The alignment of Brutus

Damn, did I leave the gas on?

For the record

LG-Lawful Good

NG- Neutral Good

CG- Chaotic Good

LN- Lawful Natural

N- figure it out

CN- Chaotic Neutral

LE- Lawful Evil

NE- Neutral Evil

CE- Do you really need me to explain it at this point?

Well, I intended to finish the second alignment article, but due to writer’s block I figured I might as well focus on something I’ve been interested in. So here you have it, a second alignment article, this one of the famous Roman patriot/murderer Brutus (the younger for those who like specifics). Well let’s jump right in shall we. As any fan of the Bard knows, Brutus, like all of William’s characters has been analyzed and discussed by many people with fancier names and nicer looking titles, so anything I offer is inevitably going to come off as pretentious, because nothing annoys people who have dedicated most of their life to studying this subject matter than young teens who’ve watched the movie and read through the play and now feel like their interpretation is the absolute truth. Someday, I might go back and write up a whole piece on the nature of Brutus’ character, but for now I just want to know his alignment.

Just to make this clear, despite the misleading picture, I am using the Brutus from the play “Julius Caesar,” not the real life one or the one from “Rome,” who are very different people. If we take this too logically, Brutus will be evil no matter what, because he is a strong believer in Roman society, which included tenets like slavery and massive oppression (genocide in some areas). As a high-ranking Roman, Brutus would engage in, or at least tolerate, the evil aspects of Roman Society, particularly slavery (Rome as a society is normally LE in history, though this does vary). However, for the sake of keeping this interesting, we will only judge him on the actions we see on stage, and ignore real world logic. Brutus in the play murders his best friend and father figure Julius Caesar out of the belief that he has been corrupted by power. However his honor leads to his defeat as he allows Caesar’s second in command Mark Anthony to make a bloody awesome speech which turns the people of Rome against him leading to a general civil war.

The thing about Brutus is that there are two main different interpretations to his motives. One train of thought says that Brutus is very much an ideal Roman noble (of the Roman Republic, not Empire), and kills Caesar out of his feeling of duty towards Rome, i.e., he was fighting against Tyranny. The other train of thought is that he is an ambitious self serving loser who resents Caesar and uses his ambition as an excuse. Personally I believe the former, this view being supported by his total political naiveté and how his sense of honor leads to his own failure again and again (compared of course to Mark Anthony who is actually politically savvy). Under that assumption, at first glance, I’d put him as LN or LG.

Brutus does commit a major evil action in the play, of course, when he murders Caesar in cold blood. However, a single evil action doesn’t normally change one’s alignment, through it does show much about his character. Now the biggest question is: is he good or neutral? He is certainly honorable (to a fault) and is a firm believer in justice. But is he actually good? While (at least in the play) he isn’t evil, I don’t think he is good. When faced with the prospect of Caesar becoming a tyrant (which in the play is never confirmed through strongly hinted at), he resorts to murder as a solution. At no point in the play does he confront Caesar, nor does he attempt to stop him in any non violent manner. The attack is very much a preemptive as he never actually confirms Caesar’s ambitions; he is acting upon instinct and suspicions, not based upon actual actions of Caesar. And while he was most likely correct about Caesar’s ambitions, he never actually proved it, nor does he even make the attempt to solve the problem in a non-violent manner. He also never portrays the values of good in the play, while he is brave and honorable, he is never shown as merciful, charitable, or sympathetic. I personally peg him down as LN, possibly LE as he acts out of a sense of honor, not by the D&D good values.

Normally, I would have ended the article here and gone off to amuse myself with the Oblivion physics engine and tricking the AI, but, alas, I am cursed with a brain that won’t shut up when it should. So instead of following the internet custom of presenting a point as truth because I said so, I am instead going to look over my work again. In retrospect, why am I so sure he is Lawful Neutral or Lawful Evil? Is he really that lawful? Oh he has lawful motives and lawful intentions certainly, but Law and Chaos are more about the methods then the motives. It is the way one carries out a task. Brutus is a strong believer in law and justice, and has debatable honorable motives, but think about the way he handles things! When talked to by Cassius, he instantly goes along with murder as a solution to the problem, for a crime that Caesar has not yet committed. To make matters more against custom, he kills him in the Senate house, with daggers. So you could really make an argument that he isn’t lawful at all, just thinks he is.

Damn it, again I could have very easily walked off after “proving” my point, but again I have to argue with my self. I need to get the hang of this idea of “I’m right because I say so” way of doing things, John Solomon can do it so why can’t I? Again, I look over what I said and realize something that disproves that theory as well. Despite his unlawful way of handling things, Brutus still does act in a very lawful manner at times, normally when it trips him up. After making his speech to the crowd, he follows the words of his oath to Mark Anthony to the letter and lets him talk after he leaves. Later he hinders his own battle plans in the scene with Cassius. He also spares Mark Anthony’s life when Cassius says they should do other wise, not out of any real sense of kindness but more out of a sense duty, Mark Anthony committed no crime.

But wait, and again I hinder my own argument. While there are numerous examples of Brutus acting in a manner one would presume lawful, an argument could be made that he is simply being honorable, which is not the same thing. A chaotic person can certainly have a sense of honor and duty, that isn’t something inherent to the lawful alignment. The greatest example of his blind following of the law is when he allows Mark Anthony to speak after him even when it doesn’t suit his interest. But one could say that is simply an example of Brutus’ stupidity rather than lawful manner. While Brutus is certainly honorable and believes in the law, we should remember that society’s law isn’t the same as the D&D’s law. Brutus is doing what he thinks is right, which isn’t so much acting lawfully as much as acting honorably. Law doesn’t have to entitle taking your enemy’s word for granted, naiveté and plain stupidity can explain that just as well.

Actually, you could very easily make a case that Brutus is being lawful along with being naïve but…no screw that. No, you don’t get to hear my next solution, because if I keep on with this schizophrenic use of the devil’s advocate, this post will start to become like the “Yellow Submarine” film and then nothing would make sense. So, in the style of the stereotypical martial artist, I am going to tap into the festering wastes of the Internet and draw upon the power of the troll. In this, I ignore logic or any conclusion other than my own and present my point like this. Brutus is LN -- deal with it…

Honestly, Brutus is most likely Neutral, Lawful Neutral, or Lawful Evil. And now I’m going to bed.