Harold Bloom argues, "Notoriously the victim of his dominating and devouring mother, Coriolanus is an overgrown child. Anywhere except on the battlefield, he is, at best, a disaster waiting to happen." Bloom also contends Coriolanus is more his own enemy than he is the crowd's enemy, and his tragedy is not the consequence of the crowd's fear and anger, but of his own nature and nurture.
Do you agree or disagree with Bloom? Provide at least three well-thought out examples from the text in your argument. This is an opportunity to intellectually argue and defend your position regarding Bloom's criticism of the play. As always, to exceed expectations you need to thoughtfully comment on two others' posts.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteCoriolanus is a disaster waiting to happen because of his unpredictable and uncontrollable temper. In act III scene I, Sicinius and Brutus come with the news that the Plebeians no longer want Coriolanus to be consul. Coriolanus is outraged, and loses control over his judgment when he yells to the crowd, "'Call our cares fears; which will in time reak ope the locks o' the senate and bring in the crows to peck the eagles'" Coriolanus essentially calls the crowd of commoners, who he should be trying to please, crows who will destroy the Roman Senate. Coriolanus's anger got the better of him, and it caused him to be unpredictable. His unpredictable nature is shown later in act III scene I when Coriolanus refuses to return to the market and beg the forgiveness of the people. He should have asked the people for forgiveness. However, he was incapable of doing this because his anger with the people caused him to think irrationally. This decision proved disastrous when Sicinius says, "'Has spoken like a traitor, and shall answer as traitors do.'" Now, the two tribunes and the plebeians believe that Coriolanus is a traitor. They approach him with the intent of killing him, so Coriolanus draws his sword and is ready to fight to the death. His anger is what caused him to end up in this disastrous situation where his life is in danger. If he would have been able to control his anger, he would have been able to ask the people for forgiveness. Instead, he greatly diminished his chances of regaining the people's support and put his life at risk. His uncontrollable anger and unpredictability is what causes Coriolanus to always be a disaster waiting to happen.
ReplyDeleteCoriolanus’s downfall is also caused by his angry nature, not by the plebeian’s treatment of him. In act III scene III, the plebeians decide to banish Coriolanus. Instead of trying to appease the people’s anger by apologizing, he arrogantly insults them. His anger with the people blinds his judgment, shown by when he states, “‘I would not buy their mercy at the price of one fair word, nor check my courage for what they can give, to have't with saying Good-morrow.’” Instead of trying to reason with the people, he rashly accepts his banishment. His anger with the people prevents him from saving himself. Coriolanus’s banishment from Rome is his fault. His banishment eventually led to his demise, making Coriolanus responsible for his own collapse.
Oh yes mark, Coriolanus's anger is his greatest problem, it is at the source of his misfortunes like the time he was kicked out of Rome, or the time Aufidius turned the people against him and made them kill him.
DeleteI agree also. Nearly everything bad that happens to him stems from his angry overreactions to the situations he is in.
DeleteI agree Mark. As you mention, Coriolanus' downfall is caused by his spiteful nature, rather than the treatment he receives from the plebeians. The plebeians are clearly critical of Coriolanus', but this is only because he treats them terribly. Coriolanus' political arrogance may be a result of his undefeated military career. Either way, the plebeians have the right to criticize the actions of Coriolanus, and he is wrong to overreact.
DeleteI agree with you as well, Mark. It seems that Coriolanus's reaction to all adversary is to respond with an uncontrolled fit of rage.
DeleteI think you are right on Mark. I realize that Coriolanus seems angry most of the time, and doesn't know how to handle social situations, but I take pity on him. I think he is easily overwhelmed, stemming from his anger, and simply says what comes to his mind. So in the end I think Aufdiu's name calling of "boy" is completely appropriate and maybe Coriolanus recognizes it.
DeleteI totally agree that the scene with Coriolanus insulting the crowd was a great example of his uncontrolled rage which I believe to be directly correlated with his child hood being dominated by his mother. With his mother making all the decisions for him I don't believe he ever really "grew up," there fore uses anger as his only way of expressing his feelings because he wasn't mature enough to channel his anger in a mature way.
DeleteI am very much in agreement with your arguments, Mark.
DeleteI do agree with Bloom. Coriolanus is almost totally inept at making his own decisions and if he does they are bad ones. When Brutus and Sicinius meet Coriolanus in a marketplace, they know that they can use him against himself. In this situation, like Bloom says, Coriolanus was his own enemy. Brutus and Sicinius knew that it would take much to set off the hot temper of Coriolanus and they utilized that when they enraged him in front of the public. By doing this they were able to get Coriolanus kicked out of Rome. Coriolanus was pretty stupid in this instance, especially because he went to the marketplace in the first place to apologize to the public. He had to apologize in the first place because of previous stupidity. In the very beginning of the play, the crowd is protesting outside. Coriolanus is so hot tempered that he comes and calls the people scabby dogs to their faces. This was probably the worst thing he could have done to secure a safe future in Rome. After all has been said and done, Coriolanus is with Aufidius and they are planning to attack Rome. Coriolanus has erased his previous hatred of Aufidius and even got strangely comfortable with him. Kind of like a child, he has mood swings, but instead of a child's mood swing, he has a more intense version where he literally goes back on a promise to kill a man. After he has set his sights on Rome, his mother comes for a visit. LIke any child would, he surrenders when he is scolded by his mother. How can this war hero manly man be swayed by an old lady. Its because, like Bloom says, he is a overgrown child.
ReplyDeleteYou bring up a great point with the mood swings. For all of the honor that Coriolanus thinks he has, he twice goes against things he swore to do (kill Aufidius and take Rome).
DeleteI agree. I like your point about how Coriolanus's stupidity allowed Brutus and Sicinius to take advantage of him. I also like your point about how Coriolanus's stupidity put him in the situation in the market. I hadn't thought about it that way before. I also agree that Coriolanus's surrendering to his mom's will in the last part of the play demonstrates his childlike nature.
DeleteI think you bring up a great point by giving the example of how his mother can control him to do whatever she pleases. A quality that depicts a child, not a man.
DeleteI think you bring up a great point that he continuously stirs up conflict with his own stupidity. If he stopped to think or had someone to help him, he would better.
DeleteI think you were spot on by saying his mother is his controlling power. Because his mother is so controlling he clearly has never made his own decisions because when he does he completely steers of in the wrong direction. I think the scene you bring up at the end of the play demonstrates his childish nature as you say.
DeleteI like what you noted about mood swings. He is very unpredictable and has consistently relied on his mom to keep him "stable." His temper has definitely been his downfall.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Bloom; Coriolanus' is the cause of his own problems, and he would have self-destructed eventually, even without the Tribunes influencing the mob.
ReplyDeleteIn Act 1, scene 1, Coriolanus insults the people before he even knows what they want or why they are there. "What's the matter, you dissentious rogues that, rubbing the poor itch of your opinion, make yourselves scabs?" In one sentence here, he puts himself above them, says their opinions are worthless, and straight up insults them. This is, again, before he knows why they are rallying. His natural reaction turns the people against him.
While Coriolanus dishes out insults, he also can't take one himself. And when he is insulted, he blows things out of proportion very quickly. In Act 3, scene 3, he gets hung up on one word from Sicinius -traitor- when all he has to do is apologize and he'll be fine. This leads to him getting banished from Rome. In the final scene of the play, he again goes into a rage based on one word -this time 'boy', by Aufidius- and the exchange ends in his death. Coriolanus' downfalls (banishment and death) both are a direct result of his personality and how he handles situations.
What seals the deal for me in regards to this argument is that Coriolanus seems to recognize it himself, even though he seems incapable of doing anything about it. In Act 2, scene 2, when he needs to appeal to the people to become consul, he feels he won't be able to do so. "I do beseech you let me o'erleap that custom; for I cannot put on the gown, stand naked, and entreat them, or my wounds' sake to give their suffrage: please you that I may pass this doing." Coriolanus seems to know that any non-war action could end in disaster for him, and though the one in scene 2 does not, the majority of them throughout the play do.
I agree completely. His anger towards the people is what caused his premature reaction to the situation in act I scene I. I also agree that Coriolanus is very sensitive and very easily agitated. I think this also reflects his childish nature. I also agree with your point about how Coriolanus is only effective on the battlefield. When put into political situations, his temper always gets the better of him.
DeleteI agree Ryan. Coriolanus is childish in that he constantly insults people, but can't accept criticism. As you mention, Coriolanus is far too proud to accept the easy way out, which ends up resulting in his death. I think that things would have ended differently for Coriolanus if he didn't act on rash impulse.
DeleteI agree with Harold Bloom's argument. Other than on the battlefield, Coriolanus is a bumbling oaf. However, I don't agree with Bloom in that Coriolanus is a victim of his mother. Instead, I think that Coriolanus is a victim of his own rash temper and overwhelming arrogance. Additionally, Coriolanus' greatness is his own primary concern. As a result of these traits, Coriolanus is a terrible politician, with his stubborn personality ultimately leading to his downfall. When dealing with the Roman citizens, Coriolanus almost always ends up insulting them. For example, in Act II while on campaign for consulship, Coriolanus brags about his war scars and tells the Roman citizens that he got them while, "Some certain of your [the citizens'] brethren roar'd and ran From the noise of our own drums." Not only is Coriolanus' arrogance angering the crowd, but he is also revealing a weakness to his enemies. Coriolanus' arrogance is exposed as a weakness by Brutus and Sicinius, who ultimately use it to turn the crowd against him. Had Coriolanus not insulted the crowd, he probably would have been unanimously voted in as consul. Coriolanus' arrogance persists in Act III when he calls the Roman people "measles". As Brutus says, Coriolanus "speak o' the people, As if [he] were a god to punish, not A man of their infirmity." Coriolanus acts like a god when in reality his political career depends on the well being, or lack thereof, of the people. Predictably, Coriolanus' pride leads to his death. After Coriolanus concedes to his mother Volumnia, Aufidius calls him a "boy". Unable to control his anger, Coriolanus demands Audifius to "Cut me to pieces, Volsces; men and lads, Stain all your edges on me. Boy! false hound!". Coriolanus continues by telling Aufidius that "I Flutter'd your Volscians in Corioli: Alone I did it. Boy!" In the same manner he does throughout the play, Coriolanus insults his enemies, and then brags about a previous accomplishment. However, this time he is held accountable for his words, and he's slaughtered by a hoard of angry conspirators. As with his expulsion from Rome, Coriolanus' death was entirely preventable. Throughout the play, Coriolanus' is plagued by his nature resulting in his unsuccessful political career and consequent death.
ReplyDeleteCorrect, it is always Coriolanus's ignorance and arrogance that gets him into trouble. Whether its being not voted for for consul, being kicked out of Rome, or being eventually stabbed by a crowd, Coriolanus's bad temper and stupidity is his greatest threat. Therefor, like Bloom says, Coriolanus is a enemy to himself.
DeleteI agree with all of Bloom's claims concerning Coriolanus. Coriolanus is the cause of his own undoing, which is even greater fueled by his overbearing and power-hungry mother. They're are two instances where Coriolanus is portrayed as a child throwing a temper tantrum. The first instance is when Coriolanus wants to be elected to city consul. Coriolanus must speak to the crowd after he wins his battle, but he does not think he needs to because he is an inflated idiot. He becomes enraged while speaking to the crowd and calls them some unsavory words. The second instance is when Brutus and Sicinius "plot" to make Coriolanus show his true colors to the common people for a second time. They convince the crowd to not elect him as a consular, due to his fit of rage. Coriolanus's childish nature is reinforced because the only way he will apologize is after his mother's request. He goes to speak to the crowd, but becomes enraged again, and is even kicked out of Rome. Interestingly enough, these two scenes are almost identical due to the fact they both show his terrible public relation skills. The last scene in the play reinforces thar he is the cause of his own demise because he has one final fit of rage. This rage leads Aufidious's men to all jump and kill him.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, and I like your temper tantrum analogy. It's interesting that in multiple scenes, the final fit of rage and an earlier one in Act 3, people respond to his rage and idiocy by attacking him.
DeleteI would agree that Coriolanus was not an enemy of the crowd but of himself. I don’t think it’s necessarily his fault that he is his own enemy, he’s more the victim of his up bringing by his mother. His mother’s nurture transformed him into a man dependent on his others directive. He is a strong fighter by himself and it encourages others, such as Aufidiu’s Army in Act IV when they went to conquer Rome, however he doesn’t understand how to lead or give directive. He just takes action for himself. The fact that he can’t make up his own mind or think before he acts gets him in trouble, thus making himself his own enemy. He is unresponsive to other people except his mother. It seems as if his mother taught him only to respond to her, or she always kept him close by praising him, “if my son were my husband, I should freelier rejoice in that absence wherein he won honour than in the embracements of his bed where he would show most love” (Act I scene 2). In the end his let his mother manipulate him. He was not aware of the manipulations others had on him. Instead of thinking for himself and his actions, he gets angry and in the end makes people hate him. I believe that Coriolanus was a lot like a boy like Aufidiu’s called him. Although he is grown he doesn’t know how to plan and think he just goes for it and is completely oblivious to things going on around him.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting that while his temperament is able to motivate armies of people to fight for him, like what you mentioned in Act IV, it also spurs people to take up arms against him. I agree with you that he's oblivious to the consequences of being so incendiary.
DeleteI agree, Jenn. He is the product of his mother.
DeleteHe was struggling with his inner emotions, I agree.
DeleteI agree with Bloom’s argument.
ReplyDeleteCoriolanus’s very first speech proves that he’s emotionally immature when he says “What's the matter, you dissentious rogues, That, rubbing the poor itch of your opinion, Make yourselves scabs?” His degradation of the gentry isn’t just politically unsound; it’s childish and an example of his complete inability to perform diplomacy in new situations without coaching from his mom.
In addition to an uncontrollable temper, Coriolanus also possesses a lot of hubris. In Act III Scene 1, Brutus says, “You speak o' the people, As if you were a god to punish, not A man of their infirmity.” Coriolanus angrily responds, “You are plebeians, If they be senators: and they are no less, When, both your voices blended, the great'st taste Most palates theirs,” confirming Brutus’s statement. The scene culminates with Coriolanus drawing his sword against the mutinous citizens. This scene is a model of the consequences of Coriolanus’s pride throughout the play; he is incredibly defensive, which offends people and forges more conflict.
Following his mother’s lengthy speech in Act V Scene 3, Coriolanus says, “O my mother, mother! O! You have won a happy victory to Rome; […] Now, good Aufidius, Were you in my stead, would you have heard A mother less? Or granted less, Aufidius?” Other than his false modesty following the battle at the beginning of the play, this is the only scene where Coriolanus attempts to justify his actions. His tone here seems to correlate with the tone he took after winning the battle for Rome. Coriolanus believes that he has won, which is a reflection of how shortsighted he is. His entire world is his mother and his military capabilities/reputation, and here he believes he’s won in both categories. Coriolanus is unable to see globally.
I agree, I like that you talked about his speech as your first example. It is a prime example of his immaturity.
DeleteYes I agree with Bloom. Coriolanus's attitude and anger shows his childish side. In act III scene I, Sicinius and Brutus tell Coriolanus that he is no longer wanted in the council by the Plebeians. When he hears the news his anger over takes him and screams to the crowd, "Call our cares fears; which will in time reak ope the locks o' the senate and bring in the crows to peck the eagles," insulting the people saying they will destroy Rome. This temper tantrum was proof of his immaturity to deal with difficult situations. Instead of responding like an adult in a polite dignified manner he goes straight to insulting everyone. This childish behavior is shown again later in the act when coriolanus refuses to swallow his pride and apologize to those he insulted. Because he refused to acknowledge his poor actions he ends up putting his life in danger for people begin to suspect that he is a traitor against the king and there fore deserves to die. This immaturity, which is due to his overwhelming mother making all of his decisions for him, left Coriolanus to be unable to deal with difficult situations and lead to his own demise.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the fact that due to the relationship he had with his mother, coriolanus cant stand on his own and be responsible for his actions. :)
DeleteI agree that he is completely incapable of handling the struggles that a leader is bound to face. He is very immature and completely reliant on his mommy.
DeleteI think that Harold Bloom is correct in his statement that Coriolanus s a disaster waiting to happen. He does seem to be a product of his environment. His relationship with his mother he seems to be unable to make good and rational decisions. A good example of this is when Brutus and Sicinius use coriolanus against him when they meet in his marketplace. They used his short temper against him but humiliating him in front of the public. By bringing up humiliating things about coriolanus in front of the public they were able to get him kicked out of Rome. This example is a prime example of when coriolanus is caught in a situation in which he doesn’t have the skills to figure how to get himself out of the situation. At the beginning of the play, coriolanus goes out to the public that is protesting an, because he has such a bad tempter, he called them all dogs to their faces. So to fix this situation and the other one, he has to go back and apologize. The stupid things he does makes in much more trouble, and that puts the safety of Rome in danger. After he is kicked out of Rome he meets with Aufidious, and even though he previously hated Aufidious, they plan to defeat Rome together. his shows that the king cant stick with one thing. he is indecisive and has sort of mood swings. Coriolanus is virtually still a child, still listening to everything his mother tells him to do, and not being able to stick with any decisions.
ReplyDeleteI agree. Ur rite. He sux. peace out RHS lol
DeleteI agree with Bloom. In my opinion, it seems that very little of the tragedies that happened to Coriolanus were the results of the crowd. Most of what happened to him was the results of him failing to comply with anyone, for example, when Coriolanus had to talk to the crowd about his winnings,He refused to do so and as a result, his popularity with the crowd began to decrease. this wasn't the result of the crowd throwing unfair conditions at Coriolanus, this is the result of him being a stubborn cry baby and not trying to comply with anyone at all.
ReplyDeletehe did recieve unfair conditions, but I believe he should have handled it a little better.
DeleteHe isn't a disaster. The more you lie, the more damage is caused from doing something bad. Its not him that's the problem but the people that are lying and making him sound mischevious that everyone doesn't like. People want honesty and for some reason think the most honest people in this play are liers and the least honest people are the most honest. The governors made the problem worse, although I believe Coriolanus made the situation worse by being honest on his opinions about everyone.
ReplyDeleteI think he is a disaster. His inability to work with others and his short temper led to his death. He sux.
DeleteI agree with Bloom’s argument that Coriolanus is his own enemy because of his lack of wisdom. His lack of wisdom is due to the upbringing his Mother provided for him. One example of his lack of maturity is when he has a temper tantrum when he Mother tries to convince him to make peace with Rome. He feels pressure from both sides, but eventually makes peace with Rome. Another example of Coriolanus’ immaturity is in the beginning of the play when he, although he is seemingly pacified by his mother, he loses his temper in front of the angry crowd and they banish him from the city forever. Also, because he decided to get revenge on the Romans instead of settling down and making a life for himself, he is a child. Overall, Coriolanus lets his Mother manipulate him until the end of his life, rather than growing up and making decisions for himself.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Bloom in his assessment of Coriolanus. He is certainly a disaster waiting to happen, and this lies mainly in his uncontrollable temper, which essentially leads him to self-destruct. Because he makes his temper problem so obvious, this is what people target. For example, when Brutus and Sicinius meet Coriolanus in the market place, they know that they can make Coriolanus look bad to the public by making him angry to show off his temper. This results in his removal from Rome. In fact, he’s never been very popular with the public. His temper led him to call protestors scabby dogs. He is also completely incapable of making his own decisions without input from his overbearing mother. He completely cancels all plans of attacking Rome based solely on his mother’s advice/scolding. This shows off his reliance on his mother, a truly childish quality for a “leader.” This also makes it more than obvious that, “Coriolanus is an overgrown child,” making his decision based upon what his mother says. He's childish and hot tempered, proving him to be childish and unfit to lead. He's absolutely his own enemy.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this quote, he is a disaster waiting to happen because of his inability to think ahead and pan out his next steps. In act one scene one Coriolanus is approached by the townspeople, angry for the high price of grain. Yet before even understanding why the people are there, Coriolanus insults them. This only adds to the people’s dislike for him and he really is just being dumb.
ReplyDeleteAlso, while Coriolanus is very quick to insult, he can’t take any himself and when he is provoked, he has extreme outbursts, totally glowing things out of proportion. An example of this could be the final scene, in which Aufidius and him confront each other. While exchanging Shakespeare words, Aufidius calls Coriolanus a boy and all hell breaks loose. Enraged by the single name “boy” Coriolanus gives a long speech and Aufidius calls him men to kill Coriolanus. This includes the great line, “”Cut me to pieces, Colsces; men and lads, / Stain all your edges on me. / Boy! False hound!” His short temper led to his own death. Loser.
Coriolanus is also a bit of a disaster waiting to happen because of his poor skills around other people. Although he is an excellent “duelist” (lol) he isn’t able to work with others/just sucks with other people. He is unresponsive to other people except his mother and in the end his mother manipulated him, which led to his death.
Basically he sux.