The witches appear in three main scenes in Macbeth:
Act 1 scene 1
Act 1 scene 3
Act 4 scene 1
In act 1 scene 1 they, to me, introduce the play. Although we often forget that the play is all about witchcraft, thinking about it, the witches do play an important part in Macbeth. I think when Shakespeare wrote act 1 scene 1 his intentions were to grip the audience at the very beginning. The witches do not appear to do anything in this scene it seems as if they’re there to introduce them-selves, they don’t really appear for a reason. I think it’s just to hype the audience up for the rest of the play.
In act 1 scene 3 the witches tell us basically what Macbeth is about. Shakespeare grips the audience even tighter when they say:
FIRST WITCH: All hail Macbeth, hail to thee Thane
of Glamis.
SECOND WITCH: All hail Macbeth, hail to thee Thane
of Cawdor.
THIRD WITCH: All hail Macbeth, that shalt be
King hereafter.
I think Shakespeare here uses repetition really well. It adds mystery and feeling to the play. A Victorian audience at this moment must be really “into” the play. The mystery deepens even more when less than a few scenes away a messenger arrives to tell Macbeth that he is now Thane of Cawdor.
A modern audience at this point must shiver with excitement. A Victorian audience may have done the same, after all these people did fear witches in their day.
In act 4 scene 1 I don’t really feel that this scene does much for the play. Some people may disagree and I can see why. I mean people sat their reading the book must be thinking, “how the hell can a tree move?”
This is because Macbeth says:
MACBETH: Who can impress the forest, bid the tree
Unfix its earth-bound root?
This will keep the reader wondering, “I wonder when this prophesy will come true?”
I think they would think this because they want to see how the tree ends up moving this was clever on Shakespeare’s part this would have helped keep the audience interested. There are three prophesies all which tell Macbeth when to start worrying.
The language the witches use is strange even for Shakespeare’s time! Another thing is that the lines are shorter than the lines in other parts of the play. I don’t think this is a coincidence, I personally think Shakespeare did this to keep the witches rhymes simple. I think he did this to keep the audience interested and not put them off.
The use of rhyme – people often forget that poetic writing doesn’t have to rhyme, in fact in the play there isn’t really much rhyming going on, but when the witches speak in Macbeth there’re speeches do rhyme unlike most parts of the play.
To add even more mystery to the witches they use strange ingredients in their potions! I mean we all expect strange items but not that strange. Cat’s tongues, guts, eyes what more do we want? I think this would have helped Shakespeare with his audience. I think they would have loved the idea of witches around a cauldron especially James!
Going back and looking at these two scenes:
Act 1 scene 3
Act 4 scene 1
We see that Macbeth is involved in both scenes. In act 1 scene 3 we see Macbeth as a worrier for his country, a gentleman. In this scene he “bumps” into the witches with Banquo his best friend. From what I can tell Macbeth is a bit shocked I think this because he basically asks them what they are, I think he doubts that they are human. I think this because Macbeth says:
MACBETH: Speak if you can: what are you?
The witches then tell Macbeth that he shall be Thane of Cawdor then King. Banquo interrupting seems more enthusiastic about talking to the witches who then tell Banquo his children shall be Kings. Maybe Macbeth is trying to take in what he’s just been told. I think Macbeth wants to believe the witches but he doesn’t want to get his hopes up. That’s why he’s looking for a reason, he asks:
MACBETH: By Sinell’s death I know I am Thane of Glamis,
But how, of Cawdor? The Thane of Cawdor lives
A prosperous gentleman;
The witches then vanish and Macbeth is left talking to Banquo. I think Macbeth is still avoiding taking about him been King, he says:
MACBETH: Your children shall be Kings.
In Act 4 Scene 1 we see Macbeth as a murderer and a evil man or should I say – King. He barges onto the scene and demands answers from the witches I know this because he says:
MACBETH: Howe’er you come to know it, answer me:
Three apparitions then go on to tell Macbeth three things:
One that he should be aware of Macduff,
Two that he should he should be aware of anyone not born from a women’s womb and
Three that he should we weary when the woods begin to move. I think at this point in the play Macbeth is worried about Banquo’s children and what the witches told Macbeth at the beginning of the play. I think this because he says:
MACBETH: Can tell so much-will Banquo’s issue ever
Reign in this Kingdom?
The witches do not give Macbeth his answer. I think the reason for this is because if the audience know the answer to this question then they can figure out the end of the play.
As I’ve already said, I do think the witches played an enormous part in Macbeth. I also think that they play a rather big part in Macbeth’s life after all aren’t they really the ones responsible for King Duncan’s death? I think they are. I think this because at the end of the day the witches gave Macbeth the idea of killing the witch. I think as soon as the third witch says:
THIRD WITCH: All hail Macbeth, that shalt be
King hereafter.
I think this is, in a way the poison been injected into Macbeth’s blood. It’s only a matter of time before it begins to kick in, and when it does Macbeth will think up his plans to murder King Duncan. Another reason I think the witches are to blame is because Macbeth wouldn’t have done it with out them I think this because Macbeth says to his wife when she pushes him into murdering Duncan:
MACBETH: We will proceed no further in this business
He also says:
MACBETH: So foul and fair a day I have not seen.
I think the above proves he wouldn’t have murdered Duncan if he had not met the witches. I don’t think the witches are all to blame though, I don’t think Lady Macbeth helps either she’s always trying to push Macbeth into committing murder. Some people in the audience may wonder if Lady Macbeth is a witch or perhaps the witches have put a spell on her?
I have seen two different versions of the witches on screen and both were extremely different. Obviously the two versions were Polanski’s version and Macbeth on the Estate.
In Polanski’s version the witches were what you would expect, old ugly women who lived in a dirty smelling cave but in Macbeth on the estate’s version the witches were played by three children who lived in an old abandoned flat. I thought this was a rather interesting (and clever) concept.
Both films were very good but if I had to choose one which I thought was the most effective (concerning the witches only) I would choose Polanski’s version. This is because the witches were exactly what I expect and want. You don’t want sweet little children playing the part of horrible witches. It just isn’t Macbeth. It rips the whole idea of witches into shreds or to be more precise it doesn’t follow the stereotype. Some people may think this is a bad thing but I would have to disagree with them.
However in Polanski’s version the witches are brilliant they’re ugly, they’re old, they’re dirty and they’re naked. I also think Polanski’s version was better because we saw the witches using magic. For example when they faded out into thin air. It was what I expected and the reasons above are the reasons I choose Macbeth over Macbeth on the Estate.
