table of Contents Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………………3 The Tool of Power……………………………………………………………………………………………….4 Power as a Means………………………………………………………………………………………………..6 Corruption and End……………………………………………………………………………………………..9 Connexions to Other Plays and Themes……………………………………………………………………11 What Could Have Been………………………………………………………………………………………….13 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………………………………14 Resources………………………………………………………………………………………………………….15 Introduction Power is strange. Power is a display of strength, and of weakness. Power is a display of hardiness, and of delicacy. Power is a display of purity, and of corruption. Power is a powerful tool to wield in hard times as well. As shown in the text of Macbeth written by William Shakespeare, the lust for power is dangerous. Shakespeare has shown indeed, as said by George Orwell in his novel 1984, that “the object of power, is power.” In a series of events organized in acts and scenes, Shakespeare explains a problem in his society and in the current global society. He shows that, as brilliantly explained by Lord John Acton in one of his letters: “All power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” (p.xi) The theme of power in Macbeth is most certainly the central theme of the entire plot, and all the other themes revolve around it, such as supernaturalism. The Weird Sisters tell Macbeth of his invincibility from their summons of apparitions, as in Act 4, Scene 1, lines 95-97, “Be bloody, bold, and resolute. Laugh to scorn the power of man, for none of woman born shall harm Macbeth.” This gives Macbeth even more power, in the psychological and physical sense. The purpose of this essay is to try to understand the theme of power in Macbeth. Although the theme of power is a very broad theme when discussed in general this essay contains the methods and the tools to help understand this broad theme and to make the theme itself be understood generally so that when encountered in any other story or play or text, the theme could be understood in context of the text that is being read. The sections have been divided so that each of the methods used are easy to grasp and helps explain the theme of power in Macbeth. The methods are supported by quotes from text and by simple trial and error. Since Shakespeare’s Macbeth is one of his shorter texts, more analysis had to be done in order to fully understand a broad theme from a very small text. Another point to be understood is why Shakespeare presented the theme of power in such an evil way through Macbeth is the play. Some reasons are thought to be because of the sudden change of Kings in England and the beginning of the Jacobean era, which introduced a line of ‘James’ kings. Although there are many reasons that Shakespeare might have had to write Macbeth in the manner he did it is still a text from a selection of a very few, including War and Peace, Anna Karenina, The Cossacks, and The Death of Ivan Illyrich that explain the theme of power in a spectacular way. The Tool of Power Macbeth himself is only partly a tool for the power he possesses after the plot progressed. Shakespeare also suggests that someone else may be the tool to Macbeth’s power. The most obvious candidate in this situation is Macbeth’s wife, Lady Macbeth. Some seem to argue that it is the Weird Sisters that are the tool to Macbeth’s power, but this is not quite true. The tool of power comes from the originator of the desire of power. In many cases it is inside the person that desires it, but in this case, it is not. Lady Macbeth is the clear culprit. It is difficult to look at a situation in Macbeth, such as looking for the tool of power, and try to derive an answer that seems reasonable because this is not any type of situation that has one solution or answer. According to the text, the Weird Sisters mention Macbeth before Lady Macbeth enters the plotline, but this does not mean that they are the tools of power. Yet it is not a crime to investigate both sides of this argument. The Weird Sisters, in their visit to Macbeth, state: “All hail, Macbeth, that shalt be king hereafter!”(Act 1, Scene 3, line 47) In this powerful statement, the Third Sister digs a hole in Macbeth’s brain that is hard to fill up. Many say that this is the tool of Macbeth’s power, the Weird Sisters themselves. Yet there is something that Macbeth said, after that, that might change a reader’s mind: “By Sinel’s death I know I am Thane of Glamis, but how of Cawdor?”(Act 1, Scene 3, lines 69 and 70) By this, we know that Macbeth is skeptical about the Weird Sisters, and after they vanish a few lines later, he is even more skeptical. Later on, Macbeth questions the incident with the Sisters. He asks himself questions that he cannot answer until they see him again. Ross enters the scene and tells Macbeth that he is now the Thane of Cawdor. Macbeth then harbors his ambitions of becoming King, yet does not know how. This meeting with the Sisters has only hinted the future. It has not stated how Macbeth shall become king. This is when the people who think the Sisters are the culprits do not have much evidence. It is shown that Lady Macbeth is a very fierce, passionate, and influential character. The scenario that is usually taken to prove that Lady Macbeth is the culprit is: replace Lady Macbeth with a woman that is kind, loving, and caring. It is most probable that Macbeth wouldn’t have killed Duncan to claim his throne. The caring Lady Macbeth would dismiss the prophecies and tell him that if he were to become king, he would do so correctly and peacefully, not wrongly and violently. A line that proves Lady Macbeth’s fierceness is: “Yet I do fear thy nature. It is too full o’th’ milk of human kindness to catch the nearest way,”(Act 1, Scene 5, lines 15-17). Macbeth had never thought of slaying the king before Lady Macbeth forced him to do it. This is when the solution to the problem of ‘who is the tool of power’ is becoming clear. To solve this problem completely, we have to look at the events that led to the rise of power of Macbeth. The Sisters told their prophecy to Macbeth, which stated that he would become king. They did not tell him how to become king. Ross tells Macbeth that he is Thane of Cawdor. Lady Macbeth receives Macbeth’s letter telling her of his meeting with the Sisters. She states that “[Macbeth’s nature] is too full o’th’ milk of human kindness to catch the nearest way,” which suggests slaying the current king Duncan. Lady Macbeth persuades Macbeth to assassinate Duncan. She helps with the setup. These events state the following as well: The Sisters had ignited the flame of ambition in Macbeth’s heart to become the King of Scotland. The Sisters did not state how Macbeth would become King of Scotland. Lady Macbeth devises a plan to murder the King and Macbeth raises concerns. She challenges his manhood, saying that “When you durst do it, then you were a man;”(Act 1, Scene 7, line 49) Macbeth kills Duncan So we can finally draw a solution from this analysis. As we all know, everything happens for a reason, and that is evident in the plot woven by Shakespeare. The reason for Macbeth’s ambition for becoming king is the Sisters. Yet the reason for Macbeth becoming king by the means of violence is his wife Lady Macbeth. The two important elements of human life, thoughts and actions, are confused in this case. Macbeth was thinking of becoming king, yet Lady Macbeth persuaded the events that followed. Therefore, the tool of power that ultimately led to the rise of Macbeth as King is Lady Macbeth. But this does not mean that the Sisters had no effect on Macbeth. They did, later on in the play, but not in the rise of Macbeth. The Sisters only gave information to Macbeth. Macbeth used it to achieve an end that is suitable for him. The Sisters never said to kill Duncan, or to kill Banquo, or to the family of Macduff, to stay in power. By that the mystery of who is the tool of power has ended. The tool of power is Lady Macbeth. Power as a Means In general, it is known and it is common to have power as a means to an end. The end is highly debated, but it will be discussed next. Yet many agree that power is a means, not an end. And, according to the first papers of recorded human history to the papers of human history and archaeology that tell us of previous civilizations, none have had power as an end. In Macbeth, this is clearly misunderstood by Macbeth himself and by his wife. They relied to much on the sayings of the Sisters through the second apparition: “Be bloody, bold and resolute. Laugh to scorn the power of man, for none of woman born shall harm Macbeth,”(Act 4, Scene 1, lines 95-97). With this said to Macbeth, he believes that he can maintain his power for all eternity. This implies that he thought of power as an end, and not as a means to another end. There are other reasons for why Macbeth thought that his power is an end, or that his power is a means to an end, and that end is absolute power. The problem with Macbeth is not that he is not smart. That is hardly the problem. The problem with Macbeth was that he was not skeptical enough about the witches. Normally, one as powerful as Macbeth would look at his situation from all possible angles and vertices, but Macbeth didn’t do so. All great leaders have fallen because of this. Alexander the Great never thought about getting sick. Bismarck never expected that his leader would bring him out of office. This presented a grand problem in political power and philosophy: was power an end or was it a means to another end? Although many have great points from both sides, according to history, power was never an end. And even though Macbeth was written as a work of fiction, Shakespeare intended it to have some realistic features. The realistic feature was a most common happening: a coup d’etat. Although in this case it is not purely a coup d’etat, it is very well close. A coup d’etat that was brought underway because Macbeth and his wife, Lady Macbeth, thought that power was an end, not a means, or an end and a means. A great, interesting part about Macbeth was that he was no different than any other great leaders of history. Macbeth never understood his situation very well because he did not take in multiple perspectives, which led to a poor handling of the situation. There has to be a culprit in this situation as well, as we stated in the previous section. The victim of the culprit was simple, Macbeth, and one diagram can explain his situation: {draw:frame} This cycle generally speaks for itself. Also, this is not only the case of Macbeth himself, but the case of many others that have a similar state of mind to Macbeth. Desire is the primary element in this cycle. Desire leads to accolades, or accomplishments, and these accomplishments lead to arrogance. This arrogance leads to even more desire, etc. We can now say that Macbeth had initial desire to become king, which is one of the themes of the story(to be discussed in another essay!). This initial desire, however, did not directly lead to his stunning accomplishment of becoming king. There were a series of factors in the way that caused that, and these being: The Weird Sisters’ influence on Macbeth, from the apparitions that they cast and the predictions that sensationally pleased Macbeth. The ongoing and dangerous influence of Lady Macbeth, which led to the assassination of King Duncan. These two factors essentially reveal the two culprits that we stated in the previous section: Lady Macbeth and the Weird Sisters. This is not really a surprise, to see them as the culprits once more. But this time, Lady Macbeth did not influence Macbeth as much as the Sisters did. We can know create stages of the cycle above from events in the plot of Macbeth: Desire: Macbeth wants to become king. Accomplishment/Accolade: Macbeth kills the king with the help of Lady Macbeth Arrogance: because he claimed the throne in place of the king, he becomes arrogant. This is only when we go through the cycle once, and this has already been discussed. The culprit in this case, as we said in the last section, is Lady Macbeth. If we travel through the cycle a second time, our results are: Desire: Macbeth wants to stay king and impose his rule on the Isles(Scotland, Ireland, and Britain) Accomplishment/Accolade: Macbeth disposes of most of the people that can overthrow him, leaving him to be worried, not arrogant. Arrogance: Macbeth finds time to visit the Sisters once again, and three apparitions convince Macbeth that he is invincible. By taking another drive through the cycle, we’ve found out that Macbeth is more arrogant than ever, creating a weakness, not a strength. This arrogance blinded him from the future ahead. This is section of Macbeth’s plot where we see that Macbeth made a big mistake: he did not question the Sisters’ apparitions. He believed them to be true because they simply pleased him and told him what he wanted to hear, which is not enough. From this, we can draw this conclusion: this is when Macbeth believed that his power as king would be an end, and not a means. The apparitions that appeared to him had convinced Macbeth that he cannot be killed, and this is where Macbeth became his own fall: because his arrogance had embraced the sayings of the apparitions without question. Sequentially, whatever happened after Macbeth heard the apparitions of the Sisters was not because of the great army that Siward brought forth to his castle or the strength of the army. It was the mistakes of Macbeth, which led to a poor defense of the castle and eventually the death of Macbeth. In the last scene, Macbeth says: “I will not yield to kiss the ground before young Malcolm’s feet, and to be baited with the rabble’s curse. Though Birnam Wood be come to Dunsinane, and thou opposed being of no woman born, yet I will try the last. Before my body I throw my warlike shield. Lay on, Macduff, and damned be him that first cries, ‘Hold! Enough!’”(Act 5, Scene 10, lines 28-34) Macbeth sees his mistake only in the end, which is clearly is not good enough. He is slain by Macduff only seconds later, as the stage directions state. Conclusions we can sketch in detail from these events from Shakespeare’s Macbeth are: power is a means, and not an end. Corruption and end In the previous section we talked about power being a mean, and not an end. In the previous two sections, we analyzed the balance of power between the characters in Macbeth in chronological order. In section one we analyzed the beginning of the plot, and in section two we analyzed the ending of the plot. In this section we will analyze the short reign of Macbeth, which was the middle part of the plot, taking into consideration the theme of power. The reign of Macbeth was similar to the reigns of many kings before him. Both Macbeth and these kings had thought of power as a means to an end of power or as just an end, which led to a result well known and discussed by scholars and politicians worldwide: corruption. Yet, although Macbeth was similar, he was not exactly the same. He had one part of him that many did not: evil. Corruption and evil are dangerously proportional, making the crux of Macbeth being king great. Although Macbeth did not appear very evil at first, his desires were fuelled evilly. Yet, in the political sense, corruption suited Macbeth best. After Macbeth came to power as King of Scotland, his desire, as we mentioned, was to stay in power. He did this in a very strange, corrupt, and wicked way. He ordered murders of Scottish nobility that are likely to destroy him. This is a very risky method, and a method that Macbeth would likely take. There were certainly other options, but Macbeth was driven by the predictions of the Sisters and did not open his mind to any other possibility. For the sake of the character of Macbeth, let us state some alternatives to his decision: It was in the power of Macbeth to rule benevolently. In this manner, he can gain the trust of Macduff, Malcolm, and the young prince Donalbain, and through time gain the trust of the other Isles of Ireland and Britain. Macbeth would do the above, and as a result, kill all in a massacre, which will destroy any chance for somebody to annihilate Macbeth. Both options are risky, but the second option is increasingly risky. The killing of the nobility would create more suspicions than Macbeth would want. Therefore the favorable decision in this case is option one, and not option two, for the sake of safety and time of rule. Obviously Macbeth did not choose this route, but that is not in his power, because Shakespeare had written the play down. But if this were to be a real life situation, in which it was in many cases in history (Surely!), Macbeth would’ve made a grave mistake. Macbeth sent murderers to kill Banquo and his son, and killed Macduff’s family the resided in Scotland. This triggered two things: the increase of Scottish nobility awareness of Macbeth’s dangerous nature and Macduff’s confirmed suspicions of Macbeth, who, according to the first apparition presented by the Sisters, Macbeth should be aware of. This also goes back to the cycle that we drove through in the previous section. Because of the Sister’s previous prophecy that Macbeth would become king, this gave Macbeth some arrogance. As a result of that arrogance, he ordered the killings of Banquo and Fleance, and Macduff’s family. Macbeth’s power made him corrupt. There is no other culprit to blame. Obviously, the previous culprits, the Sisters and Lady Macbeth are involved in the reason for his corruption but it is ultimately his power that corrupts him. His power eventually corrupts his very nature and speech, and since Shakespeare’s Macbeth involves themes of supernaturalism, some think it even affected his physical looks. The middle part of the storyline is what most affected the ending. The balance of power in Scotland in the middle part of the storyline was strange and unstable, causing for it to be a dangerous time to live in and reside in Scotland as a noble. This power brought corruption, and Macbeth’s initial morals and ‘human kindness’ were diminished by this power, and as said by Immanuel Kant, “A metaphysics of morals is therefore indispensably necessary, not merely because of a motive to speculation— for investigating the source of the practical basic principles that lie a priori in our reason— but also because morals themselves remain subject to all sorts of corruption as long as we are without that clue and supreme norm by which to appraise them correctly.” Macbeth’s morals remained subject to all sorts of corruption, and eventually his morals disappeared, creating only corruption bound by power. As we know, Macbeth was killed by Macduff’s hand in the end. In the previous section we talked about power as a means. The end to that means in the case of Macbeth and in the case of many was corruption. This is the theme that Shakespeare was trying to express, although it is not clear on the surface. It may not seem clear, but after some analysis and conclusions, this is an arguable statement. Therefore, corruption is an end to a means, and that means is political power. Corruption is not only political corruption, however. The corruption is moral, as stated previously, physical, mental, psychological, effecting how he speaks and how he looks, how he feels and how he sees things, that is why power is a dangerous thing. Even though Macbeth chose the path of purity over corruption, the results would be as dangerous because he is still not looking at a situation from all angles, edges and perspectives. In a conclusion, power in Shakespeare’s Macbeth is closely tied to corruption, and that is the subtheme under the theme of power that Shakespeare presented in this play. This theme is the least obvious from the other themes, such as supernaturalism, witchcraft, ghosts, war, and tragic characters. Corruption and end go hand in hand, as corruption is an end to power, which is a means to an end. Connexions to other plays and themes The theme of power in Shakespeare’s Macbeth is a theme of great use in Shakespeare’s other plays. It might not be expressed in the same way as Macbeth, but it is generally the same template of the theme of power. The other Shakespeare plays that are similar to Macbeth in this power theme are Antony and Cleopatra, making a reference to him in Act 3, Scene 1, lines 57 & 58, “My genius is rebuked as, it is said, Mark Antony’s was by Caesar.” Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra and Macbeth are closely related in terms of plot and type of conflict. Both Antony and Macbeth are fighting for power and have an enemy to face in order to get to power. In the case of Macbeth it was Banquo and in the case of Antony it was Octavius Caesar. There are also two major female characters in both plays: in Antony and Cleopatra it is Queen Cleopatra of Egypt, and in Macbeth it is Lady Macbeth. This, if we pay attention closely, supports a statement we made in the one of the previous sections. Macbeth was not the only person in history looking for power and looking at power as an end. Antony had furiously planned to battle Octavius and best him, but it did not turn in favor of Antony. Losing the naval battle, he attempted to attack Octavius on land, but before the battle could commence, a failed plan of Cleopatra caused Antony to ask one of his soldiers to kill him. The soldier eventually kills himself, and Antony, trying to do the same, only wounded himself. He then finds Cleopatra and dies in her arms. This information tells us that Macbeth, and many others before him and after him had tried to gain power, and when this power is gained, their life is lost by corruption. In Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra, it was a more dramatic death of Antony, more or so like the death of Romeo and Juliet: there was a huge misunderstanding in plans. In Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, both lover kill themselves dramatically: “[Romeo speaking]O true apothecary, thy drugs are quick! Thus with a kiss I die,” (Act 5, Scene 3, lines 119-120) and “[Juliet speaking]O happy dagger, this is thy sheath! There rust, and let me die.”(Act 5, Scene 3, lines 168-169). In Macbeth there was a misunderstanding surely, but it was not a misunderstanding that did not involve Macbeth directly, such as in Romeo and Juliet and Antony and Cleopatra. The misunderstanding was all in Macbeth’s hands. He misunderstood power and how to use it, and that is one of the subthemes of the theme of power in Shakespeare’s Macbeth as well. We can connect most of Shakespeare’s plays to themselves not by plot events, but by themes. When we find similar themes, as we just did right now between Antony and Cleopatra and Macbeth, we can make connections that can help us understand either play from many perspectives. This also helps us understand why the theme was chosen by Shakespeare for the play, because many themes accommodate each other. For example, a man in power is likely to have super strength or intellectual capabilities that a normal human does not have, and in the case of Macbeth, the theme of supernaturalism and witchcraft accommodates the theme of power. The theme of power in Macbeth can only be fully understood when we make connections to other texts. After looking at Antony and Cleopatra and Romeo and Juliet, we might not see exactly similar themes but we might not see exact themes between Romeo and Juliet and Macbeth either, but again, it would not be a crime to investigate. As we said before, themes accommodate other themes. And in the case of Macbeth, the theme of death accommodates power, and we can make another connection here by stating that death is an end to a means. So, we can compare the theme of death in _Romeo and _Juliet and in Macbeth by stating how, when and why Romeo, Juliet and Macbeth died: We can see two common factors in the deaths of these three characters: they were first killed very shortly after achieving what they wanted (in Macbeth’s case it was becoming King and in Romeo and Juliet’s case was running away), and that the reason for their deaths was because of a misunderstanding. This is of course not the same misunderstanding, but it is categorized as a misunderstanding. The misunderstanding in Macbeth’s case was his haste to solve his problem with the Scottish nobles and in the case of Romeo and Juliet it was Romeo’s misunderstanding of Friar Laurence’s plan. Therefore the theme of death is closely related to the theme of power, because in Shakespeare’s Macbeth the end to Macbeth’s means was death, so the theme of death is another subtheme to the theme of power in Macbeth. In Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, Cassius explains death: “But life, being weary of these wordly bars, never lacks power to dismiss itself,” (Act 1, Scene 3, lines 95 and 96). These several connections made between the plays have helped us understand the theme of power by understanding its subthemes in Macbeth. We also have to understand that themes accommodate each other, and when we understand that it is much easier to comprehend any major theme in general, such as the theme of power in Macbeth. What could have been In many cases harmony is not a result when somebody comes to power. However, in the very few cases that it does, this harmony can have an impact on the leaders to come, and how they decide to rule. If we assume Macbeth was a real, living character at the time, he would have done things differently. There was as much a possibility of Macbeth being a benevolent king than a malevolent one. Although many are not fans of realist fiction, it helps to look at fictional stories this way to understand them because, we are not fictional characters in a story. We are real and cannot possibly disappear to only be described in words or portrayed by actors in movies. This method of looking at Macbeth in a realist way will help us understand the theme of power in Macbeth. Macbeth surely had the goodness in him to become a great king of Scotland, but it was by the hand of his wife that he turned evil and corrupt, but that is only the plot of the story. We have to create a possible plot that would’ve happened to Macbeth. There are two possible plots: Macbeth’s evil route and Macbeth’s good route. Since the evil route was already written by Shakespeare in the form of a play, we will outline the good route. {draw:frame} If Macbeth were true, it was equally possible for him to follow the above route rather than the evil route that Shakespeare wrote about. When we take consideration this possibility, we see another face to power that Shakespeare has not presented in Macbeth: good power. Reasons for this are not exactly confirmed but some say that because Macbeth was written in the Jacobean era in England, Shakespeare intended to show King James some kings that were the exact opposite of him so that James can be pleased with Shakespeare’s work. In the above plot possibility diagram, Macbeth has to have two things in him that very few other kings had, and this is best stated by Leo Tolstoy in his novel War and Peace(Book 10, Chapter 16): “…But believe me, my dear boy [Prince Andrew], there is nothing stronger than those two: patience and time, they will do it all.” If Macbeth had patience and time on his hands, then he would surely choose this path rather than the path of bloodshed and violence. The creation of a possible plot as displayed by the diagram above has helped us understand the theme of power in general. When we understand this broad theme from all angles, then we can grasp all the other themes of a story or play like Shakespeare’s Macbeth. Conclusion In the sections that were aiming to understand the theme of power in Shakespeare’s Macbeth there was a variety of methods used to help to understand the theme of power and it’s subthemes. But, to understand the theme more broadly, we have to accept the message that Shakespeare was trying to send through the play. When we understand this message, and this message can vary when searched for by different people, we can understand the theme of power in Shakespeare’s Macbeth. The methods outlined in the sections before this one can be used in any other novel, play, script, and could be describing any other theme. Yet, when the themes vary, the sections are about something else. As a play and as a piece of work from Shakespeare’s vast collections of other works, Macbeth is a text that explains a lot of information in only a few pages. Many think when they see or read Macbeth, that because it is one of Shakespeare’s shortest plays, it does not contain much, but it is hardly the case. Shakespeare was able to manifest the theme of power physically (or as we say, literally) in Macbeth, and because of the times that he was living in, he wrote Macbeth so that it would be about power and corruption to please the King of England at his time. As a theme, power is extremely broad to explain, but as in Macbeth, Shakespeare aims to the theme of political power. He explains, in one short play, how power corrupts people. It takes more than strict and detailed analysis to comprehend the theme of power in Macbeth. We have to look at other plays, not necessarily by Shakespeare himself, to also find out that the theme of power in Macbeth is only a fraction of the actual theme of power used in numerous other stories. “She should have died hereafter. There would have been a time for such a word. Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow creeps in this petty pace from day to day to the last syllable of recorded time, and all our yesterdays have lighted fools the way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle. Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more. It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”(Act 5, Scene 5, lines 17-27) Resources Orwell, George. Nineteen Eighty-Four. England: Penguin, 2000 Acton, John. Essays on Freedom and Power. Boston: The Beacon Press, 1948 Paul Wolff, Robert, editor. Modern Studies in philosophy: A collection of critical essays: Kant. Great Britain: Macmillan and Co. LTD, 1968 Kant, Immanuel, translator Thomas Kingsmill Abbot. Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals. (place unknown): Forgotten Books, 2008. Conger, George Perrigo. A Course in Philosophy. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1924 Tolstoy, Leo. Three Novels: The Cossacks, War and Peace, Anna Karenina (p.639). United States: Barnes and Noble, Inc., 2007
