305
of grain-hoarding by the patricians.
Coriolanus, however, has no talent
as, or desire to be, a political spin-
doctor; as Menenius suggests, “His
heart’s his mouth” (3.1.257). As
Coriolanus sees it, the plebeians
“Did not deserve corn gratis”
(3.1.128) because they performed
poorly in battle: “Being i’th’ war, /
Their mutinies and revolts, wherein
they showed / Most valour, spoke
not for them” (3.1.128–130).
In other words, Coriolanus
champions meritocracy (reserved
for patricians) and the status quo,
while the “tongues o’th’ common
mouth” (3.1.23) favor democracy.
Opposing views
Coriolanus is structured around
argument and debate. Shakespeare
introduces alternative perspectives
from the outset. While some
citizens respect Coriolanus for
his valor, others mock him as a
mama’s boy who fought only to
please his mother. The divergent
opinions voiced by Shakespeare’s
mob complicates the audience’s
experience of the play. Should our
sympathies lie with this rioting
throng intent on violent acts? Is the
mob’s murderous intent justifiable
and based on accurate information?
Over the centuries, readers and
audiences have also been inclined
to interpret the play in a wide
variety of ways, producing a string
of alternative and often politically
divergent readings. Coriolanus
has been interpreted as both the
hero and the villain of this drama,
and the plebeians have been
accused of being dangerously
fickle, as well as morally justified
in their behavior. The mob ❯❯THE KING’S MAN
An 18th-century print depicts
Coriolanus with his mother, Volumnia.
She is a key influence, first persuading
him to run for the Senate, and later to
abandon plans to destroy Rome.His sword, death’s stamp,
Where it did mark, it took.
From face to foot
He was a thing of blood,
whose every motion
Was timed with dying cries.
Cominius
Act 2, Scene 2