I was floored by the depth and diversity of responses I received in response to my Shakespeare post. Such a waste if I don’t tap on the pool of insights here.
I started off with Macbeth first. I know I read abridged versions but nonetheless, thought Andrew Matthews was a fine writer.
Consider these gems:
A small, cold fear entered Macbeth’s heart, and he snarled to conceal it. The guilty secret of Duncan’s murder gnawed at Lady Macbeth’s mind like a maggot inside an apple.
I think it’s amazing how a seed of ill intent can grow so quickly and turn a human heart rotten so fast. I’d like to think that we are more resilient against insidious influences, but the infamous Stanford Prison experiment showed us all how we can easily let our devilish side overwhelm and dominate us when exposed to the “right” conditions. Personally, I would have liked to see Macbeth resist harder against the invasion of his heart, but I guess that when goaded by Lady Macbeth, he accelerated his gear towards the dark side. Which goes to show that choosing a lifelong partner is the most significant decision a man will make in his life.
I was a bit saddened at how the murder of Duncan tore Macbeth and his wife apart. It’s sad to imagine Lady Macbeth dying alone, having lost her mind. Would I have preferred it if the couple remained united and even enjoyed their ill-gotten gains deviously after ascending to the crown? It wouldn’t make for a good virtuous tale, but well, in real life, there are people who revel in being evil.
I wonder why Macduff didn’t take his wife and children with him when he fled to England.
I think that given the drastic and tragic things that happened to Macbeth and his wife, it’s easy to not give the three witches a second thought. They remain an enigma. Where did they come from? Why did they reveal themselves to Macbeth only? Were they his assets or foes?
And as an extension, why did Shakespeare like to introduce characters from another world? Did he feel stifled if he had kept to a one-universe world instead? These are nice questions worth mulling over.
Thank you for reading my rambling thoughts.
Glad you read and enjoyed it, though I do think nothing replaces the original text. For starters, not getting the insight into the internal thoughts of the characters allows a lot more room for interpretation. It especially allows more interpretation over why MacBeth gave in and how much he resisted.
While there are people who revel at being evil (when you get to Titus Andronicus, you'll meet Aaron, and in Othello there's Iago), flawed heroes (and MacBeth certainly starts the play as one) tend to be more compelling, personally. Even Hamlet's Claudius, one of his more evil villains is shown to be capable of guilt.
As for MacDuff, it's because he really didn't think MacBeth was evil. Usurping the throne is one thing, killing rivals is another, but going after the family was considered out of bounds.
And yeah, the Witches are such an enigma. Were they simply revealing what was destined? If he'd never encountered them, would he have been tempted? Was their second prophecy meant to make him complacent?
Shakespeare doesn't always use the supernatural; it's just a useful tool depending on the story he wants to tell.
If you're a fan of fantasy, though, I do recommend Terry Pratchett's Wyrd Sisters, which starts with a comparable group of witches and a royal plot, but goes in very different directions.
reply
Thank you for putting so much time n thought into your response!
I think I will read the originals at some point. Right now, my motivation is to finish reading these books on hand so that I can declutter my room by taking them to the recycling machine and earning a few cents haha.
Thank you for prepping my mind in regard to the things to look out for in some of his other plays. I’ll surely get back to you.
reply
What do you think is the motivation both for Lady Macbeth and Macbeth to commit the murder? I think "greed" is thrown around as the answer, but I wonder if "faithlessness" may also be credited: It is prophesied that Macbeth would be king, what would motivate quickening that prophecy besides impatience, what motivates impatience? We have greed - greed, like faithlessness, indicates a lack or an insecurity in the character. But I just wonder if faithlessness, and the haughty arrogance that we put upon ourselves to avoid that fragility in the face of a known-unknown destiny could just as easily be the answer to why Lady Macbeth got all up in arms about murdering the king.
So, a lot of more modern interpretations focus on the aspect of greed. I think Macbeth is the most (or more) parodied of Shakespeare's plays by modern avant-garde dramatists and playwrights. You could see Eugene Ionesco's Macbett or Alfred Jarry's Ubu Roi, both of which center on ambition, greed, cowardice, both written in context of changing economic and social values post-industrial revolution (Jarry's was pretty good if too politically aggressive, it was just so stupid - I didn't read Ionesco's yet, but I've read some of his work and I think he is just a touch too pompous). I have my own suspicions about how narrowly writers can view their own context - to criticize the change of society and social class without reconciling the ample opportunities presented through technological development, but that's a long tangent that is not fully developed.
As for Macduff, there are a lot of different answers we could consider. The first that comes to my mind is, maybe he considered it was more dangerous for his family to be with him. Most reasonable people would target the man and not the family in the event of these more archaic power struggles.
The fact of the witches is probably why I prefer to think about faith instead of greed when it comes to the baser themes of the play. Shakespeare does deal a good amount with metaphysical and divine themes although considerably less than his medieval predecessors - before Shakespeare's time, what was popular were mystery and miracle plays (some people theorize this is what he watched growing up) which were laden heavily with Christian themes, iconography, and characters. Shakespeare was part of the English Renaissance, so much of his work incorporated classical and "pagan" elements. I think the return to the classics always has something to do with a reaffirmation and realignment to what are the most "high" or "ideal" aspects of humanity, especially following an age of barring access to information, repression, forced conformity. To make the characters witches instead of more regular Christian demons or the devil could say to the audience, yes, we live in a world where this is believed as well, "This happened too." To affirm folk history is to affirm history...anyway...
I also read once that the reference to the witches has to do with the historical aspect of the play, it being commissioned by a king during the time of a witch hunt. But I read this once, somewhere, and I can't find the reference for it, so take it as that.
reply
Thank you for such a juicy answer. You examined Shakespeare’s writing in the context of the English Renaissance, something I would not have thought about myself since I lack the background knowledge. So thanks for doing that.
I’ll have to mull over faithlessness n get back to you. Am I right to assume that faithlessness refers to Macbeth and Lady Macbeth not believing that good things would come their way?
Reading your and @StillStackinAfterAllTheseYears’ responses made me realise one thing. Being Chinese, I grew up reading and listening to stories about how his entire family would be killed and beheaded if a subordinate deemed to be a threat dared to offer the emperor criticism or go against his orders, etc. I realised that these stories subconsciously conditioned me to the idea that we are never really sovereign individuals - we have roles to fulfill in the greater unit of our families. That’s why it was so puzzling for me to read that Macduff fled alone. Now I know that he wasn’t necessarily “abandoning” them, but rather, keeping them safe because he wouldn’t have expected Macbeth to go after them.
reply
Where did they come from? Why did they reveal themselves to Macbeth only? Were they his assets or foes? And as an extension, why did Shakespeare like to introduce characters from another world?
Supernatural elements are of central significance in many of Shakespeare's plays, contributing to their dramatic power and intrigue. Ghosts haunt political spaces and internal psyches, witches foresee the future and disturb the present, fairies meddle with love and a magus conjures a tempest from the elements.
Shakespeare used to write for the stage and these characters from another world were so useful for creating on-stage effects which people of that time loved. Additionally, they provided support to the plot.
reply
Great point about the on-stage special effects. Made me wanna watch a Shakespeare play right now haha
reply