Why do commoners in Julius Caesar lack thinking?
In the play Julius Caesar, the all the commoners seem to be easily incited and show deindividuation. They are one-dimensional and lack their own identity and self-awareness. Unlike other characters in the play who have sophisticated thinking process like real human, which makes the readers to be absorbed in the conflicts they encounter, the one-dimensional characters of the crowds interrupt the flow of the play.
In Act 2 Scene 2, Brutus speaks to the commoners the reasons for Caesar’s death and accepts his guiltiness in killing his best friend. The Roman citizens are very positive and tell him to live; some even encourage him to be like Caesar and become the next leader. This is completely contrasting to the beginning of the play, where all the citizens celebrated Caesar’s comeback and supported Caesar for his care for commoners. At least it is this part of the play is understandable considering that they were easily persuaded by Brutus by his good use of Pathos.
However, their reactions to Antonius’s speech is hard to understand. Without even having the change in place or scene, Antonius gives a speech right after Brutus to the citizens and stays in a completely opposite position to that of Brutus. Then the exact same citizens who agreed to Brutus a second ago starts to cry for the death of Caesar and shows support to Anthony. Citizen 3 who insisted Brutus should be the next Caesar now cries that Antony is the noblest in Rome.
The commoners lack identity and does not see the situation logically. They lack their own opinion and follow the opinions of the group. They very foolish and their thinking processes aren’t probable. Did Shakespeare actually believe people can be this easily incited and show strong dislike to somebody they strongly loved and supported minutes ago? Is it Shakespeare lack of writing ability or were all the commoners at that time actually foolish and improvised to believe what they heard right away?
Think 