"What he cannot help in his nature, you count in him a vice." 1. This is why it is so difficult and yet so necessary to sympathize with Coriolanus. His virtues work in conjunction with his vices and to a modern reader, with little empathy for the autocratic and warlike states of the Romans or Jacobeans, Coriolanus appears little more than a bloodthirsty tyrant, without the poetic and emotional depth offered to the more canonical texts of Shakespeare. tragic heroes. However, a consideration of the values ​​conveyed in the text - those of the nobility of war, the dangers of democracy and the deceptive power of words - and the way in which the character of Coriolanus embodies these values, allows us to recognize his emotional development and its value. to the State and thus truly sympathize with it. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on 'Why violent video games should not be banned'?Get the original essayCoriolanus is perhaps one of Shakespeare's most misunderstood characters, the main reason being that he is also the one of Shakespeare's least poetic characters. Unlike Hamlet or Lear, Coriolanus has few opportunities to express himself in philosophy and therefore has none of the deep, emotional eloquence of his tragic predecessors to captivate the reader. 2. Furthermore, in Coriolanus's few long speeches, the images on which he relies are violent and unsightly. Consider the metaphors he uses when addressing the soldiers at the gates of Corioles, in a speech that is a far cry from the call to arms of Henry V, 3. “All the contagion of the South, light on you ,/You shame of Rome; you have heard of Byles and plagues,/you have plaster, that you may be abhorred/further than seen, and one may infect the other/against the wind for a mile. (I, v, 1-5) The contemptuous nature and lack of pleasing aesthetics in such language may be seen as alienating the reader from Coriolanus, and as he cannot win us over with his eloquence like even a Shakespearean villain like Richard III or Iago can do it. , it is difficult to understand. However, if we consider one of the most important messages of the play - that mere words can be deceptive - we see that what Coriolanus cannot express, he proves in the nobility of his actions, "His Nature is too noble for the world;/He would not flatter Neptune for his Trident,/Nor Jupiter for the Thunder power of his Heart/Mouth; (III, i, 249-252) It is a virtue which distinguishes him from the chattering tribunes and is why our sympathy is evoked when he is defeated by their use of deceptive words to undermine his exploits in battle This is acknowledged by Harley Granville-Barker who states: Throughout the. play, the action and the words are closely linked... The actual spectacle of Marcius fighting alone "within the gates of Corioles" is a better witness to this feat than any of the "hyperbolic cheers". which he somewhat consciously denounces. 4. Whether it is the gentle manipulation of Menienius's "body" metaphor or the overt subversion of the tribunes Brutus and Sicinius, Shakespeare clearly shows that clever language has undone. the Roman State and constitutes an inconstant basis of judgment. It is therefore because Coriolanus cannot speak falsely that he must be considered exemplary and it is this integrity which wins our compassion. It is therefore imperative to judge Coriolanus by his actions and decide whether, as a soldier, he can be sympathetic. This is where problems of context arise, such as in modern times where war is neither romantic nor ennobling. The dismissal of Corioles by Coriolanus and hisdesire to sack Rome make him appear excessively violent, reckless and determined. Indeed, Coriolanus has little reach beyond the battlefield - he is a soldier in every facet of his life because "he was brought up in wars since he could draw/a sword." » (III, i, 313-314) Despite this assertion, there is ample evidence to suggest that Coriolanus has the potential to go beyond his warrior nature. War may not be fictionalized in Coriolanus, but it is seen as necessary to the Roman state, and Coriolanus, as an arm of the state, is equally indispensable. The fact that he is such a brave, albeit bloodthirsty, warrior protecting Rome from the Volsci in Act 1 is where the tragedy lies - the Roman citizens ungratefully reject his courage because he is impolitic. It is clear, then, that one of Shakespeare's messages in the play is that military heroism is a virtue, and therefore "if the Roman conception of virtue is correct, then Coriolanus is the perfect man." 5. Despite the many divergent opinions about Coriolanus' character offered to us throughout the play, what is admitted by his friends and enemies is that in battle he is courageous, almost transcendent, " a soldier/even according to Vêler's wish, not fierce and terrible/Only in the blows, but with your grim looks, and/the thunder-like percussion of your sounds. (I, v, 26-30) Considering the esteem placed on war and warriors in the time of Coriolanus and Shakespeare, it becomes evident that Coriolanus's role in the play is that of a hero military, and his decision to abandon this status in exchange for the security of Rome makes his fall truly pitiful. The fact that Coriolanus is primarily a soldier has led to suggestions that he is emotionally underdeveloped and that it is therefore difficult to feel much empathy with someone whose personality beyond the battlefield is thus given . little insight. Coriolanus is “Not to be anything but one thing, not moving/From the barrel to the cushion, but commanding peace/Even with the same austerity and the same costume/As he controlled the war” (IV, viii, 42 -45) and it is therefore doubtful whether he matures throughout the play. At each crucial stage of the play - when he enters "What is the matter with you, you dissident thieves" (I, i, 169-170), when he is banished "I banish you" (III, iii, 120) and when he dies "It's like an eagle in a dovecote, I/flattered your Volcians at Corioles./I did it alone, my boy" (V, vi, 113-115) - he displays the same incessant volatility and pride, suggesting Coriolanus makes no attempt to correct his character flaws, and we may therefore think that his death is rightly deserved. However, in the context of the world Shakespeare creates for Coriolanus, where opinions and loyalties are easily swayed (embodied by the fickle crowd), Coriolanus's refusal to change character and beliefs should be seen as a virtue of constancy rather than as a sign of emotional immaturity. This is recognized by Geoffrey Miles who writes that "in a characteristic paradox of this intensely paradoxical play, the passionate traitor Coriolanus is Shakespeare's most self-consciously 'constant' character". 6. Coriolanus' refusal to betray his ideals in order to gain fame and popularity with the Roman crowd is not a refusal of personal development, but a simple act of honesty in a world dominated by politics. Coriolanus therefore sacrifices not only the consulate but also his life in his desperation to "play/The Man that I am" (III, ii, 15-16) and thus becomes a martyr for his simple cause - to be recognized for all that He is a brave and noble soldier. In one of his most passionate speeches, Coriolanuscries: “Let them/Pull all around my ears, let them present to me Death/On the wheel, or on the heels of wild horses, or let them pile up/Ten hills on the Tarpeian Rock, so that that/The Precipitation may below/The beam of sight; but I will always be like this/For them. » (III, ii, 1-7) May he indeed be capable of undergoing so many trials while keeping his pride, his courage and his honesty intact. a strength of character far greater than that of many of Shakespeare's other tragic heroes. The argument that Coriolanus is unsympathetic because he is emotionally retarded can be extended to incorporate the criticism that Coriolanus does not recognize his humanity and therefore we as an audience cannot identify as human beings with him . What has been described as constancy of character could alternatively be seen as a blatant lack of respect for anyone outside of one's own interests. Coriolanus himself declares: "I will never/I will never be a gosling to obey instinct: but I stand/As if a man were the author of himself,/And knew no other kin . » (V, III, 34-37). He thus proves this by his contempt for the appeals of Menenius and Cominius to their long-standing friendship. It can be said that Coriolanus is ready to destroy his former compatriots and friends to satisfy his revenge, but thanks to the convictions of his mother. His submission to his mother's pleas, however, is proof enough that Coriolanus's compassion and mercy have greater depth than this limited argument. will allow.G. Wilson Knight finds the end of the play triumphant, because by allowing himself to be conquered by love, Coriolanus has purified himself. 7. Indeed, Coriolanus demonstrates greater humanity than anyone else in the play since his desire for revenge is dashed by his respect for those close to him, as he commits the ultimate act of sacrifice: he dies so that his city ​​and his family can live: "Oh my Mother, Mother: oh!/You have won a happy victory against Rome./But for your Son, believe him: oh, believe him,/The most dangerous thing with him is you took away,/If not the most mortal for him". (V, iii, 185-189) Perhaps the most common accusation against Coriolanus in modern times is his contempt for democracy and the people; “Where is this Viper,/Who would depopulate the City, and/Would each Man be himself?” (III, I, 257-259) Coriolanus is shamelessly “a very dog ​​for the common people” (I, i, 29-30) and his contemptuous words and actions of refusing corn to the people alienate a public imbued with the values of democracy and egalitarianism. Yet Coriolanus and his ideas of absolutism should not be judged by these modern political ideals, but by the type of democracy that Coriolanus himself faced – that of the demagogues Sicinius and Brutus. The perception of democracy in the Roman state is that it is erratic, ignorant and dangerous, as it would have been by Shakespeare's own audience. We must therefore recognize that “the representation of the people is part of a “dramatic design” 8. in the sense that Coriolanus can be considered as a necessary tyrant when the alternative is “the mutable Meiny/perfumed by rank” (III , i). , 63-64). In this way, Coriolanus' contempt for the crowd and his desire to take revenge on them is justified because "by attacking them as the embodiment of a fickle opinion, he defines himself as consistent by remaining faithful to his fixed beliefs" . 9. By using satire to undermine Coriolanus' enemies, Shakespeare ensures that although he may be difficult to like, he is superior to the other characters in the play. As Menenius points out to the tribunes “in what enormity is Martius poor,/that you have not in abundance?” » (II, i, 17-18),.333