Macbeth Commentary Ii.I.33-64

894 Words4 Pages
Macbeth II.I.33-64

Whilst in scene seven of act one of Shakespeare’s Macbeth, the main character had hypothesized that killing the virtuous Duncan in order to accomplish the witches’ prophecy would not be “done when t’is done” - that such action wouldn’t be inconsequential - and should therefore not be undertaken, shortly after, his wife persuades him to commit the crime shortly by blatantly aggressing his masculinity.
In the passage from lines 33 to 64 in the first scene of act two, Shakespeare clearly shows the change in Macbeth’s mindset induced by Lady Macbeth’s talk, which characteristics not only set Macbeth’s tragic ending, but also signal the beginning of Macbeth sanities’ downfall. The author does so through the use of symbolism, the themes of fate and natural justice, along with the use figurative language.
In this passage, Macbeth hallucinates a “dagger” “before” him which has “gouts of blood” on its “blade and dungeon”. By making Macbeth see a “dagger”, an instrument capable of harm, in his “mind” “yet, in form as palpable as” the one which he holds, Shakespeare is implying that this imaginary weapon can be as harmful to Macbeth as its tangible equivalent with which he will kill Duncan. Furthermore, this dagger is accompanied of blood, which symbolizes guilt throughout the play; Lady Macbeth is proved to be notably affected by hallucinations of bloody hands that never get clean, which symbolize the consistent torturing guilt that takes over her after passively taking part in the assassinations of Duncan, Banquo and Macduff. This contrasts with the initial concept of blood introduced by Shakespeare in the first act in which a bloody captain was proudly wearing all the blood vestiges of the battle to show off his great accomplishment: Macbeth and his wife are far from proud of their devilish deeds, and because of the dishonesty of their actions, more

More about Macbeth Commentary Ii.I.33-64

Open Document