"I have no spur to prick the sides of my intent."
His thoughts remained confused during the murder, as he visualised,
"A dagger of mind, a false creation"
We can see that Macbeth can be interpreted differently, as it would have applied to different societies. Macbeth was written in a time of uncertainty after James I becomes heir to Elizabeth I. In the 16th century the society still believed in the divine right of a king to rule the country, and as Macbeth did not rule by this right, it was only acceptable for the society that he deserved what he got. The play could have also been seen as a warning to James I, who was not seen to have this right. Whereas in the 21st century view point the Macbeth would be seen as a more political play, and the character of Macbeth could be seen more of a person whose ambition and greed leads him to his downfall, real life examples would include Joseph Estrada of the Philippines.
We can see two different interpretations of Macbeth made by two different directors, Orson Welles and Roman Polanski. In the Welles version, Macbeth seems more ruthless, and probably less human. He is portrayed as a weak, gullible man underneath the control of his wife, Lady Macbeth. On the other hand Polanski portrayal of Macbeth perhaps more human. For example when the witches told him,
"All hail Macbeth! That shalt be king hereafter."
In the Welles version, Macbeth became curious, and sought for more information, and in that instant thought of regicide, while in the Polanski version, the Macbeth didn't take the witches seriously, but eventually believed the witches, when predictions started to come true. Another example of the differences in the portrayal of Macbeth would be his soliloquies. When he considers the regicide. In the Welles version, Macbeth was portrayed as a ruthless man considering regicide, while in the Polanski version, Macbeth was more of at an uncertainty point. This could be due to different expectation of the audiences of the time. In 1947, just at the end of the Second World War, the audiences were probably more simplistic. At the end of the reigns of dictator, a play like Macbeth, which portrays the downfall of a "tyrant," would be easier to interpret by portraying Macbeth as an evil, ruthless villain that underwent a change from a brave hero. As simple as it may seem, this portrayal of Macbeth's character could be inaccurate, as it misses out the point that Macbeth is only human with his own stream of conscience . While the Polanski version, 23 years later it was more acceptable by the audience that Macbeth was only human that was not purely evil, however, this interpretation made Macbeth seemed weaker, and it seemed to lack Macbeths strength of character.
Lady Macbeth is one of the strongest female character in literature, as a dominating wife, who pushes her husband into his downfall. In a time when women were ranked lower than horses (you can go without having a wife, but you could not live without having a decent horse), Lady Macbeth, encourages, and many believe command her husband to do the deed of regicide. Although it may seem that she is the driving force behind the regicide, in the end it is still Macbeth that bears the responsibility, and the one that takes the action, because she couldn't commit the murder herself, as she says
"Had he (Duncan) not resembled my father as he slept, I had done 't."
This could be linked to Sigmund Freud's psychoanalytical work about the bond between a daughter and her father, which can't be broken, as according to Freud the bond that exists is due to the heroism a woman looks upon in her father, and this could be the very elements of a character she'll look for in her husband..
It also shows, when she was trying to persuade, or many believe command, Macbeth to commit the regicide that she would have
"Plucked my nipple from his (her baby's) boneless gums and dashed the brain out,"
suggesting that she is lacking her feminine instinct, having even the thoughts of killing her own child. This could be seen as a cruel and heartless action to do, and as absurd as it may seem, many women nowadays prefer abortion to raising a child that may interfere with her career. The fact that Lady Macbeth didn't show any emotions towards her child could imply that either she didn't want a child, or she was just heartless. On the other hand, here she could have been challenging all the notions of humanity, not only that of womanhood, however, it seemed absurd that a woman could even bring herself to thoughts of such. In fact it becomes questionable whether this is because she is brave enough to reject the cultural expectations of her, or was it just a literal expression of strong metaphors, that Shakespeare constantly uses in her speeches, to make her appear stronger, and perhaps more fiend-like.
There are evidences that suggest that she is a good actress, in a sense that she able to act as the consummate hostess, enticing the king into her castle. When she faints immediately after the murder of Duncan, the audience is left wondering whether this too, is a perfect act, or her feminine instinct coming out at last.
The audiences usually assume that Lady Macbeth's character was a portrayal of as an evil heartless "fiend" as Malcolm described her as. People, especially at the time when the play was first presented chose to blame Macbeth's downfall on her, seeing her as evil, calling upon
"spirits that tend on mortal thoughts,"
suggesting that she may lack all natures of humanity. She was also seen as ruthless, as mentioned above, she lacks her feminine instincts, as she has thoughts of killing her baby. It's, as if the audience over the last few centuries hold on to their opinion, without realising the actual womanliness that she possesses. It is as if the audiences over this time have forgotten that it was Macbeth that first thought of the regicide, and she has never actually said or directly implied that she had the ambitions to become queen. She realised that her husbands hope of the crown may be impended upon the fact that he is,"
too full o' the milk of human kindness,"
she therefore prays that her own feelings would be suppressed, in order to help Macbeth reach his
"deep and dark desire"
of becoming a king. However, as we know, Lady Macbeth is proven wrong, as Macbeth managed to transform himself into a "butcher" and it was herself that lost it.
Ultimately, it seems that the different interpretation of the actual nature and derive of Lady Macbeth would depend upon the audience. The 16th century view would see Lady Macbeth as evil and heartless, which would be expected of them, as it was a misogynist society, as women were the lower part of the society, and were functioned to obey their husbands. It seemed to be impossible that a women would be the dominant partner in marriage, as Lady Macbeth is. However a 21st century view would see Lady Macbeth as a strong modern character she is, many of her character elements would be more appreciated. It is now normal for a woman to be the dominant partner of marriage, and also common for a woman to have her ambitions and expectations of her career, pushing any barriers of it. Lady Macbeth would be one of a few female literary characters that modern women can connect with, and would be seen as somewhat of a role model, instead of a disgrace of feminine values, which could have been how the 16th century women saw her as.
We can see the different interpretation of Lady Macbeth in two productions of Macbeth, the interpretations by Orson Welles and Roman Polanski. Welles, the earlier interpretation of Macbeth, in the 1940s, portrayed Lady Macbeth as this ruthless, ambitious, demanding and controlling wife. Instead of supporting her husband, it felt that she was commanding him to do the deed. She seems to be more dominant in the relationship, and it felt as if Macbeth lived under her shadow. On the other hand, Polanski, whose interpretation was made in the 60's, portrayed Lady Macbeth as a weaker character, which is just as ambitious, but she tries to achieve it differently. Instead of commanding Macbeth, Lady Macbeth uses her charms to manipulate, her husband, so the audience sees this as a more warm relationship. For example, when Macbeth confessed that he couldn't assassinate the king and was sacred of it, the Lady Macbeth in the Welles version became visually angry and hissed the line
"but screw your courage to the sticking place and we shall not fail"
to Macbeths ear, in a fiend-like manner. While the Lady Macbeth in the Polanski version just persuaded him to go on with the plan, whispering softly, with an undertone of urgency while using her charms to manipulate him. The difference could be due to rise of feminism throughout the 50's and 60's when women fought for their rights to be treated equally.
Macbeth and Lady Macbeth were both ordinary people that reacted to circumstances, as someone would have before, does now and will again. The changes that occurred in both the character of Macbeth and his lady could leave us questioning upon our right to judge their characters based upon their actions, which should leaves us with more reflective views upon moral justice, as someone's character cannot be simply judged upon the actions of life that they take.
