Julius Caesar • 2013 - Chicago Shakespeare Theater

28
WHAT THE CRITICS SAY
1500s
1600s
1700s
1800s
1900s
Julius Caesar • 2013
Questionless, the Romans should not have nourished this lion [Caesar] in their city, or being nourished,
they should not have disgraced him.
—William FulBeCke, playWriGhT, 1586
So have I seene, when Caesar would appeare,
And on the Stage at halfe-sword parley were,
Brutus and Cassius: oh, how the Audience
Were ravish’d, with what wonder they went thence.
—leonarD DiGGes, poeT, 1640
Surely I may be permitted to inquire, in what consisted the divine virtue of Brutus?... Neither as a
statesman nor as a general did Brutus ever approve himself equal to the arduous task he had so
rashly undertaken, of restoring the commonwealth; instead of restoring it, the death of a mild and
generous usurper produced only a series of civil wars, and the reign of three tyrants whose union and
whose discord were alike fatal to the Roman people...The monarch and the patriot are alike amenable
to the severe but candid inquisition of truth.
—eDWarD GiBBon, hisTorian, 1765-66
Our, author... shows great judgement in taking various opportunities to display the softness and
gentleness in Brutus...for one cannot conceive, that he...would from malice or cruelty, have cut short
the important and illustrious course of Caesar’s life.
—elizaBeTh monTaGu, CriTiC, 1769
The art of Marc Antony is skillfully unfolded; his oration over the dead body of Caesar is such a masterpiece
of eloquence as is not to be matched in any play, ancient or modern.
—Thomas Davies, auThor, 1784
The amiable beauty of [Brutus], his feeling, and patriotic heroism, are portrayed with peculiar care.
Yet the poet has pointed out with great nicety the superiority of Cassius over Brutus in independent
volition and discernment in judging of human affairs; that the latter...is unfit to be the head of a party
in a state entirely corrupted; and that these very faults give an unfortunate turn to the cause of the
conspirators.
—auGusT Wilhelm sChleGel, sCholar, 1811
Caesar’s shade is more powerful to avenge his fall than he himself was to guard against it.
—auGusT Wilhelm sChleGel, sCholar, 1811
We do not much admire the representation here given of Julius Caesar, nor do we think it answers
to the portrait given of him in his Commentaries. He makes several vapouring and rather pedantic
speeches, and does nothing. Indeed, he has nothing to do. So far, the fault of the character is the
fault of the plot.
—William hazliTT, sCholar, 1817
Shakespear (sic), who knew human weakness so well, never knew human strength of the Caesarian
type. His Caesar is an admitted failure...Caesar was not in Shakespear, nor in the epoch, now
fast waning, which he inaugurated. It cost Shakespear nothing to write Caesar down for the merely
technical purpose of writing Brutus up.
—GeorGe BernarD shaW, playWriGhT, 1900
Brutus, murdering from philosophy, stands for the revulsion of humanity against the superman, who,
when you get him out of the circumstance of war into that of peace, and out of the medieval atmosphere
into that of a free community, becomes revealed for nothing else than what he is—plain tyrant.
—e.k. ChamBers, sCholar, 1906
And here comes the irony of the play, that after all, it is Cassius, and not the idealist Brutus, who
might, if the opportunity had been his, have brought to the conspiracy just that element of efficiency
which was needed to turn it into a triumphant revolution.
—e.k. ChamBers, sCholar, 1906