Characters In Shakespeares Plays Want Power English Literature Essay

Through out the composing calling of Shakespeare, one of the many subjects that Shakespeare uses in his dramas is power. Almost all of the characters in Shakespeare ‘s dramas want power and would make about anything to acquire it. This power that Shakespeare ‘s characters search for will be analyzed through Marxist and sociological positions.

In Shakespeare ‘s drama Hamlet, a certain character earnestly wanted power and would make perfectly anything to acquire this power and he certainly did. Not even Hamlet, who the drama was largely approximately wanted power every bit much as this individual. Claudius, Hamlet ‘s uncle, did everything and anything he could to acquire the power that he wanted. Hamlet ‘s late male parent even told Hamlet that “ by a brother ‘s hand/ Of life, of Crown, of queen at one time dispatched/ ” ( Act 1.V. 79-80 ) . Claudius went every bit far as to being so low to kill his brother while he lay asleep, and steal his married woman and eventually taking the crown off from his brother. Again this shows that Claudius would make anything merely to acquire some power, and that means that he would even kill his ain household merely to get what he wants. Through a Marxist position, the being of categories promotes the aspiration of persons at times to force. Marxism shows how the upper category and how the people who have influence over the on the job category affect and command the working category ( DiYanni ) . This besides shows the power circles that can we see in different dramas such as Hamlet. Marxism brings to illume the aspirations and strategies of the characters in Shakespeare ‘s dramas. For illustration, Marxism brought out the evil aspirations and strategies of Claudius. Claudius craves power and longs to hold it. Through Marxism, one can see that the fact that Claudius ‘s brother became king got to Claudius and made him desire the power that his brother had. He must ‘ve thought, that he excessively would could hold the same power as his brother, and this thought led to Claudius to finally plotting a strategy to really kill off his ain family. Claudius besides might ‘ve been blinded by his green-eyed monster that his brother became king alternatively of him. We see an illustration of this through the Biblical characters of Cain and Abel ( Genesis ) . Because God favored Abel much more than he did Cain, Cain devised a program to kill off his ain brother really much so like how Claudius killed off his brother every bit good. In the same manner that Cain killed Abel, Claudius murdered his brother. Both Cain and Claudius go blinded by the fact that their brothers received more favour from people than they would. Abel developed favour with God more than Cain did, and Claudius developed angry feelings to the fact that his brother became king and got all the lovely glorious power that he likely thought should hold been his. Even though Shakespeare knew that Claudius ‘s older brother ( Hamlet ‘s pa ) was technically supposed to hold the kingship anyhow. Through Marxism, we can see that even though Claudius was of a higher criterion that the others, and that of the working category, his aspirations and his greed for the power that his brother had got to him, and he finally murdered his brother. Thankss to the Marxist position we can see that his aspirations and hoggishness got the better of Claudius. Besides through the sociological position we see that Claudius wanted power. A sociological position means the values of a society and how those values become reflected in literary plants. ( DiYanni ) For illustration, back in Shakespearean times, if a individual had power, the people showed fear towards them, and looked at the individual with the place of power as an astonishing individual, and looked upon them with awe. The townsfolk looked up to the people who had power, and the small town people ever thought that they wanted to go like the people in power so that they could hold whatever they wanted and that they could populate in luxury like the people who had power did every bit good. Claudius already had a place of power. He was the brother to the male monarch, and either manner people still saw him as person who lived in luxury, and even though he did non go the male monarch right at that minute, he still got all the fringe benefits of it every bit good. There still resides the job that Claudius has non become male monarch. This miniscule, but of import item, most likely led Claudius to killing his brother. Even though people still wanted to go like him, Claudius ‘s high place or criterion, still did non alter the fact of him non going king. Society ‘s position back so was that if that person were to go male monarch they were astonishing, and Claudius most likely idea, “ why non me so? ” and so he went and killed off his brother so that he could go king. Now that his brother has died, the people look up to him, and can praise him and all that good material. Plus non merely did he acquire the Crown, but he got an astonishing married woman excessively.

Another character in Shakespeare who got consumed by his privation of power is Macbeth, in Shakespeare ‘s Macbeth. When the three enchantresss exclaimed, “ All hail, Macbeth, that shalt be king afterlife! ” ( 1.iii.51 ) , something inside of him stirred. He likely liked the manner that sounded, and he wanted to keep onto that thought of him really going king. Either manner the fact of the affair remains that the enchantresss have now implanted into Macbeth ‘s head/mind the fact that he in the hereafter will really go male monarch. Unfortunately for Macbeth, King Duncan remains as the male monarch. Macbeth has to somehow acquire rid of Duncan. However, before the enchantresss even mentioned to Macbeth that he would go male monarch, Macbeth was really loyal to his male monarch and would make anything for the male monarch, and to help his state Scotland. But now that he has heard that he will go male monarch in future old ages, he can non acquire it out of his caput. Macbeth so makes a awful determination and tells his married woman, Lady Macbeth about this so called prognostication. Lady Macbeth wants power even more so than Macbeth at the clip, and she becomes enraptured at the fact that Macbeth will go male monarch subsequently. She jumps up at the thought of Macbeth going male monarch, and starts to brainstorm thoughts about how Macbeth can go male monarch, and the first and obvious would necessitate killing off Duncan. At first Macbeth does non desire to kill Duncan. After all, Duncan is technically his male monarch, and even though the thought of Macbeth going king sounds good and all, Duncan remains the male monarch, and Macbeth does non look all excessively happy about killing his loving and good male monarch. Unfortunately, at the persuasion of Lady Macbeth, he gives in to the thought that “ king Macbeth ” sounds good, and agrees to kill off Duncan so that he may take the Crown off for himself. Several times, Macbeth tries to halt himself from killing Duncan. Which would hold proved that he had non gone over the dark side, but alas, Lady Macbeth once more persuades Macbeth that Scotland would be better off under the leading of Macbeth and non Duncan. After this, Macbeth eventually slayings Duncan and everything starts to travel downhill from here. Through Marxism which once more shows the categories and the upper category and the in-between category and the lower category, we can see that merely like Claudius, Macbeth wanted power, but non every bit much as Claudius wanted it, good non in the beginning of his character anyhow. In Macbeth, they fought a war, and when king Duncan found out that the existent Thane of Cawdor betrayed him, he stripped the existent Thane of Cawdor of his power and bestowed it upon Macbeth and asked Ross and Angus to name Macbeth “ thane of Cawdor ” ( I.iii.107 ) . This first gustatory sensation of more acquired power added fuel to the fire. Since Macbeth stumbled upon the enchantresss foremost, the enchantresss could state Macbeth of all the rubrics that he would hold, and made Macbeth ask the fact that he might really go thane of Cawdor and even king. Macbeth already had a rubric of power because of his dead male parent, and at the beginning of the book that little spot of power was good plenty for him. But unluckily after run intoing the three enchantresss he realized that the spot of power that he had did non make him much good and that if he wanted to do it to the place of male monarch he would necessitate some supernumerary added power and what non. The freshly acquired rubric as thane of Cawdor, made Macbeth believe that he might really hold a opportunity at going King, even though he ‘s ne’er truly thought about going King of Scotland of all time in his life. His new rubric besides made him believe that possibly the enchantresss were really right and that possibly that they are capable of stating the truth. Since he got the rubric as thane of Cawdor, Macbeth really might believe that the enchantresss might be stating the truth about Macbeth going king subsequently on. All of this distorted thought is thanks to the lovely three enchantresss. Besides we can see Macbeth ‘s privation of power through a sociological position. A sociological position once more shows the society ‘s position and how it affects the piece of work, or in this instance, how society ‘s position affects what happens in Macbeth ( DiYanni ) . In Shakespearean times discoursing with enchantresss was n’t a good thing. Actually seeing enchantresss did non make anyone any good. Reasonably much, a enchantress did non convey good newss. So the fact that non merely did Macbeth see these animals, he really spoke with them, became a large trade. Harmonizing to Nina Makofsky, enchantresss were a physical manifestation of immorality ( Makofsky ) . So enchantresss were frowned upon and they were non viewed as lovely human existences by the society. Macbeth really taking the advice of the three enchantresss so was frowned upon a ton. Even though speech production to these enchantresss was frowned upon, Macbeth still did so, and this finally led to Macbeth ‘s ruin. Society told us that remaining near enchantresss was bad, and that people should remain off from them. Macbeth did the complete antonym and did everything society told him that he should non make. Even though he did go male monarch, he became king merely for a really little sum of clip. He could non truly make much for the state of Scotland that he loved so really much, except for attempt and battle for his rubric that he usurped from the rightful male monarch. Besides, Macbeth ‘s association with the enchantresss led to Macbeth ‘s death. So through Marxism and the sociological positions we can see that Macbeth besides wanted power and he did several atrocious things to get this power that everyone wants so much.

Now that everyone has the power that they want, there has to be some effects for the evil workss that they have done. Let us take for illustration, Lady Macbeth from Macbeth. When she heard that her hubby Macbeth would go King of Scotland, she jumped up and down for joy. She wanted that power that came with the rubric of king so really severely that she convinced her hubby who could non kill anyone, and who had non done anything evil to really kill the good male monarch of Scotland. Once she had her hubby kill off the male monarch, she made him kill even more people, so she could hold even more power that they already had. Finally, Lady Macbeth realized the mistake of her ways, even though it was rather a bit excessively late. She eventually realized that she had the blood of those guiltless people on her custodies and that non even the finest aromas would be able to acquire that malodor off her custodies. She would ne’er look at her little custodies of all time once more the same manner, because those custodies of hers had committed slaying many times, and without even believing how their household must ‘ve felt when they were killed. Lady Macbeth would ne’er be able to acquire that guilt off of her custodies of all time, and this finally drove her to insanity. Claudius from Shakespeare ‘s Hamlet besides faced the effects for the slaying of his brother the existent male monarch of Denmark. In the terminal, Claudius gets killed by Hamlet his nephew and the boy of the existent male monarch of Denmark, so truly the new existent male monarch of Denmark. And merely for boots, Ophelia besides went wholly insane like Lady Macbeth every bit good. But unlike Lady Macbeth, Ophelia was n’t really looking for power, she merely wanted the love of Hamlet, and she did n’t have that so, alternatively she merely went insane. Besides person else who put their olfactory organ where it did n’t belong was Polonius. Polonius ever thought that he was right, and that he was all high and mighty because Claudius listened to him one time in a piece. Well in the terminal, he ends up acquiring killed by Hamlet because Polonius was being nosey. And for no ground at all, Hamlet besides went insane someplace while he was feigning to be insane. All of this can be seen through a Marxist and sociological position.

In decision, we can see the privation for power through a Marxist and sociological position through Shakespeare ‘s characters. Even though some of his character ‘s might hold gotten the power that they wanted, in the terminal even though they got what they wanted, they still faced the consequences. & gt ; & gt ; In this manner we can besides see the Marxist position and the sociological position in The Great Gatsby and The Lord of the Flies. Get downing with The Lord of the Flies there is an copiousness of Marxism in at that place. He boys battle to be on top. Since Marxism is like a category system this fits absolutely good. The male childs use the conch shell to set up an order Ohio who is the best and what non. “ insert quotation mark ” ( aˆ¦ ) Through that conch shell everyone was able to savor a spot of power and they all seemed to desire it. Especially Jack, he was non able to defy the power that he felt through being the one at the top and naming all the shootings. Ralph likes the power but non in the same manner that Jack did. Ralph tried to utilize to power to acquire things under control and assist the group of male childs. On the other manus Jack merely wanted people to look up to him like he was deserving something. “ insert quotation mark ” ( fitzgerald.. ) He wanted to set fright in the other male childs so they would n’t seek and take his place or whatever from him. Thank God Ralph stepped up and took Jack down. Through the sociological position one can state that because Jack was one of the older boys the other small childs looked up to him. And because he was one of the older boys this gave him some sort of power of the other childs and Jack took advantage of this. He did n’t experience bad for holding power over other people. In fact that ‘s what he had wanted. Like wise in the book the Great Gatsby everyone wanted to be on top. The whole point of the book was that people kept contending each other to remain on top so they would hold other people looking up to them. Like with Gatsby, he did everything in his power to acquire on the top of the nutrient concatenation. And all of this was merely to acquire the attending of some miss. Just conceive of what he would make to acquire on the top for existent power like Hitler. Gatsby did what he could acquire on top non for the power in the sense like in the other books such as Macbeth and Lord of the Fliess but for the attending of a lovely immature lady. Power is what everyone wants because if you have the power and money everyone will look up to you and you have their regard and what non. “ insert quotation mark ” This ties into sociological positions. The society looks up to people who have money and power. It ‘s like the two jazz band gives you a shoo in for being first topographic point or something up in societies eyes. Once I have the clip I shall happen some outside beginnings and have them bind into these two lovely books that I read but did non bask. Well really Lord of the Flies was non that bad. The Great Gatsby was merely a deadening read for me. Sorry out at that place excessively all the people who love the Great Gatsby. Well besides that dorsum to the Marxism and what non. Everyone can see Marxism in The Great Gatsby because that one dude the name that I can non retrieve and Gatsby fought over the miss and I ca n’t retrieve her name either but they fought over her and that shows that they through the adult female they will derive power because it shows the readers who the “ adult male ” is so to talk. Because the “ existent ” adult male would be the one to be able to win Daisy ‘s ( ? ) bosom or whatever. And by being the “ existent adult male ” this would demo everyone else who the had the power and people would be able to distinguish from the existent adult male with the power and with the adult male who was merely seeking to win the lady ‘s heart/hand. Besides if they won Daisy ‘s ( ? ) bosom manus that would demo society that whoever is traveling after Daisy is a existent adult male and that they would be able to take attention of her and what non and being able to take attention of person is of import as it shows power. Or at least I think it shows power. But yeah by winning over Daisy it shows that they have the power to pull strings others through the use of money and things that money can purchase. Yes Marxism is shown in the Great Gatsby through the use of chapstick. Why is it shown through chapstick? I have no hint but it is and I shall hold a quotation mark here someplace turn outing why chapstick shows Marxism in the Great Gatsby. Because everyone knows that chapstick has great immortal powers and that through these powers people look up to chapstick. Because chapstick is excessively cool. And the vocal that merely came frightened me really much so because Marxism is Marxism. Besides sociological things are go oning but of class I shall turn out that with polka points and java. Sociological position can be seen in the Great Gatsby because everyone is seeking to vie with others through seeking to demo up other people through they wealth and position and stature and things. Sociological means things seen through the society so holding tonss of money and a immense house would be awesome because they ‘re demoing off their money like Indians would. Ooh I merely realized merely how good Indians would fall into this class. They ( Indians ) can be seen through a sociological point of position because they care excessively much about what other Indians think and they want the other Indians out at that place to believe they have the best autos, houses, and whatever else they can vie with other Indians with. In the same manner it ‘s seen in the Great Gatsby that they all compete with each other to see who will come out on top and who will do better than the other. It does n’t count to either Indians or the characters in the Great Gatsby, but they will make whatever it takes to be the 1s out on top. Even if it means making illegal things that they should non be making. Who cares if they end up on top and have the “ regard ” of the remainder of society?

In decision, Marxism can be seen in several books, novels, short narratives and etc.. I have realized that all I truly had to make was travel my other decision down here. I have come to the decision that I am dense.

DiYanni, Robert, Ed. Literature: Ready Fiction, Poetry, Drama, and the Essay. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 1998. 1893- 1926.

Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. New York Scribner, 2004.

Golding, William. Lord of the Flies. New York Penguin, 2003.

Makofsky, Nina. “ About Witches in Shakespeare ‘s Time |Ehow.com ” EHow | How To Make Merely About Everything! | How To Video & A ; Articles. 15 Oct. 2010. Web. 22. Oct. 2010. hypertext transfer protocol: //www.ehow.com/about_4569142_witches-shakespeare_s- time.Html.

Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. Ed. Jenny Mueller. New York: Hauppauge, 2002.

— – . Macbeth. Ed. John Crowther. New York: New York, 2003.

Carroll, Robert and Stephen Prickett, Eds. “ Genesis ” . The Bible: Authorized King James Version with Apocrypha. Oxford: Oxford UD, 1997.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *