An important and repeatedly recurring means that Shakespeare makes use of, in order to clearly showcase deeper insights into the mental world and psychological processes of his protagonists to the recipient, is the monologue. By means of the monologue the audience becomes an intimate witness of the presented thoughts and feelings, in a sense, so as if they could take an unfiltered insight into the innermost spheres of a person (Mürb, p.34, l.28-30).
We encounter everything that marks Shakespeare’s art of characterization in his greatest dramas: the utter concentration of the statement, the ability to illustrate or concretize feelings and thoughts with sensuous forcefulness and, lastly, the extensive understanding of the human being, which is shown in both its rational awareness as well as its irrational actions – in short, in its entire contradictory complexity (Clemen, p.45, ll.8-17).
Herein the monologues, which additionally constitute a medium of self-portrayal for the tragic hero in the inwardness of his reflections and feelings (see Seeber, p.136, l.20-24), open up a fascinating look into Macbeth’s mental processes. Such an insight engages the viewer’s interest in a figure by including him into the events and also by creating an understanding for the respective motivations of the characters.
In Shakespeare’s great tragedies, such as Macbeth or Hamlet, the audience is given the impression of directly witnessing the genesis and unfolding of feelings and thoughts along with their spontaneous verbalization (Seeber, p.136, l.29-33). This act of verbalization itself becomes a mirror of an inner drama at this point, since the way in which a figure speaks – i.e. struggles for words and images, breaks off in a sentence, disrupts the blank verse, calls out excitedly, falls silent etc. – becomes an indication of unconscious or suppressed desires, hopes, fears and doubts (Seeber, p.136, l.38-42).
Another means for the insight into the characters is the ‘aside’, which often appears as a pre- or transitional form to the monologue in Shakespeare’s works. Nevertheless, in many cases a short version of a monologue cannot be distinguished from an ‘aside’. Shakespeare has developed this type of expression far above its original purpose, which was prescribed by the stage convention to the audience’s information, by evolving the ‘aside’ into a differentiated artistic means of the indirect characterization, the multilayered conversation, the preparation and the interpretation, whereby the same aspects and categories repeatedly arise which are also crucial for the consideration of the actual monologue (Clemen, p.51, ll.24-36).
Therefore, it can be conclusively stated that the function of the dramatic means during Shakespeare’s time was entirely new, since with the help of the monologue and the aside he – along with Marlowe – was the first to transfer mental processes and the innermost feelings and mindsets of his protagonists onto the stage. This can, to an extent, already be seen as a first dramatic depiction of a ‘psychology’, which during Shakespeare’s time was latently present at most.
1.2 Subject of interest
‘Imagination’ constitutes a central term in literary and intellectual history from the old Greeks up until postmodernism. In Shakespeare’s great tragedies too, but especially in Macbeth – which is generally labelled as his gloomiest and goriest drama – imagination possesses a significant importance since it functions, in form of Macbeth’s delusions, as both the starting point and driving force of the whole plot.
The work depicts itself as both a tragedy of ambition and its consequences, as well as a character study of an extremely complexly portrayed protagonist who, in the course of the play, transforms from an honorable, brave and loyal soldier of the Scottish king into a fear-consumed, bloodthirsty and ruthless tyrant who estranges himself from his original, actually better nature and, thereupon, entirely gives himself over to the powers of evil.
On the other hand, one could certainly argue that the drama – throughout the course of the plot – exposes the true evil nature of Macbeth. Nevertheless, one cannot unreservedly affiliate to this point since it is not to be assumed that he could have just readily simulated all the good character traits, which he undoubtedly possesses in the beginning. There clearly has to be more behind it.
The driving force in his inner conflict lies in his non-suppressible imagination which, along with its impacts on Macbeth and the plot of the drama, shall be primarily discussed within this paper. Like often mentioned, in Macbeth the felon becomes the hero in the context of an alarming depiction of human temptation and greed for power, though here it is not the victims of evil who stand in the center, but evil itself (see Mehl, p.106, l.1-2). In this context the question of the origin of evil and its power over the individual character also stands in the focus of the tragedy.
Thereby the issue of evil is spectacularly concretized here by the inclusion of the Elizabethan witch-mythology, since James I., who as the son of Mary Stuart followed Elizabeth I. on the throne in 1603, was apparently highly interested in occultism, witchcraft and all kinds of apparitions as well as their impact on human actions (Mehl, p.106, l.7-9)1. He even wrote a book on demonology (published in 1597) and the parliament, also infected by the belief in witches that came into fashion, enacted a law according to which any form of witchcraft was to be punished by death. Thus the doctrine of witchcraft was legally established (Woudhuysen, p.45, l.15ff.). In Macbeth it is also the witches and their prophecies, whose arbitrary interpretation is part of Macbeth’s imagination, that decisively contribute to tempting him to evilness and, therefore, get the ball of the plot rolling.