Language (Coriolanus)

This section explores the language used in the play Coriolanus by William Shakespeare. Coriolanus is one of Shakespeare's later tragedies, noted for its sparse, direct, and powerful use of language. The play’s linguistic style is closely tied to its exploration of political power, class conflict, and personal identity. Below is an analysis of how language is used in Coriolanus, focusing on key techniques and their significance.

Language of Heroism and War

Overview

The play is dominated by the language of war and heroism, reflecting Coriolanus’ identity as a soldier and his martial prowess. Shakespeare uses military imagery and metaphors to illustrate both the glorification of war and the destructiveness of unchecked aggression.

Martial Imagery

Coriolanus as a War Hero: Much of Coriolanus’ speech is steeped in martial imagery. He frequently refers to the battlefield, using language that highlights his physical strength and prowess. In his descriptions of combat, he equates personal honour with military success, reinforcing his belief in the superiority of the warrior class.

Aggressive Language: Coriolanus’ speech is often harsh and aggressive, reflecting his combative nature. For example, he refers to the plebeians as “fragments” (Act I, Scene i) and speaks with disdain about the need to appeal to the common people. This aggressive use of language emphasises his alienation from civil society and his rejection of political diplomacy.

Use of Military Metaphors: The play is rich in military metaphors, which Coriolanus and others use to describe personal and political conflicts. This reflects the broader theme of the play, where the world of politics is often seen as a battleground. For instance, Coriolanus’ entrance into the Senate is described in military terms, as though he is entering a hostile environment.

Heroic Speech Patterns

Elevated Language: Coriolanus often speaks in a formal, elevated manner, especially when discussing honour or battle. His language is marked by a rigid structure, reflecting his inflexible nature and sense of superiority. His speeches in moments of battle or victory are filled with grandiose expressions, further emphasising his heroic self-image.

The Language of Politics

Overview

The play’s political landscape is shaped by how language is used to manipulate and persuade. The contrast between Coriolanus’ blunt, honest speech and the more rhetorical, persuasive language of the tribunes and other political figures highlights the importance of oratory in public life.

Coriolanus’ Blunt Speech

Lack of Rhetorical Skill: Coriolanus’ language in political settings is direct and often blunt, reflecting his disdain for manipulation and compromise. He refuses to flatter the plebeians or engage in the kind of rhetorical performance expected in Roman politics. His refusal to “flatter” the people during his campaign for the consulship demonstrates his rejection of political language as a form of deception. His uncompromising honesty becomes a barrier to his success in the political arena.

Honesty as a Weakness: Coriolanus’ inability to use language as a political tool is portrayed as both a strength and a flaw. While his bluntness reflects his integrity and commitment to personal honour, it also isolates him from the political processes necessary to maintain power in Rome.

Rhetoric of the Tribunes

Manipulative Language: In contrast, the tribunes, Sicinius and Brutus, are skilled in the use of rhetoric. Their speech is calculated and persuasive, designed to manipulate public opinion and turn the plebeians against Coriolanus. They use language to control the crowd, exploiting their fears and emotions to achieve political ends.

Language of Persuasion: The tribunes often use rhetoric to frame Coriolanus as a threat to the people’s freedoms. For instance, they refer to him as “a tyrant” and a “serpent” (Act III, Scene i), using figurative language to paint him as dangerous and untrustworthy. This contrasts sharply with Coriolanus’ more straightforward manner, highlighting the tribunes’ skill in using language to manipulate perception.

Volumnia’s Persuasive Appeal

Emotional Manipulation: Volumnia’s language is another form of political rhetoric. In Act V, Scene iii, she uses highly emotional language to persuade Coriolanus to spare Rome. Her appeal is a masterclass in persuasion, as she frames her argument in personal and patriotic terms, appealing to his sense of duty both as a son and as a Roman.

Imagery of Family and Nation: Volumnia uses imagery of family and country to tug at Coriolanus’ emotions, blending personal appeals with broader political concerns. She refers to his son’s future and the survival of Rome as intertwined, thus making it impossible for Coriolanus to ignore her plea without betraying both his family and his homeland.

Class and Language

Overview

Language in Coriolanus also reflects the social hierarchy, with distinct differences in how the patricians and plebeians speak. These linguistic distinctions highlight the tensions between the classes and underscore the play’s themes of class conflict and power dynamics.

The Plebeians’ Speech

Plain and Colloquial Language: The plebeians speak in a simpler, more colloquial language compared to the patricians. Their speech is marked by a lack of the formal, elevated style seen in Coriolanus and the Roman elite. This linguistic contrast reinforces the social divide between the two classes.

Use of Prose: Shakespeare often uses prose for the plebeians, reflecting their lower social status. In contrast, Coriolanus and the other patricians speak mostly in verse, indicating their elevated position in society. This distinction in language reinforces the play’s portrayal of class hierarchies and the separation between the rulers and the ruled.

Coriolanus’ Contempt for Plebeian Speech

Derogatory Language: Coriolanus’ interactions with the plebeians are marked by scorn and contempt. He frequently refers to them in dehumanising terms, calling them “curs,” “scabs,” and “fragments” (Act I, Scene i). His language reflects his belief that the plebeians are unworthy of political power and are beneath him, both socially and morally.

Class Tensions through Language: The way Coriolanus speaks to the plebeians exacerbates the tension between the classes. His refusal to address them with respect contributes to his downfall, as his disdain alienates the very people whose support he needs to secure political power.

Imagery and Symbolism

Overview

Shakespeare uses imagery and symbolism throughout Coriolanus to deepen the audience’s understanding of the characters and themes. The play’s imagery often draws on notions of the body politic, war, and nature to convey ideas about power, identity, and society.

Body Politic Imagery

Menenius’ Fable of the Belly: One of the most famous pieces of imagery in Coriolanus is Menenius’ fable of the belly (Act I, Scene i), in which he compares the state to a body, with the patricians as the belly that feeds the rest of the body (the plebeians). This metaphor reflects the hierarchical structure of Roman society and justifies the unequal distribution of power. However, it also emphasises the interdependence of the social classes, suggesting that the state can only function when all parts work together.

Coriolanus as the Heart: Later in the play, Coriolanus is described as the heart of Rome, a vital organ whose removal (exile) causes the state to suffer. This imagery reflects both his importance to the state and the inherent danger of his uncompromising nature. By portraying him as the heart, Shakespeare suggests that Coriolanus is essential to Rome’s strength but also a potential source of its destruction.

War and Animal Imagery

Beastly Metaphors: Animal imagery is frequently used in the play, particularly by Coriolanus when describing the plebeians. He refers to them as “crows” and “curs,” reducing them to the level of animals and emphasising his belief in their inferiority. This dehumanising language reflects the social division between the ruling class and the common people.

Imagery of Blood and Violence: The language of war is filled with references to blood and violence, reinforcing the central theme of martial conflict. Coriolanus often speaks of his own wounds as badges of honour, linking physical injury with military glory. However, the repeated references to bloodshed also underscore the destructive nature of his unyielding pride and aggression.

Verse and Prose

Overview

Shakespeare’s use of verse and prose in Coriolanus is significant in highlighting the differences in social status, emotional states, and thematic concerns of the characters.

Blank Verse (Iambic Pentameter)

Patrician Speech: The use of blank verse (unrhymed iambic pentameter) is primarily reserved for the patricians, reflecting their elevated status. Coriolanus, Volumnia, and other characters of the aristocracy speak in verse, which gives their speech a formal and dignified quality. The use of blank verse also reflects their seriousness and high stakes in matters of politics and war.

Prose for Lower-Class Characters

Common Speech: In contrast, the plebeians and tribunes often speak in prose, signalling their lower social rank. Prose is used for more casual or comedic exchanges and represents the everyday speech of the common people. This distinction between verse and prose reinforces the hierarchical divisions between the patricians and plebeians.

Conclusion

The language of Coriolanus plays a crucial role in shaping the themes and character dynamics within the play. Shakespeare’s use of martial and political imagery, the contrast between bluntness and rhetoric, and the careful distinction between verse and prose all serve to illuminate the conflicts between personal pride, political power, and social class. The play’s linguistic economy and precision reflect the intensity of its themes and the complexity of its protagonist.