Erin Brummett Bridgewater College

Moral Lessons Within Macbeth and Othello: The Individual vs. Society
It is not unlike Shakespeare to bring to the surface the puzzling question of how his tragic heroes represent the moral and ethical guidelines to which his readers or audiences should adhere in their own personal lives. Some of the more common responses to this inquiry revolve around the ideals of becoming more wise and honest individuals or shedding those negative characteristics such as jealousy or pride. The widely accepted factor that ties all of these responses together is that Shakespeare is inevitably trying to display the faults and flaws of society as opposed to the individual so that his audience can learn and grow from their personal mistakes. It can be argued, however, that the flaws which are represented by many of the characters in Shakespeare's tragedies do not adhere to the collective flaws of society. For many of them, death and destruction fall on their heads because of individualistic errors and imperfections that do not apply to society as a whole. This argument can be examined through various plots and character analyses taken from two of Shakespeare's most prominent tragic plays. Before the analysis of the tragedies can take place, it is essential to understand the definition of a tragedy and how an audience might perceive and endure its tragic plight. In his work King Lear, Macbeth, Indefinition, and Tragedy, Stephen Booth relates tragedy to humanity's willingness and ability to comprehend what lies outside of normal behavior for the average individual. He says, "We use the word tragedy when we are confronted with a sudden invasion of our finite consciousness by the fact of infinite possibility" (85). Booth believes that individuals find comfort in believing that "dramatic tragedy happens on the stage and not in the

Brummett 2

audience" (86). It is because of this interpretation of tragedy that it becomes difficult for an audience as a collective society to sometimes relate to the moral lessons identified in a play. Tragedy occurs within the lives of individual characters who are seen as separate from the normalcy of real life. To move into a more in-depth definition of tragedy, one can turn to critic Toby Widdicombe. In his work entitled Simply Shakespeare, Widdicombe compiles a list of eleven characteristics that can be attributed to Shakespeare's tragedies. Two of these characteristics have a striking relevance to the idea that the tragedies depict at least one or more moral lessons that can be learned from the actions and behaviors of their significant characters. Specifically, the eighth characteristic states, "The tragedies show humanity's weaknesses as inevitable. The best anyone can do is to learn from them" (Widdicombe 140). This occurs through the misfortunes of the tragic hero or through the faults of society. The fifth characteristic shares a similar premise of humanity's struggle, and yet it concentrates more so on the fact that individuals falter due to the burden of societal pressures. It states that the tragedies "dramatize the struggle between full self-realization and the acquiescence to social norms" (Widdicombe 137). This second characteristic is somewhat less convincing in its interpretation of why characters suffer misfortunes in Shakespeare's tragedies. The reason for its lack of conviction can be found when observing the primary goals of the tragic characters in Shakespeare's plays which eventually lead them to their death or, in worse circumstances, the untimely death of others. Every Shakespearean tragedy encompasses a tragic hero, and in most cases, other characters that assist the tragic hero in his or her hardships. When analyzing the flaws

Brummett 3

within these characters, it becomes evident that one overarching theme seems to arise. In some way or another, these tragic characters are searching to gain political power. While this does not always include striving toward becoming king and attaining the crown, this plot is seen multiple times in the tragedies and in Shakespeare's histories and comedies alike. It is because of this goal of achieving political success that the argument can be made that the flaws that occur within the tragedies are more representative of particular individuals who are privy to certain lifestyles than to the general public. Take, for example, the tragedy of Macbeth. The character Macbeth does not display irrational behavior relating to excessive pride until after he has heard the prophecy from the three witches that he is to become king and has been given reassurance from his wife that the prophecy is sure to come true. Even after his initial encounter with the witches, it does not take long for Macbeth to accept their prophecy: MACBETH. If chance will have me king, why, chance may crown me Without my stir. (1.3.145-146) It is during this aside that Macbeth tries to rationalize the prophecy and eventually comes to the conclusion that he will accept whatever fate brings him. The duration of the play revolves around his quest to receive the power that he comes to believe is due him. It is his pride and coercion by evil-doers that leads to his destruction. While the moral lesson of refraining from such pride and evil can apply to all humanity, the reason behind Macbeth's political greed and thus his learned lesson of reducing its power is not applicable to many individuals. Not everyone who reads Macbeth or watches it performed on stage is in a position to appreciate or even have the slightest chance of achieving some type of

Brummett 4

political power. Therefore, many viewers could simply turn the other cheek and respond to Macbeth's moral lesson as one that is only befitting for individuals who lived during a time when kings still reigned over society. Or, viewers could feel as though the moral lesson would not apply to them if they were in no position to gain political power based on their social standing. The point here is that Macbeth's moral lesson is restricted to that of a certain kind of individual. In Shakespeare's era, that individual would most unquestionably be a white man with a significant social standing among the aristocrats or nobility. In modern times, the individual could be male or female but, in order to be moved by the moral lesson, would more than likely fit the description of a politically and socially involved, upper-class individual. This is not to suggest that no one except this type of individual could possibly gain a moral revelation from learning about the tragedy of Macbeth. The fact remains, however, that the assumption cannot be made that Shakespeare's tragedies will always reveal a weakness of humanity that is applicable to society as a whole. Harley Granville-Barker depicts an important factor relating to the influence of Macbeth's evil deeds that take this idea of application even further. He argues that the prophecy Macbeth receives is what Shakespeare uses to form his character. Granville-Barker says, "He is imaginative enough, yet not by nature or choice introspective. He sees the conflict as in an apocalyptic vision" (78). To say that the very prophecy that molds Macbeth through the entirety of the play is an "apocalyptic vision" distinguishes Macbeth from his audience almost immediately. For most individuals, influence does not derive from such a vision and thus, once again, relevance of the character in the play to the audience is removed. In conjunction with this premise, another important factor of connectedness to the character of Macbeth comes into play. In Killing the King: Three Studies in Shakespeare's

Brummett 5

Tragic Structure, Maynard Mack Jr. claims that Shakespeare depicts Macbeth as a villain beyond full comprehension due to his murderous deeds. He regards how Malcolm refers to Macbeth and his wife as "this dead butcher, and his fiend-like queen" in the final speech of the play (5.8.70). Mack Jr. says, "We understand why Malcolm and his followers should feel and speak so, and within limits we know them to be right. But only within limits. This is their Macbeth; it is not quite ours" (156). Mack Jr. makes a vital point here when claiming that there remains a distance between the morality of the characters and that of the audience due to the comprehension of the activities that develop during the course of the play. Another argument to make when using the example of Macbeth is that the tragic hero or other prominent characters within the tragedies are not always cornered and pressured into committing evil acts by society. In many ways, these characters have the choice of turning towards evil and thus falling prey to temptation and sin. They could care less about the burdens of conforming to social norms. They are much more concerned with themselves in which their own self-indulgence gets in the way of society's views. This contradicts Widdicombe's fifth characteristic of tragedies which claims that social norms work alongside self-realization to pull characters back and forth along a continuum of internal and external struggles. This characteristic applies to some of the tragic characters in Shakespeare's plays, but many of them seem to turn towards evil out of their own free will and desire. A classic example of this would be the evil and conniving nature of Lady Macbeth. She is seen in the very first Act of the play soliciting her husband to kill the king while he dines and sleeps at their home in order to ensure her husband's promising future. Lady Macbeth makes it clear while talking with her husband that there is no reason why they should fail in their attempt to kill the king:

Brummett 6

LADY MACBETH. When in swinish sleep Their drenchd natures lies as in a death, What cannot you and I perform upon Th'unguarded Duncan? (1.7.68-71) She is completely confident in herself as well as in the objective of the murder. In this passage and in the surrounding text, there is no reference to any social norms that seem to have pressured her into her murderous plan. In this way, her evil strategies remain an individualistic intention apart from society. Turning to another tragedy, the character of Iago in Shakespeare's Othello shares a very similar nature to that of Lady Macbeth. Critics like to refer to Othello as a tragedy of jealousy because the character of Othello becomes enraged and murderous with his wife Desdemona merely from hearsay that she has been unfaithful to him and their sanctity of marriage. This is where the theme of appearance and reality takes shape most prominently because Othello cannot distinguish between truth and deception. And it is true that Iago serves as the individual who persuades Othello that Desdemona has committed adultery; therefore, as the tragic hero of the play, Othello falls prey to the pressures of society and the standard of marriage from social norms. Othello's hasty adherence to Iago's deceit does however make a statement about his instinctive behavior that is perhaps influenced by society but inevitably comes from within. While Othello tells Iago that he must prove that his wife has been unfaithful before he believes it to be true, he makes comments that lead the audience to believe that he has already made up his mind as to her guilt before the proof surfaces. After Iago's initial discussion with Othello in

Brummett 7

which he lays the foundation for jealousy and suspicion, Othello questions his marriage to Desdemona: OTHELLO. She's gone. I am abused, and my relief Must be to loathe her. Oh, curse of marriage, That we can call these delicate creatures ours And not their appetites! (3.3.283-286) The thought of Desdemona committing adultery with Cassio is too much for Othello to take as depicted in this passage. He contemplates here not only the fact that he is inherently different from his wife due to the fact that he is a Moor, but he also questions marriage as an act that is doomed to eventually fail. In this light, Othello can be viewed as an individual who lacks a certain element of self-confidence but also trust in those whom he claims to love most. These issues of trust and self-esteem are possibly what lead him to his tragic end. Othello's audiences can most certainly relate to these issues. Most of them cannot, however, relate to his social position as a Moor which is what distinguishes him among his peers in a detrimental manner more so than a beneficial one and is perhaps the cause of his inherent flaws. Unlike Othello, Iago is a character who needs no persuasion or coercion to commit to his evil doings. In the first Act of the play, much like Lady Macbeth, Iago declares his hatred for Othello and designs a plan to seek revenge on him: IAGO. The Moor is of a free and open nature, That thinks men honest that but seem to be so, And will as tenderly be led by the nose As asses are. (1.3.400-403)

Brummett 8

In this design, Iago also seeks a position of power. He feels cheated of the position of lieutenant that has been given to Michael Cassio. Once again, an attribute of one of Shakespeare's tragic characters does not apply to the widespread community. The argument can be made that individuals should find the innate goodness within themselves instead of the evil as Iago does in Othello, but this is easier said than done. If Iago turns to evil chiefly because he believes that he has been robbed of a political position that was due him, then how is the audience of this tragedy supposed to relate to the moral lesson that lies beneath the plot? The audience could most certainly look to the misfortunes of the character Othello and find the moral lesson that humanity should become less jealous especially when that jealousy spurs from an illegitimate source of information. But what should humanity learn from Iago? To be less evil? The question that remains looming over this play and many other tragedies is how individuals should shed all thoughts of evil. If one of Shakespeare's characters could not turn away from evil, how is the audience supposed to learn to do this? This is especially troubling when realizing that Iago's nature as a human being is not innately good but innately sinful. In Shakespearean Tragedy: Lectures on Hamlet, Othello, King Lear, Macbeth, A. C. Bradley states that "evil has nowhere else been portrayed with such mastery as in the character of Iago" (207). He also believes that it is Iago's greediness for power and his willful spirit that brings him to his own destruction. He says, "Iago stands supreme among Shakespeare's evil characters because the greatest intensity and subtlety of imagination have gone to his making" (232). If this is the case, then there is no hope that Iago will change his evil ways; therefore, the moral lesson does not apply to all of humanity because not everyone in the world (whether living in Shakespeare's era or in the 21st century) shares the same inherent nature as Iago.

Brummett 9

The debatable argument continues that while many of the trials and tribulations that are represented in Shakespeare's tragedies seem to apply a moral lesson to society as a whole, many of Shakespeare's tragic characters reveal issues of morality that remain applicable only to the individual. This claim, as represented through the characters within Macbeth and Othello, holds significance based on two main premises. The first being that many of Shakespeare's characters turn to tragic events due to their positions of power, most notably political positions. This reality does not apply to the majority of individuals reading or viewing the tragedies. Secondly, it has been examined through character analyses that many of the tragic characters are not pressured into their evil-doings by society; rather, they are innately sinful based on their own free will which distances them from the average individual. A moral lesson can be found, most undoubtedly, from every Shakespeare tragedy. The question remains, however, how society can learn from those lessons when the issue of morality seems to be trapped within the confines of the plays' textual or performed realities.

Brummett 10

Works Cited

Bevington, David. The Necessary Shakespeare. New York: Longman, 2002. Booth, Stephen. King Lear, Macbeth, Indefinition, and Tragedy. New Haven: Yale UP, 1983. Bradley, A. C. Shakespearean Tragedy: Lectures on Hamlet, Othello, King Lear, Macbeth. London: Macmillan and Co., 1937. Granville-Barker, Harley. A Companion to Shakespeare Studies. Ed. Harley GranvilleBarker and G. B. Harrison. London: Cambridge UP, 1940. Mack, Maynard, Jr. Killing the King: Three Studies in Shakespeare's Tragic Structure. New Haven: Yale UP, 1973. Widdicombe, Toby. Simply Shakespeare. New York: Longman, 2002.