The conflict between good and evil is one of the oldest and most consistently fascinating sources of literary drama. It is a primary motor of countless movies and books, just as it has always been one of the most important issues for philosophers and religious scholars. Shakespeare explored the topic in great depth. His are some of the most villainous antagonists ever conceived. But a character can't simply be evil and have nothing else to him. That makes him unbelievable, as anyone who has ever seen a bad Hollywood movie can attest to. In Othello and Macbeth Shakespeare presents us with two very different representations of evil. To understand the respective villainies of the Macbeths and Iago we must try to understand the ultimate goals of the villains' plots, and we must try to understand how they are able to live with their amorality:
[...] There is certainly logic to the belief of some Shakespeare critics that Iago is a personification of the devil himself. I think I could say with confidence that there has never been a living person as evil as him. Even Lady Macbeth's evil pales in comparison. One could compare Iago and Lady Macbeth's respective resolution for a final statement on their characters. Lady Macbeth's sleepwalking episode in front of the Gentlewoman and the Doctor of Physic is her own unmasking, when her crimes are made public. [...]
[...] She proves to be less evil than she would have us believe: she was able to conceive of the murder, to think it up and convince her husband to carry it out, but in action it ended up affecting her far more profoundly than she expected. Her conscience has returned, and, as she soon dies from the mysterious illness, it ends up killing her. Of course, Iago has no such problem. One could imagine him looking at Lady Macbeth's crisis of conscience with the same disdain with which he regards Othello's honesty. [...]
[...] This would be psychotic jealousy in a different character, but Iago shows no special love for his wife, and is in fact quite cold and confrontational with her in the few instances where they do interact. Rather, he takes the mere existence of the adulterous rumor (which he doesn't even completely believe) as a justification for his hate. Further, his phrasing suggests that the rumor isn't the source of his anger: hate the Moor, and Had suspicion of his wife been his true motive, that should instead be a hate the Moor, for Instead he hates the Moor and there is also this nasty little rumor going around. [...]
[...] Macbeth is a tragedy in the tradition of Shakespeare's tragedies, dealing in issues of kingdoms and the potential for evil within all of us. The villainy of the Macbeths is explored realistically and humanely, so that the supernatural elements, though central to the plot, are at once not exactly necessary, as Lady Macbeth and her husband could easily convince themselves to usurp the throne without the witches' prophecies. The Macbeths seem like real people. Iago is no normal person, rather, he seems more a concept, Shakespeare's attempt to create evil in its essence, a character that seems so complex at the play's outset, but, transversely, is simplified more and more until the conclusion. [...]
[...] She admits to the murders of Banquo and Duncan, and reveals her own guilt. It is a sad moment, surprisingly so given how little sympathy the character actually deserves. Her muttering and her hand washing is creepy, and it inspires the Doctor's and the Gentlewoman's pity. Lady Macbeth's control is clearly not that of Iago's. But, thanks to her husband's successful coup, she is in no danger of retribution. The Doctor and the Gentlewoman quietly agree not to tell a soul about it: to, go to! [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
