Collins Unbound

In honor of William Shakespeare we are celebrating the 400th anniversary of his death on April 23, 2016. What better way to do this, than by highlighting the writing done by first-year students in Associate Professor of English John Wesley’s first-year seminar, A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare? This first-year seminar in scholarly inquiry studies four remarkable plays Shakespeare wrote or saw into production in 1599, the same year he opened the Globe Theatre. In the first half of the course, students were introduced to the myriad ways in which Shakespeare’s 1599 plays are shaped by and give shape to the political and cultural intrigues of that year. In the second half of the course, students turned to a play (and year) of their own choosing, the historicist analysis of which is the basis of an independent research project. As part of this project, students were asked to prepare a blog post that reflected on aspects of Shakespeare’s life, a specific work, or a resource or organization associated with Shakespeare, or to provide a personal interpretation of a play. During the month of April, we’ll feature the posts from students that celebrate all things Shakespeare!

Congratulations to our wonderful first-year writers. For additional online resources about Shakespeare, check out these sites:

• British Library: http://www.bl.uk/
• Folger Shakespeare Library: http://www.folger.edu/
• Globe Theatre: http://www.shakespearesglobe.com
• Internet Shakespeare Editions: http://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca
• Shakespeare 400:  http://www.shakespeare400.org/

The Audience of Shakespeare’s Globe
By Sarah Rau

Interior of the Swan Theatre by Johannes de Witt drawn in 1596

While plays have evolved into a luxurious form of entertainment, they were once a common leisure. The plays of William Shakespeare are a notable example of this evolution. Today, attending a Shakespeare play is considered a significant occasion; however, when his plays were first being produced, playgoing was simple entertainment for all people. Shakespeare’s three-storied Globe, located in London, was an exceptional example of a diverse audience. Holding around three-thousand people at its maximum occupancy, the Globe theatre accommodated a group of people, ranging from criminals to nobility.

The cheapest admission at Shakespeare’s Globe was into the Penny Gallery or yard. The Penny Gallery referred to an extremely-crowded standing area surrounding the stage; entry into this area only cost one cent. Situated in the center of the open-air theatre, this area of the Globe was exposed to the unpredictable London weather. The audience members in the Penny Gallery endured the somewhat lengthy plays without seating, but they did enjoy food and drink. On the downside, the Penny Gallery was thus cursed by a reek of what some described as garlic and beer according to the Shakespeare’s Globe company. One could only imagine what the unwashed playgoers and lack of lavatories added to the already potent smell of food and alcohol. Although uncomfortably cramped and surrounded by unpleasant odors in the Penny Gallery, one had the advantage of intimacy with the players. Being within reach of the stage, the commoners were able to interact with the play and be swept up into its tale. The other audience members did not enjoy this personal experience although they were free of most inconveniences associated with the Penny Gallery.

Above the Penny Gallery stood different tiers of audience members. These tiers mimicked the social hierarchy of the time – the lower galleries held the commoners while the higher galleries were reserved for higher-class citizens. One could scan the audience from the Penny Gallery up to the third-floor, carefully observing the broad scope of the audience. According to Andrew Gurr, a broad variety of people, from prostitutes and pickpockets to army captains, occupied the lower galleries. In the lower galleries, one could afford the luxury of a bench seat for the cost of two pennies.

Above the lower galleries, wealthier people, such as merchants and lawyers who could afford pricier seating, populated the Central Galleries. The highest galleries, containing the most expensive seating, were known as the Lord’s Rooms. In the higher galleries, one could enjoy sheltered seating and the prominence of being among wealthier citizens rather than commoners and their crude stenches. Understandably, the aristocracy used their wealth as an advantage to segregate themselves from the overpopulated, unpleasant Penny Gallery, yet the intimacy became absent from their experience because of their distance from the stage.

Each social class possessed its own comforts at the Globe; the wealthy welcomed the luxury of prestige and covered seating while the lower classes enjoyed their ability to buy food and drink as well as interact with the play. In contrast with today’s world and regardless of the distinct division among social rank at the time, playgoing at Shakespeare’s Globe remained a form of entertainment enjoyed by the majority of Londoners.

Interior of the Swan Theatre by Johannes de Witt drawn in 1596. The Globe closely resembled the Swan Theatre – this drawing is the closest artifact to an original drawing of the Globe.

Bibliography

“Audiences.” Shakespeare’s Globe: Globe Education. The Shakespeare Globe Trust, 2013. Web. 26 Feb. 2016.

De Witt, Johannes. The Swan. 1596. The Shakespearean Stage 1574-1642. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2009. 163. Print.

Gurr, Andrew. The Shakespearean Stage 1574-1642. New York: Cambridge UP, 2009. Print.

Harbage, Alfred. Shakespeare’s Audience. New York: Columbia UP, 1941. Print.

In honor of William Shakespeare we are celebrating the 400th anniversary of his death on April 23, 2016. What better way to do this, than by highlighting the writing done by first-year students in Associate Professor of English John Wesley’s first-year seminar, A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare? This first-year seminar in scholarly inquiry studies four remarkable plays Shakespeare wrote or saw into production in 1599, the same year he opened the Globe Theatre. In the first half of the course, students were introduced to the myriad ways in which Shakespeare’s 1599 plays are shaped by and give shape to the political and cultural intrigues of that year. In the second half of the course, students turned to a play (and year) of their own choosing, the historicist analysis of which is the basis of an independent research project. As part of this project, students were asked to prepare a blog post that reflected on aspects of Shakespeare’s life, a specific work, or a resource or organization associated with Shakespeare, or to provide a personal interpretation of a play. During the month of April, we’ll feature the posts from students that celebrate all things Shakespeare!

Congratulations to our wonderful first-year writers. For additional online resources about Shakespeare, check out these sites:

• British Library: http://www.bl.uk/
• Folger Shakespeare Library: http://www.folger.edu/
• Globe Theatre: http://www.shakespearesglobe.com
• Internet Shakespeare Editions: http://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca
• Shakespeare 400:  http://www.shakespeare400.org/

The Spark of Creativity
By Megan Biglow

It’s often thought that no idea is entirely original. Whether you are creating a derivative of another person’s ideas or basing your work off of an admirable example, we are all influenced and inspired to some degree by the work that others do. William Shakespeare was no exception to this phenomenon. Although there is not an overwhelming amount of proof of this, it seems as though Shakespeare was heavily influenced and inspired by Roman and Greek literature and history. This is shown subtly in a vast majority of his work and more transparently in his re-writing of history in plays like Julius Caesar. I assumed that this inspiration was shown in plays involving fantastical and dramatic tales that are set in otherworldly places like The Tempest and A Midsummer Night’s Dream. And how could you not be inspired? From epic tales of heroes fighting off monstrous, deadly creatures, to all-powerful gods, it is nearly impossible to not be struck by the intense imagery and grandiose nature of the tales and epics that originated in Greece. So I was particularly surprised to find that Plutarch’s writings regarding romance and politics inspired Shakespeare heavily. As Plutarch was a Greek man who later became a citizen of Rome, it only makes sense that the political and social savagery that occurred on a regular basis within Rome would have influenced Plutarch’s, and indirectly Shakespeare’s, writings heavily.

It only makes sense that William Shakespeare would have been so heavily affected by Plutarch’s essays, as they were extremely popular during his time. One author states, “The sixteenth century was indeed steeped in Plutarch. His writings formed an almost inexhaustible storehouse for historian and philosopher alike, and the age was characterized by no diffidence or moderation in borrowing. Plutarch’s aphorisms and his anecdotes meet us at every turn, openly or in disguise” (Brooke “Plutarch’s Influence”) the same of which could be said of Shakespeare in this day and age. As a vast majority of people, including myself, can attest, Shakespeare’s work is studied extensively and is immersed in our culture through language, movies and art of all kinds. The very words he wrote permeate our speech and writing today, just as Plutarch would have for the people of the 16^th century. That being said, it would only make sense that Shakespeare would be heavily affected, or at the very least, interested in the work of a man that was so prevalent and influential in his time.

The fact that an excellent author was inspired by a brilliant mind, aside from his own, is a prime example of the necessity for education and appreciation of exceptional literature. Had William Shakespeare not become so well versed in Plutarch’s essays, it is entirely possible that he would not have been as prestigious and exemplary as he was in his time and in present day. And personally, I would think that life would be boring without writers that can give us an entertaining and fascinating escape from our daily lives from time to time. It is deeply important to understand the plays, essays and writers from the past so that we too can be inspired to create excellent, immersive and cerebral.

Bibliography

Walbank, Frank W. X66541-004-582E8B66.jpg.pagespeed.ic.zSskYXxY3u. Digital image. Encyclopedia Britannica. The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, n.d. Web. 11 Nov. 2015.

Plutarch. Plutarch’s Shakespeare. Ed. C.F. Tucker Brooke. London: Chatto and Windus, 1909. Shakespeare Online. 20 Feb. 2010. (2/27/16) <http://www.shakespeare-online.com/essays/plutarchshakespeare.html >.

Wyndham, George. North’s Plutarch. From Essays in romantic literature. London: Macmillan and Company, 1919. Shakespeare Online. 20 Feb. 2010. (2/25/16) <http://www.shakespeare-online.com/essays/northshakespeare.html >.

In honor of William Shakespeare we are celebrating the 400th anniversary of his death on April 23, 2016. What better way to do this, than by highlighting the writing done by first-year students in Associate Professor of English John Wesley’s first-year seminar, A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare? This first-year seminar in scholarly inquiry studies four remarkable plays Shakespeare wrote or saw into production in 1599, the same year he opened the Globe Theatre. In the first half of the course, students were introduced to the myriad ways in which Shakespeare’s 1599 plays are shaped by and give shape to the political and cultural intrigues of that year. In the second half of the course, students turned to a play (and year) of their own choosing, the historicist analysis of which is the basis of an independent research project. As part of this project, students were asked to prepare a blog post that reflected on aspects of Shakespeare’s life, a specific work, or a resource or organization associated with Shakespeare, or to provide a personal interpretation of a play. During the month of April, we’ll feature the posts from students that celebrate all things Shakespeare!

Congratulations to our wonderful first-year writers. For additional online resources about Shakespeare, check out these sites:

• British Library: http://www.bl.uk/
• Folger Shakespeare Library: http://www.folger.edu/
• Globe Theatre: http://www.shakespearesglobe.com
• Internet Shakespeare Editions: http://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca
• Shakespeare 400:  http://www.shakespeare400.org/

Shakespeare’s Influences and Influencers
By Keely Coxwell

On the four hundredth anniversary of William Shakespeare’s death we celebrate not only his life but what he created as well. In fifty-eight years William Shakespeare wrote thirty seven plays and one hundred and fifty four sonnets. According to Marvin Spevack’s concordances, that is 884,647 words and 118,406 lines and 1,224 characters (“Shakespeare FAQ.”). Not only are these numbers mind boggling but they attest to Shakespeare’s ability and creativity. That is 1,224 characters with different personalities and thirty seven unique stories. When I saw those numbers I questioned how one man could possibly come up with all of those stories but, of course, Shakespeare didn’t just pull some of these ideas out of thin air. Thorough out his plays, scenarios and characters were influenced by things such as the political climate, events, and other people.

Elizabeth I, the Plimpton Sieve Portrait. ca. 1540–1596. Folger. Folger Shakespeare Library

The connection to Queen Elizabeth and Julius Caesar would have been fairly obvious to contemporary Elizabethans at the time. During the time Julius Caesar was written Elizabeth was criticized as being weak and feeble Shakespeare then made his Julius Caesar to be as week and feeble, like Elizabeth (Shapiro, 151-152). If this didn’t aspect of Julius Caesar didn’t bring Elizabeth to mind the fact that she often compared her self to Julius Caesar would. Also, Julius Caesar was very much a warning tale. There had been multiple attempts on Elizabeth’s life and Julius Caesar depicted the chaos that follows an assassination.(Shapiro, 144-145). Not only did Elizabeth influence characters but she might have been the reason why Merry Wives of Windsor was written. It’s rumored that Shakespeare wrote Merry Wives of Windsor because after seeing Henry IV, Part Two Queen Elizabeth wanted to see more of Falstaff; specifically, Falstaff in love (Herman).        

It wasn’t just political figures who influenced Shakespeare’s writing, one of the main reasons Shakespeare wrote such strong female characters in As You Like It was because two good boy actors had recently joined his company (Shapiro, 114). Elizabeth wasn’t the only person who shaped a character in one of Shakespeare’s plays. The Earl of Essex greatly influenced the character Henry V in the play of the same name. The Earl of Essex was for the war with Ireland, he even used what Henry V did (in real life and in the play) to justify his reasonings. Similarly to Julius Caesar the people watching the play would have recognized this connection.

Shakespeare started Hamlet with jittery soldiers guarding Denmark which referenced the soldiers that were in London in response of the threat of the Spanish Armada invading in 1599 (Shapiro, 187). Similarly Henry V, was heavily influenced by England’s war with Ireland. The debate over the merits of and simply whether or not to go to war in Henry V would have felt almost too real for the contemporary Elizabethans watching the play (Shapiro, 79-82).

We might not have a story about Julius Caesar if Elizabeth I wasn’t the queen she was and the debate in Henry V might have felt every different if it were not for the war with Ireland.

Bibliography

Elizabeth I, the Plimpton Sieve Portrait. ca. 1540–1596. Folger. Folger Shakespeare Library. Web. 1 Mar. 2016. <http://www.folger.edu/works-of-art>.

Herman, Jan. “A Not-So-Merry ‘Wives of Windsor’.” Los Angeles Times 22 June . Web. 1 Mar. 2016.

“Shakespeare FAQ.” Folger Shakespeare Library . N.p., n.d. Web. 1 Mar. 2016. <http://www.folger.edu/shakespeare-faq>.

Shapiro, James. A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare 1599. New York: Harper Perennial, 2005. 79-187. Print.

Ziegler, Georgianna. Elizabeth I: Then and Now. N.p.: Folger Shakespeare Library, 2003. N. pag. Web. 1 Mar. 2016.

In honor of William Shakespeare we are celebrating the 400th anniversary of his death on April 23, 2016. What better way to do this, than by highlighting the writing done by first-year students in Associate Professor of English John Wesley’s first-year seminar, A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare? This first-year seminar in scholarly inquiry studies four remarkable plays Shakespeare wrote or saw into production in 1599, the same year he opened the Globe Theatre. In the first half of the course, students were introduced to the myriad ways in which Shakespeare’s 1599 plays are shaped by and give shape to the political and cultural intrigues of that year. In the second half of the course, students turned to a play (and year) of their own choosing, the historicist analysis of which is the basis of an independent research project. As part of this project, students were asked to prepare a blog post that reflected on aspects of Shakespeare’s life, a specific work, or a resource or organization associated with Shakespeare, or to provide a personal interpretation of a play. During the month of April, we’ll feature the posts from students that celebrate all things Shakespeare!

Congratulations to our wonderful first-year writers. For additional online resources about Shakespeare, check out these sites:

• British Library: http://www.bl.uk/
• Folger Shakespeare Library: http://www.folger.edu/
• Globe Theatre: http://www.shakespearesglobe.com
• Internet Shakespeare Editions: http://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca
• Shakespeare 400:  http://www.shakespeare400.org/

Shakespeare and the Supernatural
By Jake Gritzmacher

“He could write realistically in the style of a dispassionate and often amused observer of contemporary life: he could dramatize biographies and historical chronicles; he could invent fairy stories and visionary fantasies; he could create (often out of the most unpromising raw material) huge tragic allegories of good and evil, in which almost superhuman figures live their lives and die their often sickening deaths. He could mingle sublimity with pathos, bitterness with joy and peace and love, intellectual subtlety with delirium and the cryptic utterances of inspired wisdom.” (Aldous Huxley, Shakespeare and Religion)

Present in one form or another in literally every one of Shakespeare’s literary masterpieces is a sense of the supernatural; that is, the consciousness that there is more to life which lies beyond the known world and scientifically-proven aspects of the universe. I, personally, am enthralled with the concept of the mystic, and how in today’s rationalized world of science and technology, humans can still never be sure of how existence began, how or when it will end, and even what on Earth mankind is doing here. I resonate with the manor in which Shakespeare presents supernatural elements in his works, and especially how the way with which he implements them affects his audience’s perception, as well as the overall meaning they derive from the play. This feature of Shakespeare’s work is part of what enticed me into reading and studying his plays in the first place, and is also the facet that incessantly leads me back. Though a majority of the imagery which I am highlighting in this post hails from the Christian faith, it is very important to grasp that the superhuman aspects of Shakespeare’s work are not limited to what is written in the the Judah-Christian bible. There is a broad spectrum of divine power emanating from various dwellings in Shakespeare’s plays. Be it religion, dark magic, or fantasy, Shakespeare covered a great deal of ground with relation to depicting and describing otherworldly phenomenon; this is what I wish to convey when I say, “supernatural”.

Hamlet and His Father’s Ghost
William Blake, 1806

The most interesting and enlightening source I came across in my research on the subject happens to be the last essay written by the great Aldous Huxley, on his deathbed in November of 1963. Simply entitled “Shakespeare and Religion,” the brief but through essay analyzes varying examples of supernatural and religious experiences in various plays in different lights, then comments on the effect that the experiences had on the meaning of the work, as well as on Shakespeare’s overall views regarding the metaphysical.

In his essay, Huxley articulates that, “Unlike Milton or Dante, Shakespeare had no ambition to be a systematic theologian or philosopher. He was not concerned to “justify the ways of God to Man” in terms of a set of metaphysical postulates and a network of logical ideas.” Huxley goes on to describe how Shakespeare instead preferred to “hold the mirror up to nature … What he gives us is not a religious system; it is more like an anthology, a collection of different points of view, an assortment of commentaries on the human predicament offered by persons of dissimilar temperament and upbringing.” (Huxley, Shakespeare and Religion)

I believe that Shakespeare offers a plethora of religious, existential insight within his plays, especially his later works, and does so mostly by simply comparing and contrasting dissimilar views. I find it intriguing to note that though many aspects of his personal life remain obscured due to his lack of memoirs, the overall scholarly consensus articulates that Shakespeare’s faith had a basis in Christianity, and some even speculate that he was a papist. What I really find interesting about this consensus, if it is true, is how Shakespeare was able to write from so many religious and superstitious points of view; he even often wrote plays which contained doubt and expressed beliefs competing with Christianity in a time in which that was a very risky act to partake in. Shakespeare explored the deep, ubiquitous, universal questions of existence in an age where the religious institutions reigned sovereign and life’s enduring questions were to be answered for the populous by a holy man clad in robes.

Shakespeare, being the gifted playwright he was, had the ability in his works to comment on nearly all aspects of religion and the mystical and convey to his audience powerful notions regarding the unknown in such a manner that he himself remained, in a way, aloof and detached from the subject-object dualism of the matter. “Shakespeare is always able, as a playwright, to balance and challenge many differing perspectives, one against another. But I think, in the end, he is able to express an openness to the mystery of our existence, an openness to what ‘God’ might mean, and an openness especially to the natural world and how that might relate spiritually to the doctrine of the divine-incarnate.” (Dr. Paul Edmondson, Shakespeare and Religion video)

A lot has transpired in the four centuries since Shakespeare’s brilliance graced the Earth; humanity has changed, so has the world, and many of its ways. In Shakespeare’s day, religion was forced upon citizens regardless of whether the people wanted to have faith in it or not. Today, most parts of the world indulge in religious freedom and can hold whatever views desired. Because religion was more engrained in Shakespeare’s society, there was more common belief in the supernatural. As Huxley would agree, “Honest faith in God, angels and saints implied a corresponding faith in the Devil, evil spirits and the witches, sorcerers and magicians who collaborated with them.” Magic seemed to flow freely in the world in the 14^th and 15^th centuries, simply by mankind’s belief in it. It is not even a generalization when I say that everyone was superstitious to some degree in Shakespeare’s day, and Shakespeare played on these superstitions many times in order to raise universal questions of the human condition that today are still as applicable as ever. The profound, unrequited questions that remain, and the sense of mystery which accompanies them, in a way, represent the supernatural aspects of the universe that are still intact four hundred years after Shakespeare faced them, and will likely endure until the end of time. As a closing statement, I would like to evoke the last written words of the great Aldous Huxley, “We are all well on the way to an existential religion of mysticism. How many kinds of religion! How many kinds of Shakespeare!”

Bibliography:

Huxley, Aldous. “Shakespeare and Religion by Aldous Huxley.” Shakespeare and Religion by Aldous Huxley. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Mar. 2016.

Edmondson, Paul, Dr. “Shakespeare and Religion.” YouTube. Shakespeare Birthplace Trust, n.d. Web. 02 Mar. 2016.

In honor of William Shakespeare we are celebrating the 400th anniversary of his death on April 23, 2016. What better way to do this, than by highlighting the writing done by first-year students in Associate Professor of English John Wesley’s first-year seminar, A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare? This first-year seminar in scholarly inquiry studies four remarkable plays Shakespeare wrote or saw into production in 1599, the same year he opened the Globe Theatre. In the first half of the course, students were introduced to the myriad ways in which Shakespeare’s 1599 plays are shaped by and give shape to the political and cultural intrigues of that year. In the second half of the course, students turned to a play (and year) of their own choosing, the historicist analysis of which is the basis of an independent research project. As part of this project, students were asked to prepare a blog post that reflected on aspects of Shakespeare’s life, a specific work, or a resource or organization associated with Shakespeare, or to provide a personal interpretation of a play. During the month of April, we’ll feature the posts from students that celebrate all things Shakespeare!

Congratulations to our wonderful first-year writers. For additional online resources about Shakespeare, check out these sites:

• British Library: http://www.bl.uk/
• Folger Shakespeare Library: http://www.folger.edu/
• Globe Theatre: http://www.shakespearesglobe.com
• Internet Shakespeare Editions: http://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca
• Shakespeare 400:  http://www.shakespeare400.org/

Fact vs. Fiction in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar
By Nate Jacobi

While reading Julius Caesar I found myself thoroughly frustrated by author William Shakespeare’s political neutrality. Considering the play revolves around a philosophical debate about whether an assassination is justified, little, if anything is philosophically determined by the play’s end. Were the conspirators justified in killing of Julius Caesar? Were they wrong to cut short the life of one of Rome’s greatest men? Shakespeare certainly provides no overwhelming evidence to tip the scales in any favor. In order to gain a better understanding of what motivated Shakespeare’s political ambiguity in Julius Caesar I want to compare the historical perception of Caesar with Shakespeare’s portrayal of Roman perspectives. This will reveal whether Caesar was truly such a divisive figure or whether Shakespeare turned him into one for alternate reasons.

According to Shakespeare the primary reason why many Romans were fearful of Caesar is summed up in two lines spoken by Brutus during the first act of Julius Caesar: “I do fear the people / Choose Caesar for their king” (1.2.78-79). Rome at the time was a republic and feared that Caesar was becoming so popular and powerful that he would seize ultimate power over the state. In reality, these fears were justified as Caesar incurred enormous amounts of popularity among the Roman people and also his soldiers due in part to his military successes in Gaul. However, there is evidence to suggest that Shakespeare downplayed the sheer amount of power and popularity that Caesar enjoyed. According to Plutarch, one of Rome’s most prominent Roman historians, Caesar had a personal army that was extremely loyal to him. Plutarch says: “He was so much master of the good-will and hearty service of his soldiers that those who in other expeditions were but ordinary men displayed a courage past defeating or withstanding when they went upon any danger where Caesar’s glory was concerned” (Plutarch). In fact just years earlier Caesar had led his forces across the Rubicon river into Rome which had never before been done by any Roman military leader in history. While Shakespeare mentions Caesar’s military successes in the first act of the play, his decision to leave out Caesar’s military power heavily downplays Caesar’s threat to the republic.

Why then might Shakespeare have chosen a more neutral portrayal of Caesar in his play? Some critics note that Shakespeare’s neutrality may have been the result of simple logistics, as any outright negative portrayal of Caesar could be viewed as an attack on Queen Elizabeth’s right to rule and therefore would have attracted the eye of censors (Shapiro 129). While practicality is a plausible explanation, it would be disingenuous and unfair to Shakespeare’s skill as a playwright to say that the spectre of censorship was the only reason he remained ambiguous on Caesar. As James Shapiro notes in his book A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare: “One of the lessons Shakespeare had confirmed by reading Hayward was the dramatic advantage of juxtaposing competing political arguments, balancing them so neatly that it was impossible to tell in favor of which the scales tipped” (Shapiro 129). Shakespeare wanted his audience to feel conflicted just like Brutus who had to decide whether to betray his friend or not. If Shakespeare had boldly portrayed Caesar as either a hero or a villain, the audience would not have identified with Brutus’ struggle. By staying politically ambiguous Shakespeare is able to build tension and deliver a more thought provoking piece.