Rough Draft

I was really glad the Professor Burton was extra clear about how rough our rough drafts could be, cause guys, let me tell you, this is a rrrrrrrrrouugh Draft!

Steve Kesler
ENG 382
Professor Burton
March 20th, 2013
                                      Nature vs. Nurture in Shakespeare’s Coriolanus
    One of times oldest paradox is that of the chicken and the egg.  Which came first?  Though this idea has some comedic aspects the complexity that it conveys can be compared to age old literary debate of nature vs nurture. Differing from the facetious chicken and egg argument which doesn’t pose any real value the argument of nature vs nurture, on the contrary holds enormous worth.  The ability to distinguish between the innate ability and those that abilities that fostered and bread into society allows humankind to better understand the human relationship that is inherently shared by everyone.  Ideally, the importance that this kind of  comprehension would garner is a larger capacity for humankind to relate to one another and recognize the unavoidable differences that often lead to conflict. (Quote: The importance of understanding Nature Vs. Nurture).  In William Shakespeare’s tragedy Coriolanus these ideas are portrayed and explored.  Set in a burgeoning Roman empire the play takes place after the fall of Tarquin and is semi historical in that aspect.  Much of the conflict that is portrayed in Coriolanus takes place between the different Roman classes, the plebeians and the patricians, during the transition of the Roman government from monarchy to republic.  It is in this setting that the audience follows the decisions of Caius Martius Coriolanus and witnesses the enormous downfalls that accompany that characters unrelenting pride.  It is specifically through the portrayal of pride that Shakespeare explores the debate of nature vs. nurture calling into question the origination, necessity and reason for such a human trait.  In doing this Shakespeare constructs a tragedy that appears to be a warning of the hazards of pride however, a closer examination of the text will reveal that the tragedy is not wholly the fault of Coriolanus, but that is occurs on much broader scale.  Though Coriolanus is commonly seen as a tragedy centered around the downfalls of pride in the individual the tragedy actually is found in the faults of a culture and society that cultivates and relies on such extreme pride to the extent that it breeds contempt among its people.
    One of the first instances that Shakespeare gives the audience that Coriolanus’s overbearing pride cannot be wholly prescribed as a trait that is innate to his unique person is when his wife, Virgilia, and his mother, Volumnia, are discussing with excitement the return of Coriolanus from battle with the Roman nemesis the Volscians.  Volumnia, showing an immense pride of her own, reveals to Virgilia that even when Coriolanus was young she held the traits of honor and pride in higher esteem than even the life of her child.  After hearing her mother-in-law’s extreme point of view Virgilia exclaims: “But had he died in the business, madam; how then?” (l.) Volumnia with her retort displays her true nature and with it reveals the likely hood that the cultivation of Coriolanus’s extreme pride had been in cultivation for the duration of his life: “Hear me profess/sincerely: had I a dozen sons, each in my love/ alike and none less dear than thine and my good/ Marcius, I had rather had eleven die nobly for their/ country than one voluptuously surfeit out of action/”(ll.).  Seeing how much value was placed on honor and pride and then instilled in Coriolanus throughout his formative years it is easy to ascertain how Coriolanus developed his fatal flaw as well as a rich contempt for those in society who do not share his view.