Macbeth Towards Murder example essay topic

Before having a closer look at the character of Macbeth and Gloster and deciding whether they belong to the group of classical tragic heros, it is worth examining the sources, the historic background and the genres of the plays, which may help discover and understand the motives by which Shakespeare was driven while shaping these characters. The main source of Richard (1597) is the same chronicle (Raphael Holinshed's Chronicles) that served as a basic material for Macbeth (1605). Shakespeare handled the chronicle quite freely in both cases: to achieve his purpose, he changed several facts or at least the order of certain events. Historical Macbeth ruled between 1040 and 1057. He was a hard-handed, great king. He had a legal right to the throne that had been taken by Duncan I. Macbeth overcame him in an open battle and we have no data about assassination.

However, Shakespeare had a different idea of Scottish history. He read Macbeth's story in the Holinshed's Chronicles, which appeared in 1587. In this chronicle Macbeth is portrayed in quite a different way, the plot is coloured and varied by supernatural elements. Holinshed's Duncan is a young and untalented ruler who is dependent in all respects on two generals, Macbeth and Banquo. Shakespeare's Duncan, however, is an aged man but a good king, who does not take part in the battle only because of his advanced age. Although Holinshed's Macbeth is a usurper, he makes a generous, good king.

On the contrary, Shakespeare's Macbeth becomes a tyrant from the moment he comes to the throne in an unlawful way. With these changes Shakespeare wanted to justify James I's succession to the throne. That is why Shakespeare changed the role of Banquo. Originally (according to the Chronicle) he was Macbeth's accomplice in the murder but, as James I considered himself the descendant of Banquo, Shakespeare could not hurt the king by presenting his assassin ancestor on stage. The same aim is served by the episode in the Fourth Act. When Macbeth asks if any son of Banquo might become king, there come eight kings, the last of them being Banquo himself, holding a hand-mirror (this being the symbol of prediction) and showing with a smile to the one before him to mark where they were his own descendants.

By lining up eight kings of the Stuart-dynasty in a most spectacular way, Shakespeare wanted to express his devotion to the extraordinarily vain James I who succeed the throne in 1603. (The double apple symbolizes two isles of the empire unified by James I, namely Ireland and England, while the triple sceptre stands for the three kingdoms, Ireland, England and Scotland, respectively.) Richard is an insignificant but rather characteristic figure of the English history: it was due to his death that the Tudor-dynasty could come to the throne. The historical Richard was not so black as he was painted by Shakespeare. (It is still an unsolved question whether he commited any of the murders charged against him by his enemies.) Shakespeare describes him as a bad private person and bad ruler endowing him with such features that make him a devilish, typical Machiavellian figure.

Shakespeare had to make it clear that it was good that Henry VII, the first Tudor, came and rescued the country from Richard. Again, his aim was to justify the succession of the Tudor-dynasty. Macbeth belongs to the tragedies while Richard, although shows a lot of similarities with tragedies, is classified as a history play by Shakespeare's editors. The source of those similarities is the central character, Gloster. Shakespearean tragedy, like most Elizabethan tragedies, deals with people of high estate. In the centre of these dramas is a strong character in an exposed position, a king or a leader.

In this sense history play is not differentiated from tragedy as both Gloster and Macbeth fulfil the above requirements. Macbeth is one of the king's kings men, a courageous general and Duncan rewards him with noble titles. Gloster is again a member of the high society- he is the king's (Edward IV) brother. In his tragedies and his histories alike Shakespeare established a moral universe in which the wages of sin is usually death, and in both genres the authority of God is emphasized. The tragic hero is a distinguished member of society, who is morally superior, but gets corrupted by the events. He is overreaching, he pretends to be more than he is, and blinded by his overwhelming pride (hybris) he attributes to hims lef the power and wisdom of God.

He commits a tragic fault (hamartia), or makes the wrong decision, and the things that happen to him afterwards are the inevitable consequences of his wrong choice or what he has done. He is able to recognize his fault (anagnorisis), but only when it is too late. As a result, he is humbled for his arrogance (God's judgement), and has to die or suffer alone. From a social point of view, at the beginning of the play the hero is a part of society, but later he slowly disintegrates the world around him, runs into contradictions with himself, and tries to become whole again- but it is impossible. Finally, he is excluded from society. Macbeth's character is the classic example of the classical tragic hero.

Macbeth, the cousin of a king mild, just and beloved ("So full of the milk of human kindness"), but too old to lead his army, is described as a loyal, brave and faithful warrior, somebody, who can be relied on ("so fair and foul I've never seen"). At the same time he is exceedingly ambitious- and it becomes a passion. Although the temptation could be present in Macbeth earlier, too, it is the prediction of the witches that plants the seed of sin in Macbeth's soul: the idea that he can become king. The prophecy accelerates the events.

The great military leader rich in success, gives the real results of his life in exchange for the unreal prophecies of the witches. This prediction creates an uncertain, however fixed point in the future, which the present of the drama has to approach to. A frightened compulsion of action, running after the future, continues to be a typical characteristic of Macbeth, causing his downfall. He is overreaching by the determination that he wants to be king. In Medieval and Renaissance Times kingship was seen as a divine gift: a king is made by the mercy of God. That is why usurpation was considered one of the greatest sins, a sin against God.

In Macbeth the clash of the different systems of succession constitutes the reason of the conflict. Macbeth, as the lest kinsman of Duncan, has a privilige to the throne. The motive for Macbeth's action is not only ambition but fatal pride that he can be a better king by his own strength than the old king by the mercy of God. The climax of the drama is reached at the beginning of the Second Act when driven by his hybris (lust for power) Macbeth commits his hamartia, he kills the king. Owing to the murder, he is a usurper, i.e. a tyrant, and this is where the historical conflict arises from. We know that he must fall because he provoked the anger of God.

His fate has been sealed from the point when he killed Duncan. He is a murderer and usurper, a destroyer of the metaphysical order of things. The means of divine justice is Macduff and Malcolm becomes king by the grace of God. The same idea (God's revenge for sin) is present in Richard, too. As it turned out from the other parts of the tetralogy, both the York and the Lancaster party had commited cruel murders. According to the contemporary religious views such sins cannot be unpunished.

So, Gloster comes (as God's scourge?) and punishes all the sinful. Although he makes the nation's way to a better future, he is not a saviour. He only wants to gain the throne, and marching towards it gradually puts away everybody from his way. In this respect he is a twofold sinner because - murdering the people who commited sins in The War of the Roses he intervenes into God's business- he takes private revenge which usurps the authority of God: - -driven by a lust for power he is overreaching, he wants to be king, and uses immoral means to achieve his immoral aim. Actually, he is the supreme evil and finally remains alone.

Then comes Richmond as the means of divine justice and fulfils Richard's doom. The role of Gloster is the same as that of Macbeth: he is a usurper. Also there is in Richard the same portrayal and analysis of passion which characterizes Macbeth as well. The description of the destructive power of passion in Richard is a cruder one than in Macbeth, but in Gloster's character its corrosive effect is exhibited and analysed.

Ambition and lust for power press Gloster, as they do Macbeth towards murder that he may gain a throne. Fear compels him, as it does Macbeth, to murder to keep the throne. Even the murderer becomes surfeited with his own crimes: " I am in blood Stepp'd in so far, that, should I made no more, Returning were as tedious as go o'er". (Macbeth) "But I am in So far blood that sin will pluck on sin".

(Gloster) But each murder makes him even more anxious. Like Macbeth, he also has killed sleep. Yet fear urges him to commit new crimes. He arranges with Tyrr el to kill the little princes in the Tower, because they are "too deep enemies, /Foes to my rest and my sweet sleep's disturbers". In Macbeth, the scenes following the murder swiftly and sharply depict a world gone insane from lack of balance: the whole drama becomes a nightmare.

Until Duncan is king, the country is prosperous. When he is murdered, everything turns upside down. Sun never rises again, darkness rules everything. The country shows a weak, tormented landscape where people (even the protagonist) cannot sleep, there are witches, horses run out of their stable and bite each other. Whole Scotland is bathing is blood. The parallel between disintegration of the self and the country is obvious.

On the top of the state there is a man who murders people just to reinsert himself. He is more afraid of the world's judgement than his own guilty conscience. He murders for fear of not being called a man, he murders for fear of murder and he just cannot give up. He is so accustomed to murdering everybody who is in his way that he does not think. He sinks deeper and deeper, he disintegrates society and is finally expelled. Richard rises steadily until he pr ders the murder of his nephews, but from that moment he completely disintegrates his environment turning friends into enemies, till "he hath no friends but what are friends for fear".

His last night is the night when he meets the ghosts of his victims, and roused by Ratcliff to the day of battle he complains, "O Ratcliff, I fear, I fear!" That is the moment of anagnorisis when his character is the closest to the tragic heroes. Although he never regrets anything, he fears: he shows some human side-but it is too late. Despite the fact that Gloster's character is obviously nearing to that of the classical tragic heroes, such as Macbeth, he does not belong to them. His character is influenced by Medieval and contemporary popular traditions as well. By contrasting the personality of Macbeth and Gloster I try to reveal the most significant differences between them.

Macbeth, the cousin of the king is introduced to us as a general of exrtaordinary prowess, who has covered himself with glory in putting down a rebellion and repelling the invasion of a personal courage, a quality which he continues to display throughout the drama in regard to all plain dangers. We imagine him as a great warrior, somewhat masterful, rough and abrupt, a man to inspire some fear and much admiration. He is thought honest, or honourable, he is trusted, apparently, by everyone. And there was, in fact, much good in him. Gloster is quite the opposite. In his monologue he depicts himself as an ugly, repellent figure as he somehow joyfully scorns, over exaggerates his deformity.

In this ironical, good-humoured way he actually draws his "pathography" for us: "since I cannot prove a lover To entertain these fair well-spoken days I am determined to prove a villain". With the passive construction he somehow suggests that it was not his own decision to be a villain: God gave him that role endowing him with such physical features that prevent him from adapting to his environment and living a normal way of life. "Deformed, unfinished, sent before my time Into this breathing world scarce half made up". So?

I venture to say that he has an inborn inclination to evil, and the fact that he admits it, is a typical Machiavellian feature. Macbeth represents a particular kind of evil- the evil that results from a lust for power. He is not a naturally evil man, like Richard, but a man who has every potentiality for goodness. After the prediction of the witches Macbeth understands that he can get the desired crown only in an unlawful, immoral way. From that time on a fatal battle is going on within his soul between his two selves: the honest heroic warrior and the inferior, ambitious man who is driven by mere passion.

Finally, his bad self wins. Nevertheless, Macbeth was not bad enough, therefore, his lover drove him into killing. Neither of them was able to commit the murder alone. If Macbeth had had enough courage to decide and carry out the assassination by himself then he might have endured the moral consequences of the deed.

However, Gloster needs no assistance. He is a strong character, he pills the strings, unlike Macbeth who is rather "pulled" and never plans consciously. His opening speech is masterly: winter is now summer. The War of the Roses is ended, the killing is over, it is time to live and love, but not for Gloster - his keenest pleasures are to come, and the first will be to destroy his brother. Gloster planned his strategy for winning the crown very consciously. Having a political motivation, he kills for reason.

Macbeth, actually, is not prepared to be king: he murdered Duncan only treasure his manhood; then he murders because he does not feel secure and later it becomes a habit. He cannot stop killing in spite of the fact he constantly suffering from his conscience ("all full of scorpions in my mind"). Gloster, however, is free from the censor of conscience. He can win women, he can win power, he can enjoy using his power to destroy, to do whatever he wants to do.

We know that he will not get away with it in the end, but meanwhile, what fun he is having. And we also share that fun, we enjoy his somehow crooked but original sense of humour when he speaks with and without his masks. He continuously plays parts as he goes along, but he always keeps the leading part for himself). He is the devil-like, dynamic vice figure from morality plays or the embodiment of Lucifer, the rebelling angel, who was expelled from Heaven and had to change his forms and faces to be able to cheat people. Gloster has one more common feature with Lucifer - he is as lonely as the devil was. Although Gloster is placed in a society, he does not really belong to it.

In the beginning, he has friends only for interest, but after he orders the murder of his nephews, he has friends only for fear. Macbeth, on the other hand, starts as a respected member of society and he walks a long way for becoming the embodiment of evil. He starts from the territory of humanity but after the prophecy of the witches he sinks deeper and deeper and in the end not the devil is under him. We wish his downfall, but at the same time, long for Macduff's victory as well.

It was a must to liberate the country from Macbeth. His death is inglorious: as his head is carried in, blood appears on stage. Richard's death is not humbling: Richmond is not a real rival for him, only a stage prompt having a dramatic function. He symbolizes the power that overcomes the supreme evil, but has no other individual characteristic. As for Macbeth's character, Shakespeare could arouse my sympathy at the very beginning be presenting him as a brave and victorious soldier. He could show him drawn towards sin, against will and conscience, by persuasion of a woman.

I felt close to him all the time because he somehow allowed me to look into his deepest thoughts as he has torn into pieces under the pressure of his conscience. The most appalling thing is that the same can happen to anyone. We may sometime get to crossroads in life and if the temptation is strong enough, we may choose the wrong direction. We probably will not commit as serious crimes as Macbeth did, but could we have enough bravery to admit our mistake, return to the right path and bear humiliation, or we just keep marching towards our doom? Richard represents what a part of our selves sometimes would like to be. Not being bound by his conscience he follows his motto: "The end justifies the means".

And he always knows what and how to do. We condemn him for his immense wickedness, nevertheless. We must value his dynamism and intellect. There are two features in Gloster's character which I appreciate most: the strong will by which he is able to achieve his aim, alone, the whole world being against him; and his ability to hide his claws and horns behind nice words. Just to sum up my thoughts about these two characters: the most I can feel for Macbeth is pity - the less I can feel for Richard is admiration. 1.

Shakespeare, W. : The Tragedy of Richard the Third (The signet Classic Shakespeare, New York, 1964) 2. Shakespeare, W. : Macbeth (The Signet Classic Shakespeare, New York, 1965).