakespeare, Act I. Scene II, 94-95). In addition, he values Roman honor and declares that he will never allow himself to be captured, “Think not, thou noble Roman, that ever Brutus will go bound to Rome; he bears too great a mind” (Shakespeare. Act V Scene 1. 121-122). These values portray how his patriotism demands him to do anything necessary for Rome, influencing him to trust other conspirators and leading him mistakenly judging Antony. Brutus’ downfall is also displayed when he foolishly follows Cassius’ plan to murder Caesar. Brutus’ tragic flaw of naivety is especially shown when he says that he believes that no one has ever lied to him. The audience will as well as see Brutus’ naivety when he mistakenly honors Cassius, “My heart doth joy that yet in all my life I found no man but he was true to me” (Shakespeare, Act 5. Scene 5. 37-38). Honoring Cassius depicts how even at the end of his life, Brutus still does not know how he was manipulated by Cassius. Peripeteia, which is when a situation develops in a certain way and immediately turns into an opposite direction, is displayed once Brutus murders Caesar. After Caesar is murdered, Brutus is thrown into negativity such as when Antony convinces the people at Caesar’s eulogy that Brutus is a criminal which leads him to prepare for a battle he is then defeated in. Anagnorisis is another element that is conveyed in instances like when Brutus notices that his friendship with Caesar has fallen after being haunted by Caesar’s ghost and when he discovers that his people have turned against him once Antony had spoken to them. In Act 4, Scene 2, he recognizes that assassinating Caesar was harsh and impulsive, “Hath given me some worthy cause to wish things done, undone” (Shakespeare, Act 4. Scene 2. 8-9). It can be seen here that he regrets being a part of the conspiracy and the entire plan, fully aware that his people have every right to not like him. Moreover, catharsis is another element that is applied in the play when Antony finds Brutus’ dead body and asks for Brutus’ body to be buried like a hero. This releases the audience’s tense feelings of pity and fear because the audience is reminded that Brutus was a noble with good intentions who then endured a tragic fate. Having several of the elements described by Aristotle, Julius Caesar proves to be a successful tragedy that can be analyzed in the Aristotelian lens.

While Medea does not have a tragic hero like Julius Caesar, it is still viewed as Euripides’ greatest work with Aristotelian concepts like peripeteia, pathos, and deus ex machina. This drama is a powerful story of Medea’s love that is turned into dangerous revenge of murdering her own children. This work clearly includes the plot’s three unities and the six elements of tragedy as discussed by Aristotle. On the other hand, both major characters Medea and Jason have most but not all characteristics of a tragic hero. Additionally, peripeteia can be analyzed in both Medea and Jason’s situations. Once as a wife of a hero and caring mother, Medea faces reversal as she becomes an exile with no husband and no shelter for herself or her children. In Jason’s case, his near future of living royally and wealthily was destroyed and changed to having absolutely nothing. As well as peripeteia, the drama has pathos in a variety of scenes. For example, when Creon tells Medea to banish from Corinth, she begs him to let her stay, pleading, “Please, let me stay just one more day…Take pity on them…If we go into exile, I’m not worried about myself-I weep for their disaster” (Svarlien, lines 350-356). She uses an appeal to emotion to convince Creon to ultimately agree to giving her one more day in Corinth, illustrating the pathos. The Chorus is another crucial part of the pathos within this drama. Acting as a group of bystanders commenting and asking of the characters’ motives and actions, the Chorus leads the audience to have more sympathy for Medea and Jason such as in the beginning, “I heard a wail, a clear cry of pain…For the injustice she suffers” (Svarlien, lines 205-210). The pathos mostly developed the audience’s feelings of pity and fear for Medea that were then released in catharsis. Along with these elements, anagnorisis can be found in the situation when Jason discovers Medea’s true intentions of vengeance. Jason and Medea had settled their arguments with Medea apologizing and stating how regretful she was for overreacting to Jason’s decision to divorce. She even sobbed for a dramatic and emotional appeal to him, tricking Jason into believing that Medea accepted what he wanted. Yet, after the murders of his fiance and father in law, Jason quickly becomes aware of Medea’s plan to kill his children. In the last scene, Euripides uses deus ex machina, which is when the author solves an inevitable problem by adding an unexpected character, object, or situation. Medea leaves with her children’s corpses in a chariot given by the God Helios, showing that her survival method was irrational and could not have been accomplished without the God. These aspects of peripeteia, anagnorisis, pathos, and deus ex machina explained by Aristotle clarify that Medea is a true Aristotelian tragedy.

In conclusion, both Julius Caesar and Medea are strong models of Aristotelian tragedies. Even though the two dramas have completely different story lines, they could be easily interpreted through Aristotle’s theories stated in his Poetics. Understanding how the Aristotelian lens analyzes certain dramas portrays how significant small details and plots can be in order for a drama to be considered a tragedy.

Discover more:

About this essay:

If you use part of this page in your own work, you need to provide a citation, as follows:

Essay Sauce, The Aristotelian Lens in Julius Caesar and Medea. Available from:<https://www.essaysauce.com/sample-essays/2016-9-17-1474084534/> [Accessed 19-11-24].

These Sample essays have been submitted to us by students in order to help you with your studies.

* This essay may have been previously published on EssaySauce.com and/or Essay.uk.com at an earlier date than indicated.