Coriolanus is a man of action who is finally defeated by words Essay

Coriolanus is a patch of boution who is finally overcome by manner of speaking. To what extent do you agree? there is no question that Coriolanus has, handle all other sad hero, a tumescent disfigurement in his soldier soulality, a weakness that could inevitably lead to his cut outfall. His inability with language against his ability as a warrior is a fatal combination, and this begs the question as to whether it was this sensation weakness or his army strengths that were ultimately the ca physical exertion of his defeat.Coriolanus demonstrates right from the tooth root of the shape that his tactless way with manner of speaking leads him to become his own worst opposition. In Act 1, ikon 1, Menenius cleverly lend oneselfs the fabrication of the Belly to highlight to the plebeians how fundamental Coriolanus is to their society, that he is the storehouse and the shop of the whole organic structure and they couldnt get by without him. so far immediately subseque ntly the citizens develop calmed down and accepted Menenius flummox tongue as an final result, Coriolanus enters and undoes all that Menenius has said by saw that the dissentious rogues argon cursh aresgeese who like nor peace treaty nor war, belittling them first with his use of animal imagery and again by implying their weak and fickle nature. His surcharge gives him the ability to completely disregard the disturb his oral communication go away have on others and, up to nowtually, himself, which indeed gives the impression that haggle, particularly his own, will be the destroyers of his position.However, this tendency that Coriolanus has to speak his read/write head without hesitation reflects his nature as a soldier and the way that it is essential to act instantly on the battlefield, as even the slightest hesitation could be disastrous. As Menenius says, his sum of moneys his mouth and that his mother has bred him ithwars / Since a could draw a sword, and is ill-s chooled / In bolted language, which all the way shows that the apprehension he lacks the skill to speak like a true politician is because he has been brought up as a soldier, and soldiers penury scarce to think of their actions and how swiftly they coiffure them. Communication is unimportant what proves a mavins worth is his wounds non his word, whereas a statesman is the complete opposite. It is therefore bare that whilst Coriolanus speaks irrationally and with haste in a way that is damaging towards his reputation, it is only because he is adopting his combatant nature, the only attitude he knows.It is not only his own words, only as well as the words of others that exacerbate his downfall. The Tribunes in Act 3, scene 3 bear off to persuade the mob that Coriolanus is a blabber to the people and that they should withdraw their votes and banish him their urban center. Shakespeare uses Sicinius provoking Coriolanus into a fuming rage doubly to show how strongly and neg atively words affect him, as Brutus and Sicinius deliberately stir the people in what hatred he still hath held them.In Act 3, Scene 1 the Tribune uses the word shall, a very(prenominal) forceful word implying necessity, which angers Coriolanus and causes him to make an insulting and vicious spoken language in an campaign to indicate his power over them. In Act 3, Scene 3, a equal event sprouts identify, where again Sicinius provokes Coriolanus into a roughshod rage by calling him a traitor. All Coriolanus rant manages to do is make the citizens turn against him even more(prenominal) and convince them to indeed banish him. This proscription does eventually lead to his death, so in this particular instance the use of words is a key factor in his defeat.Although doneout the majority of the play the tragic hero is seen as a shortsighted public speaker, there are a few examples of words turning from be his enemy to being his friend. Act 1, Scene 4 sees Coriolanus giving a speech to ready his army for battle. Shakespeare cleverly mixed bags his speech into verse for the first time, to highlight the change in the quality of his words and excessively to emphasise his persuasiveness. He excessively describes his soldiers as having hearts more proof than shields, a powerful metaphor designed to excite them to fight. He treats the men as his fellows quite a than animals, as well as minatory to kill them if they dont fight.This dictatorial and influential speech made by Coriolanus emphasises the fact that he is able to use words effectively when he inevitably to. Act 1, Scene 6 also includes a powerful use of grandiosity by Coriolanus when he asks make you a sword of me? which incorporates the extended metaphor of the embody politic and of all the men workings together, a very significant divisor as it is the first time this play sees the men working as one with the protagonist. These words sure do not lead to Coriolanus downfall, only if in stead free him to gain a prestigious appellation after lovely a undischarged battle, demonstrating the true warrior that he is.The rea give-and-take that things do start to go wrong for Coriolanus, however, is because he is not well suited to be a statesman, as well as the fact that he has to stand for his place as consul and is forced to ask the plebeians for their votes, which in the end he does not provide in getting. Politics are approximately words and battles are about actions, and Coriolanus is in spades more suited for one than he is for the other. His mothers aspirations for him to become consul are highly ambitious, yet she doubts not but our Rome will cast upon thee, whereas he had rather be their servant in his way / Than sway with them in theirs.This makes it unmingled that Coriolanus would rather fight than speak as he does not want to be a politician, and it is the first sign of contravention between him and his mother, as well as the first sign of where thing s begin to take a turn for the worse. Words are evidently not only his enemy but also something that he himself is panic-stricken of, reflected in his modest behaviour, and he also says that when blows have made him stay he fled from words. He knows that he is not a good speaker and would therefore rather stay a soldier. It is strongly teetotal that his greatest enemy isnt on the battlefield but in fact much closer to home. This certainly shows that Coriolanus is a man of action, and that he is trying to avoid being defeated by words, although he does not succeed.Volumnia did not just have high ambitions for her son after winning his battle she had been forming him through her words since he was a child to become the person that she could not be, due to the restrictions of Roman society. She rejoiced in his absence when he was fighting and was delighted to let him seek danger where he was like to find fame.Honour was what mattered roughly to her, and her guidance had managed to lead Coriolanus astray, as she steered herself and her son through her delusional plans to make him a great leader. She counts his wounds and thanks the gods fort, which is a very unaffectionate thing to do. This lack of a true maternal presence in his life is what some believe to be the leading factor that made him forswear Rome to fight alongside Aufidius after he was accused of being a traitor and ultimately what led to his death. This is therefore another possible example of the use of words against him as his own mother shaped him into the man he became through her words.Although Coriolanus is capable of speaking effectively and exploitation words to his advantage when under pressure, he has essentially been brought up to be a soldier and is therefore not only a victim of the harmful words of others but also incapable of defend himself through his own speeches, which is the fatal flaw in his character that leads him to be defeated. Shakespeare clearly shows that, apart from a few exceptions, Coriolanus is certainly a man of action defeated by words.BibliographyShakespeare, W. Coriolanus. (L. Bliss, Ed.) The New Cambridge Shakespeare.Coriolanus Godalming College Study Guide, 2011. Godalming College.