also to maintain his relation with the people. People exile him out of Rome because he is judged as a leader who cannot solve the conflict.
3. Willing to Take Personal Risks and Make Necessary Decisions
Relating to the use of power, a leader is supposed to use the power in order to facilitate and accomplish efforts or objectives. In the process of
facilitating and accomplishing efforts or objectives, a leader is required to have willingness to take personal risks and to make necessary decisions. Since moral
value of leadership in the play is close to Garry Yulk‟s modern theory, here, the writer
adopts Garry Yulk‟s 2006:424 suggestion of risk taking in leader decisions and actions. Through
the analysis of Coriolanus‟ attitude, especially his bravery, the writer notices that Coriolanus
‟ deed to be the vanguard in the battlefield is his willingness to take personal risk. He will probably take risk to be
killed easily in front of the enemy. His decision to take personal risk is based on his sacrifice to avoid his companies got injured and being killed.
MARCIUS CORIOLANUS. Then shall we hear their „larum, and they
ours. Now, Mars, I prithee, make us quick in work, that we with smoking sword may march from hence to help our fielded friends
Come, blow thy blast.
Shakespeare, 1942:1294 Marcius Coriolanus risks his personal life to save his friends who are
surrounded by the enemies. He steps in front of his other companies who have been frightened. The writer interprets that the willingness to take personal risk can
be understood as sacrifice. Moral value of leadership which can be learned here is sacrifice. Coriolanus
‟ decision to reconcile Rome and Volsce in a peace treaty can be considered as a great sacrifice. From the play, it is sure that standing as Volsce
military general, Coriolanus intently wants to destroy Roman people who banish him from Rome. His decision to forgive Rome
at moment‟s notice is not based on his forgiveness for Rome but because of his love to his mother, Volumnia whom
he respects mostly. However, it can be seen that what kind of Coriolanus‟ reason
to decide to make peace treaty cannot be avoided from a dangerous risk. The dangerous risk taken by Coriolanus is his death as a tragic hero.
4. Being Humble to Followers
Egoism is Coriolanus main problematical quality, and it defines his fate. His arrogance partly arises from his special military qualities and its track record.
To be a consul is not Coriolanus‟ ambition actually. It is an appreciation for him, which through it, he is supposed to love common people. If he were not so
arrogant, he would be viewed by the plebeians both as a war hero and a suitable consul. The people will see him like Menenius one that hath always loved the
people Shakespeare, 1942:1290 ”, not as chief enemy to the people
Shakespeare, 1942:1289. Coriolanus ‟ egoism impedes him to be negotiable and
communicable with common people. Again, people admit Coriolanus loyalty for his military services. On the other hand, the people dislike his arrogance and
egoism. Thus, Coriolanus is like a coin. What basic demand that the people pursue is now the focus. Actually, the
people are more concerned with the quality of a leader ‟s abilities to communicate
and to build a good relation with the people such as in listening and treating them with respect. Coriolanus is unable to provide these elements; on the contrary, he
confronts the people. The conflicts lead him to his banishment as the
