Coriolanus Act 1 Characterization

In the play, Coriolanus is the protagonist, a character who’s obstreperous and arrogant personality is unable to conform to the ‘proper’ personality of traditional Roman leaders. This trait is highlighted all throughout the first couple acts as one can notice that his mother speaks of him as a man with strength who will likely come back safe from battle (as a way to comfort Virgilia, his wife). Furthermore, the audience is also introduced to the people’s perception of him, as one citizen had stated that “he pays himself with being proud” (1.1) and one member of the tribune (Brutus) had described him as “too proud to be so valiant” (1.1). From this, one can deem that Shakespeare had used the people of Rome to characterize Martius in the beginning as an introduction, setting the tone for how readers think of him when he enters the play. However, including him in act one also sets the scene for how he thinks of his citizens as “dogs” and therefore demonstrates his god-complex and egoistic attitude. With this, a dark political atmosphere is set where society is split into classes (social hierarchy) and therefore there is prejudice within this community; most of the time, catalyzed by Martius’ discriminatory behavior. Surprisingly, it is ironic how Shakespeare established a contrast between the tone and diction of a calm and collected Menenius and the angry and sometimes violent citizens. It is noticeable that Martius regards Menenius as a fatherly figure, as do the people, thereby allowing one to think that the people and Martius are very similar. In light of this, the only redeeming quality of Martius in this act is his display of respect for the antagonist (Tullus Aufidius) as even though it is his enemy, he musters enough maturity to state that he “sins in envying his nobility” (1.1). As to how this characterization played a part in the larger purpose of the play, it did so by the fact that Martius’ horrible attitude and heinous reputation foreshadowed the people of the tribune in their bitter comments to create the revolt against him by the citizens. Not to mention that this same hatred is shared by the citizens, which in Martius’ statement of how “easily swayed” the people are foreshadows the eventual betrayal of the citizens towards Martius. In terms of how the audience’s judgment of Coriolanus at the end of Act 1 contrast with those garnered from the opening scene, it does so by giving a biased first impression of Martius through the lens of the people of which offered a foundation for the actions of Martius throughout the rest of the play as the reader is obligated to view all actions of his as acts of selfishness and not for the health of his country. This is further supported by the impudent manner in which Martius addresses his people as he even named them a “plague” to society (1.6). With this in mind, Shakespeare had characterized Coriolanus in such a manner that the audience cannot help but root for Coriolanus’ downfall, in the beginning, making the ending much more valuable as the choice to not invade Rome was to render Coriolanus as more than just a brutish character, but instead someone much more complex. It is possible to say that this was one to highlight the fact that even the ‘villains’ in Shakespeare’s plays are humans, and go past more than just a representation of society’s evil nature.