Macbeth
Roger Peters Copyright © 2002
The previous commentaries in this volume followed the development of
Shakespeare�s philosophy through the long poems of 1593 and 1594 and the
shorter poems of 1601 and 1609, to show that the Sonnets were published
in 1609 as the definitive expression of a philosophy that had its gestation in
the period before the first plays written in the early 1590s. The commentaries
have also shown that Love�s Labour�s Lost (1596) and Measure for Measure
(1604) cannot be understood except as intended expressions of the
philosophy eventually articulated in the Sonnets.
Before considering the evidence for the philosophy in Shakespeare�s last
history play (Henry VIII, 1613), the present commentary will demonstrate that
the Tragedy of Macbeth (1606) cannot be understood except in terms of the
Sonnet philosophy. The priority of Nature, the dynamic of female and male,
the increase argument, and the logic of truth and beauty are pivotal to the
meaning of the play. Beginning with the forces of Nature and the Witches�
refrain of the first few lines that ends with, �fair is foul, and foul is fair�(1.1.12),
the play is based in Shakespeare�s appreciation of the natural logic of life.
By articulating his philosophy definitively in a set of sonnets, Shakespeare
avoided the issues of authenticity that arose when the plays were reworked for
varying performance conditions and for the unregulated publishing market.
However much a play was altered, cut, or rewritten for the playhouses and for
publication, the Sonnet philosophy provides a common point of reference for
the author�s content.
Because the Sonnet philosophy has not been understood for 400 years,
it has not been possible for commentators to determine the meaning of the
plays. Disputes over interpretation arise principally because of their ignorance
of the Sonnet philosophy. Their problems multiply when there are two
or more versions of the same play. In their desire to resolve real or perceived
difficulties, they criticise or offer remedies that invariably reveal their psychological
or religious prejudices.
Macbeth is one of eighteen plays for which the 1623 Folio provides the
only version. Unlike Hamlet, Othello and King Lear, there are no bad or
doubtful quartos to add to the complexity of interpretation. Yet the text of
Macbeth still arouses debate. Commentators, ignorant of the Sonnet philosophy,
are doubly dissatisfied when they expect the play to be sympathetic
to their traditional beliefs.
Because Macbeth is one of the shorter plays, they suggest Shakespeare or
someone else had a hand in its abridgment. Ironically, again, they remedy
the supposed difficulties according to their religious prejudices. While some
think the play was abridged, others think it is complete as it is. Even amongst
those who want changes or additions, there is an acceptance that the Folio
text is surprisingly coherent, leading to the circular suggestion that maybe
Shakespeare himself did the shortening.
The nature of the debate is symptomatic of the commentators� ignorance
of the Sonnet philosophy. Because the philosophy articulated in the
Sonnets is the philosophy behind all the play and poems, an appreciation of
its logic is required to reveal the play�s meaning. And because the philosophy
corrects centuries of biblical and Platonic apologetics, the discomfort
commentators experience is a consequence of having their traditional psychological
expectations profoundly challenged by Shakespeare�s consistent
philosophy.
Analysis of Macbeth
Nature is the constant background against which the tragedy of Macbeth
unfolds and finds its resolution. The forces of Nature in the form of
�Thunder and Lightning� precede the first words of the Witches. And the
Witches speak first because they represent the logic of the female derived
from Nature, albeit in a form affected by the orthodox male-based delusions
typified by Macbeth.
Thunder and Lightning. Enter three Witches.
First Witch. When will we three meet again?
In Thunder, Lightning, or in Rain?
Second Witch. When the Hurley-burley's done,
When the Battle's lost, and won.
Third Witch. That will be ere the set of Sun.
First Witch. Where the place?
Second Witch. Upon the Heath.
Third Witch. There to meet with Macbeth.
First Witch. I come, Gray-Malkin.
All. Padock call anon: fair is foul, and foul is fair,
Hover through the fog and filthy air. (1.1.2-13)
The priority of Nature over the female and the female over the male,
established in the first lines of Macbeth, is in keeping with the priority of
Nature over the sexual dynamic in the Sonnets. The word Nature/nature
occurs frequently throughout the play, whereas the word God occurs infrequently.
It appears in a greeting, as an expletive, or is used by a character
(principally Malcolm) whose initial youthful idealism is associated with the
adolescent psychology of traditional religious belief.
Although the male God appears infrequently, his logical counterparts,
the Devil and the Witches, are ubiquitously present throughout the play.
The three Witches in particular represent the corruption of the feminine
intuition by the excessive male-based expectations idealised as God.
Shakespeare uses Macbeth�s self-serving faith in the Witches� predictions
to parody the illogicality of belief in the priority of a male God over
Nature.
The transformation of idealised good into its logical opposite evil is
addressed throughout the Sonnet sequence to the Master Mistress and
throughout the plays. Sonnet 14 is specific in dismissing faith in �heaven�
and the telling of �fortunes� as a basis for truth and beauty. It argues in favour
of a logic based in the sexual dynamic in Nature. In Macbeth, Shakespeare
examines the consequences when sainted �nobleness� and �honour� are
divorced from natural logic. Macbeth�s transition from honour and goodness
to an illogical faith in the Witches reflects the self-regard behind his previous
achievements.
But sonnet 14 not only dismisses faith and augury as a basis for judgment.
It also brings to a logical conclusion the increase argument of the first 14
sonnets. Without the possibility of increase, there can be no judgment or
knowledge. As the play unfolds, Macbeth�s disregard for natural logic is
apparent in both his dependency on self-serving ideals and in his (and Lady
Macbeth�s) explicit rejection of the logic of increase. Not surprisingly then,
as the Macbeths follow God/Satan into the hell of excessive idealism and
swear off children, they are haunted by the image of a baby, which recurs
throughout the play.
So, beginning with the Witches� incantation, Shakespeare signals his
intention to examine the implosion that occurs when idealised belief shows
a disregard for natural logic. He begins with an acknowledgment of the
priority of the female in Nature but, by introducing the female in the form
of a witch, he indicates that the female is initially viewed through the
prejudice of male-based ideals.
In the Mistress sequence of the Sonnets, beauty and truth are derived from
the female, who is at unity with Nature. The logical progression from
Nature, through the sexual dynamic to beauty and then truth, means truth
is not a self-sufficient quality but a process of continuous judgment between
right and wrong based in natural logic. The Witches give witness to their
inherent female logic by expressing their sensitivity to the logic of truth with
their refrain �fair is foul and foul is fair�, and their prediction that the �battle�
will be �lost, and won�.
As with the Sonnet philosophy, the characters in Macbeth represent both
people in the world and personae in the mind. The play establishes a logical
relation between the characters in the drama and the psychological dynamic
of the mind. The Witches exist at the periphery of Macbeth�s everyday
world, but are also representatives of his state of mind under the influence
of excessive male-based idealism. Because Shakespeare�s logic is impeccable,
commentators who expect a literal history play or sympathy for their malebased
beliefs are seriously disturbed by the underlying philosophy, which
challenges both prejudices.
The first scene, then, establishes the play as a battleground where Shakespeare
will demonstrate his natural logic through characters that represent its
argument places. In the first few lines, he outlines the logic of the action that,
by the end of the play, shows a way out of the �foggy and filthy air� of malebased
delusions. Consistent with the Witches�prediction that the battle will be
�lost, and won�, Macbeth is the heroic winner who then loses his judgment.
But, by the play�s end, his loss enables Malcolm to become a more circumspect
winner. From Macbeth�s good comes evil, and from his evil comes good.
When scene 2 opens, the Witches� allusion to a �battle� is given dramatic
form in the �bloody� fight between King Duncan and his foes. Appropriately,
Shakespeare introduces the male dynamic in scene 2, after Nature and the
female dynamic were introduced in scene 1. The distinction between female
and male is immediately apparent in that the female logic has an overview
of the battle, whereas the males are blindly immured within it.
The description of the battle by the sergeant/captain at the beginning
of the scene, establishes the play as a critique of the male-based excesses,
and in particular of Christ�s bloody sacrifice at Calvary. The �bloody man�
who enters in the first line, as a symbol of male intransigence, is compared
forty lines later to the definitive expression of male bloodletting epitomised
by the �reeking Wounds� of Christ on �Golgotha�.
What bloody man is that? he can report,
As seemeth by his plight, of the Revolt
The newest state. (1.2.18-20)
Except they meant to bathe in reeking Wounds,
Or memorise another Golgotha. (1.2.60-1)
Shakespeare begins Macbeth with the recognition that the pivotal moment
in biblical transcendence is a bloody consequence of the illogical prioritising
of the male over the female. When the sergeant/captain or �bloody man�
describes the �rebel� forces of Macdonwald as �multiplying the Villainies of
Nature�, he gives voice to the dire contradictions that occur when male-based
aspirations prevail against the priority and balance of Nature.
...continued in Volume 3, William Shakespeare's Sonnet Philosophy
Back to Top
Roger Peters Copyright © 2002
Introduction
Venus and Adonis
Lucrece
Love's Labour's Lost
The Phoenix and the Turtle
Measure for Measure
Macbeth
A Lover's Complaint
|
