Heroes can often have tragic flaws that lead to their downfall. This is the case throughout life. The debate whether someone is good or evil has been a topic humanity has wrestled with since the beginning. Should we make bad decisions for the greater good? Does doing an evil deed for a good cause make us bad? Should we do the right thing even if it brings about our own demise? These are some captivating questions that the Tragedy of Julius Caesar addresses. Brutus was the protagonist and the tragic hero in the play; a noble man that wanted to do the right thing for the greater good of Rome. However he believed everyone was as good-hearted as him and was too trusting of his fellow conspirators who were only acting out of envy and spite. Shakespeare's intentions were to portray Brutus as the hero of the play. What makes this so captivating and emotional is the tragedy of the fact that …show more content…
These qualities are similar to those we find with heroes not villains. If a villain believes he is doing the right thing does that make him evil? What exactly are the lines of good and evil? Are there any lines at all? If a good person does something bad are they automatically a bad person? What exactly makes a person good or a person evil? Shakespeare does a beautiful portrayal of these blurred lines with his play. In the text Antony expresses a compliment, ¨The noblest Roman of them all¨. Antony pays Brutus a high compliment by saying of all the people in Rome he is the one with the highest virtue. The words ¨noblest and ¨roman¨ directly shows that Brutus is a man with high morals principles and strong ideals. This is so prominent that Mark Atony who is a very loyal and highly respected roman tells Brutus such. Shakespeare tries to convey the idea of how respected and good-hearted Brutus is. These are ideals that are carried by Heroes not villains, therefore Shakespeare was trying to show that Mark Antony was a