Interpretation and julius Caesar I

A Problem of Interpretation

Bill Long

The complexity of Julius Caesar , described in an earlier mini-essay, suggests that the play isn't as straightforward as one might think. This suggests that what is at stake for the careful reader is to be aware that the interpretation of speeches, gestures, actions and movements will be fraught with peril.

We are plunged into the dilemma of interpretation in 1.3. In the previous scene we were introduced to most of the main characters of the play and we saw there how the problem of Caesar's possible pursuit of imperial honors colors the disquiet of Brutus, the bitterness of Cassius and, derivatively, the complaints of Portia to Brutus. Now, in 1.3., the scene shifts to the evening where a raging storm is "dropping fire" (1.3.10) in Rome. What does the tempest mean? Casca, one of the conspirators, tells the famed senator Cicero that the tempestuous storm either betokens civil war in the heavens or imminent judgment on the earth (1.3.11-13). Yet Cicero doesn't agree.

"But men may construe things after their fashion,/ Clean from the purpose of the things themselves (1.3.34-35)."

That is, 'Casca, it is all a matter of interpretation.' To show that Cicero is not at all impressed with Casca's interpretive gloss on the storm, Cicero then asks nonchalantly, "Comes Caesar to the Capitol tomorrow? (1.3.36)." By being ignorant of why his question is itself portentous, Cicero is both undermining his own advice about how to interpret "signs" in the heavens as well as communicating to the reader that our acts of interpretation will often be misguided.

More Interpretation

But then the scene continues with the entry of Cassius and more interpretation follows. Casca is still overwrought by the heavenly signs and earthly portents, and wonders what all this might mean. 1.3.44. Casca repeats the interpretation ignored by Cicero, but Cassius immediately disagrees. "You are dull, Casca; and those sparks of life/ that should be in a Roman you do want,/ Or else you use not (1.3.57-59)." Then, Cassius gives an alternative explanation, one in keeping with his greater design of stirring up interest in a conspiracy against Caesar. The "true cause" of these signs is that they act as "fear and warning/ Unto some monstrous state." 1.3.70-71. Then Cassius subtly makes his interpretation more specific:

"Now could I, Casca,/ Name unto thee a man most like this dreadful night,/ That thunders, lightens, opens graves, and roars/ As doth the lion in the Capitol (1.3.72-75)."

Casca as well as the reader would know that the lion is the symbol of Caesar. Thus when Casca responds, "'Tis Caesar that you mean; is it not, Cassius? (1.3.79)," the delighted Cassius only need respond, "Let it be who it is (1.3.80)." Interpretation has gained another co-conspirator.