Macbeth, Macbeth...Oh How Far You've Come

 Macbeth is regarded as a hero when he is introduced in the play.  He defeated a "merciless Macdonwald" (Macbeth, 1.2), and is described as a "brave...valiant...worthy gentleman" (Macbeth, 1.2).  How did Macbeth devolve into a crazy guy who gets the king and his best friend murdered?  The deadly sin of greed can answer that.  Greed for power, money (a form of power), love, religious or political importance, etc. are the primary means that people go from honorable, morally correct citizens to jealous, morally wrong people who endanger others.  Macbeth has no reason to become "evil" in the beginning of the play, but when the supernatural witches tell him and Banquo of a mysterious prophecy where Macbeth and Banquo's sons will be kings, Macbeth is enticed into a dangerous game of moral conflict.  Macbeth and Banquo at first say that they will not do anything to influence fate, thus the prophecy.  However, they react differently to the prophecy--Macbeth asks,"Do you not hope your children shall be kings" (Macbeth, 1.3), before saying "If chance have me King, why, chance may crown me / Without my stir" (Macbeth, 1.3).  Banquo, on the other hand, responds to Macbeth's question by saying that "oftentimes, to win us to our harm, / The instruments of darkness tell us truths, / Win us with awful trifles" (Macbeth, 1.3).  Macbeth is already tempted by the prophecy and is trying to see if Banquo is in agreement with him.  Banquo uses many words with negative connotations--"darkness", "trifles"--to demonstrate his caution to Macbeth, and Shakespeare uses the appearance vs reality concept to further convey that, though the prophecy may appear to be positive, bad things lurk there and draw people in by giving them possible truths.  Macbeth is, then, when looking deep into language usage, already at a lower moral standing than Banquo in the beginning of the play.  Though Macbeth is seen to come to a revelation like Banquo's, his initial reaction to the prophecy is hope (spurring action).

Macbeth is drawn by the prophecy, by the promise of power, by the deadly sin of greed.  Lady Macbeth convinces his him to actually act.  Her strong, confident character and mocking tendencies are no match for Macbeth's feeble attempts to fend her orders off: "Wouldst thou have that / Which esteem'st the ornament of life, / And live a coward in thine own esteem, / Letting 'I dare not' wait upon 'I would,' / Like the poor car i' th' adage" (Macbeth, 1.7).  She uses her excuses against him, until he finally relents, and, that night, kills King Duncan.  But, oh how he feels terrible.  He is practically hyperventilating as he exclaims, "Will all great Neptune's ocean wash this blood / Clean from my hand? No" (Macbeth, 2.2).  He refuses to go on and frame the guards or do any other action to ensure the prophecy.  However, he did the deed.  Persuasion by Lady M, and desire for power led him to take the first steps into evil-dom.

When Macbeth sends two (or three; the third murderer could represent the supernatural influence on everything regarding Macbeth's actions) murderers to kill Banquo, he is truly succumbing to greed and jealousy.  Instead of being happy that his friend's sons will have the chance to have power, he is angry that Banquo's sons will easily rise to power and not have to murder someone to do it: "For Banquo's issue I have filed in my mind; / For them the gracious Duncan I have murdered; / Put rancors in the vessel of my peace / Only for them, and mine eternal jewel / Given to the common enemy of man, / To make them kings, the seeds of Banquo's kings!" (Macbeth 3.1).  That long-winded exclamation, using metaphors ("vessel of peace," "eternal jewel") to represent his damaged moral code, his thirst for power, conveys Macbeth's true descent into evil.  Anyone who is in his way is an enemy, and isn't that evil--not caring who the person is, but smashing them down if they are an obstacle?

"Mr." Macbeth :) is not impervious to remorse once he kills people he respects and admires.  Multiply his little freak out session after killing Duncan by 100 and you'll get his reaction to Banquo's ghost in Act 3, scene 4.  He at first doesn't notice the ghost (could this represent another facet of evil, the fact that the murder is out of his conscious mind already??), but when he does, he is horrified.  Shakespeare uses a lot of exclamatory punctuation to contrast when the ghost is in the room or not, and this helps characterize Macbeth's reaction as severe and a little crazy.  Macbeth is going through an internal conflict: should he really have killed his friend to satisfy his own desire, or should he have not ever done anything at all?  This internal conflict is outwardly shown when he yells at the ghost: "Take any shape but that, and my firm nerves / Shall never tremble.  Or be alive again, / And dare me to the desert with thy sword." (Macbeth, 3.4).  Macbeth is telling the ghost to be any organism but his Banquo human form, and he won't feel terrible and anxious.  He then expresses his wish that Banquo were alive, and that Macbeth would be in turn be punished for the sins he has committed. 

Macbeth was introduced as perfect, then quickly descended into a greedy man desperate to make his part of the prophecy come true, simultaneously feeling intense guilt and having the side effect of slight insanity.  Macbeth could have remained with Banquo, content with letting fate happen on its own, but instead chose the morally wrong, paranoid path.  Macbeth made crucial mistakes in the first part of the play, and it will be interesting to see what he becomes as the play comes to an end.

Aquamanile Ram Pictures

Aquamanile in the Form of a Ram

This artwork is called "Aquamanile in the Form of a Ram" and was created by an author dubbed Unknown (strange name:) in England.  Being a glazed earthenware product (the dimensions are 9 7/16 x 11 1/2 x 5 1/4 inches), and using luminescence dating
( http://daybreaknuclear.us/bortolot_faq.html ), this ram was created circa 1300 and was most likely made in the Scarborough area where a plethora of kilns were found there at the time.  Though it is apparently in very good condition, the ram's horns are missing, and a great deal of paint, especially on the other side, has flaked away. 


So...what's so cool about this dilapidated clay ram?  Well, if you notice, there are two holes in the ram: one is a large opening at the top by the head, and a smaller one is where its mouth would be located.  This ram is no ordinary artwork, rather serves a practical purpose as well: it's an aquamanile
( http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ewer ).  There is the top, larger opening where water is poured into, and the mouth opening where it flows out.  I chose this piece of art for this reason; it shows that art can have an aesthetic or deep meaning to it, but also a functional aspect


The earthenware piece is more rounded and abstract than an actual male sheep, and there are two possibilities as to why this is so.  First, the artist may have chosen to create the most space as possible to hold water in the vessel.  Second, the abstract, not-completely-clear quality (from what we can see) of the ram shape could make it more aesthetically pleasing, thus more likely that a customer would buy it.  The deep, rich and shiny green that the ram was painted with could additionally increase the chance of a sale.  And notice the ridges on the sides of the piece: this could either add to that unique viewpoint of the artwork, or the artist could be attempting to conform slightly, to make the audience connect the ridges of the clay animal with ridges of traditional pottery bowls and the like.  Why the artist would do this, other than to better sell the practical artwork, is unknown.


What does the aquamanile ram mean to us today?  Rams are not very significant to the general public today, as then it was known that rams were needed to reproduce more sheep, whose wool was an important trading tool.  Around the exact same time that the artist was creating the artwork, Great Britain began exporting sheep wool to Italy.  Without rams, there are no sheep, which means there is not wool.  So then, sheep were important, as were (but no as much so) the rams.


It is extremely important to keep in mind, that, though the artwork does not create a direct, or deeper emotion in the modern-day audience as perhaps the as it did in the general public in the 1300s, the general idea of this work is that there is value in art of the broadest sense: a pitcher or any other useful item can be art.  The fact that a ram is in the form of a pitcher reminds the audience of the two unseemingly different things.  A ram could provoke further thoughts from the audience, such as livestock and animals used for human demand, as to what we, as luxurious and pompous human beings, don't realize that we need, (like wool then and now, though other items along with this one now are extremely important). Many people do not take time to acknowledge the immense amount of things that are necessary to us.  A ram, a symbol or strength and possibly even wealth in the trade-centric Great Britain, serves the purpose of functional ability and visual pleasure.  The ram today tells us humans that art is such a wide range of ideals, contexts, and visual qualities, and they all overlap to make one art piece.