We will be doing a trial in class, and i have been chosen as a "Lawyer"....(that already sounds hard) and I am suppose to be the defendants Lawyer (defending that Iago is not responsible for the deaths in the book of Othello) but the only problem is i can only think of arguments for the Plaintiff's Lawyers, this would have been a good thing since i could have pllaned out a counter argument for most of their arguments but i can't really think of many counter arguments. And this where you guys come in and try to help me out.....SO PLEASE COULD YOU HELP ME FIND REASONS (AS MANNNNNY AS POSSIBLE ON THE SUBJECT OF WHY IAGO IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY OF THE DEATHS IN THE BOOK EVEN THOUGH HE DID FRAME DESDEMONIA, OTHELLO, CASSIO AND ON....THE ANSWER WITH MORE REASONING WILL BE GIVEN MORE PRESIDENT OVER OTHER ANSWERS.... PLEASE IF YOU CAN FIND BACK UP (QUOTES/PARAPHRASE)....THAT WOULD BE GOOD AS WELL....... IN THE MOCK TRIAL MY JOB WILL BE NOT ONLY TO DO THAT BUT I WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO CROSS EXAMINE ALL OF THE MAIN CHARACTER LIKE ASK QUESTION LIKE IN REAL LIFE COURT ......WHAT KIND OF QUESTIONS COULD I ASK THE WITNESSES (INCLUDES OTHELLO AND DESDEMONA) USE TO PURSUE THE PANEL TO BE ON TO MY SIDE....THANK YOU
1 Answer | Add Yours
We learn of Iago's hatred toward Othello from the beginning of the play. The reasons for this are particularly impenetrable: his revenge goes beyond anything that might be justified by his jealousy over Cassio’s promotion. Iago, in fact, adduces an excess of reasons for his “motiveless malignity” and doesn’t seem to care whether they are provable. We see his ability to mask his private desires and his horrible aims under a façade of honesty and bluntness. We see his ability to corrupt, transform, and debase anything and anybody through his cunning use of language. Iago is skilled in manipulating and poisoning the minds of others. He exploits the prejudices and unexamined assumptions already held by others (as with Brabantio). He makes people see other people as if they are types, not individuals—speaking to Rodrigo, he reduces Othello to a “barbarian” and Desdemona to a Venetian woman of sophisticated and debased tastes. He insists on his own cool rationalism while offering irrational arguments that sway others. He is a superb improviser (a quality exemplified by his impromptu plotting during his soliloquies).
In Act 3, Iago deploys a variety of tactics in the long, drawn-out manipulation of his commander that results in Othello’s doubting Desdemona’s faith. He works by silence and omission as much as direct statement. Iago’s suggestive withholding of information permits Othello’s own imagination to run riot; he will introduce new topics at random and encourage Othello to piece together a story. But with all of this, is there any physical evidence linking him to any crime? Is there any direct testimony linking him, or is it all hearsay? Did he physically wield any type of object of violence? Can he be held responsible for simply lying to Othello ? he should be found guilty of fraud from Rodrigo, but that is all.
Join to answer this question
Join a community of thousands of dedicated teachers and students.Join eNotes