The character development in Macbeth was something that really interested me. The play features a lot of really fascinating characters that change as the play goes on, which is so interesting. If I was to write a paper on Macbeth, I think I would do something along the lines of researching character development in both Macbeth and Lady Macbeth. I would like to be able to pinpoint the moment when they changed. Macbeth went from a rather cowardly but ambitious person to being bloodthirsty and absolutely fearless in the face of war. Lady Macbeth was the driving force, at first, behind her husband's ambitious murder spree, but she later snaps and is found sleepwalking and attempting to wring her hands clean. There is a really revealing line in act 5, scene 1, lines 37-42. She says "Out, damned spot, out, I say! One, Two, Why then, 'tis time to do't. Hell is murky. Fie, my lord, fie, a soldier and afeared? What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our power to account? Yet who would have though the old man to have had so much blood in him?" She had mocked her husband's guilt and later, as shown in that scene, succumbed to an entirely more intense guilt of her own. It would be interesting to me to do a psychological analysis of both Macbeth and Lady Macbeth, as both individuals and as a couple.I would probably focus my research on psychological articles and use those to analyze the characters myself. I don't know what I would find, exactly, seeing as I'm not well-versed in the science of psychiatry, but it would be cool to be able to come up with my own conclusions about how, why, and when Macbeth and Lady Macbeth changed. It would be interesting to see what effect witches would have had on their mental state, how the lure of power might have pushed them over the edge, and perhaps what supporting characters such as Banquo or Macduff would have contributed to their changes. I think I would try to avoid articles already written about the mental state and character changes of Macbeth and his wife in order to try and formulate my own argument and not be heavily influenced by the arguments of scholars past and present. I'm sure there is so much that has been written on this subject before, so in order to keep it somewhat original, I would do my best to stay away from those articles.
Okay Sam, I know you said you wanted to avoid being biased by reading other articles but you might be missing out on some interesting (if crazy) ideas about MacBeth and psychoanalysis. For example, this Prezi is all about a Freudian Analysis of MacBeth. Maybe instead of avoiding it you could combine two paths of psychoanalysis in your paper, (potentially providing a more accurate reading) or maybe you could counter the ideas presented in one of them. Anyways, you might check out this Prezi if the Freudian bit appeals to you at all, (even in a crazy unconscious sort of way). https://prezi.com/v030fsmh-vli/freuianism-and-psychoanalysis-of-macbeth/
ReplyDeleteThank you! That's really helpful, you're right. Maybe what I could do is research my own analysis and once my ideas are established, compare them to other readings. The main reason I wanted to avoid other interpretations was just so that I could allow myself to interpret more freely, but you're right, for accuracy's sake, it would be important to not write in a vacuum here. Thanks!
DeleteI think that would be really interesting to explore the psychological discipline and then analyze the characters through that lens. I know what you mean about avoiding researching the articles that have already analyzed the play using a psychoanalytic analysis, as almost every scope of analysis has been exhausted about Shakespeare's plays. Blah. I was wondering if you'd try to focus your research to a specific renowned psychologist. I know that Freudian analysis provides a popular form of analysis for literature, but it might be interesting to explore the other psychologists theories as well, such as Jung. If you do a Freudian analysis, then he has plenty of theories concerning the role of guilt!
ReplyDeleteThanks for that response! I think you're totally right. Psychoanlysis and Shakespeare are like peanut butter and jelly- they just go together- so naturally there's a lot that has already been written. But I like your idea of analyzing it from a different psychologist's point of view- perhaps someone less known. That's a great idea, thank you!
DeleteI think that would be really interesting to explore the psychological discipline and then analyze the characters through that lens. I know what you mean about avoiding researching the articles that have already analyzed the play using a psychoanalytic analysis, as almost every scope of analysis has been exhausted about Shakespeare's plays. Blah. I was wondering if you'd try to focus your research to a specific renowned psychologist. I know that Freudian analysis provides a popular form of analysis for literature, but it might be interesting to explore the other psychologists theories as well, such as Jung. If you do a Freudian analysis, then he has plenty of theories concerning the role of guilt!
ReplyDeleteCharacter development and psychology are good starting points. Just be sure that you bring into your analysis adequate attention to the dramatic, literary, and rhetorical form (and don't just analyze personality or mental states apart from form). Gaylie's suggestion is good. You might also check with Karee Brown, from the morning class, who is interested in taking a psychological approach.
ReplyDelete