‘Imagination’ has always constituted a central term in both literary and intellectual history from the old Greeks up until postmodernism.
In Shakespeare’s tragedies, but especially in Macbeth – which is generally labelled as his gloomiest and goriest drama – imagination also possesses a great importance since it functions, in the shape of Macbeth’s delusions, as both the fundament and driving force of the whole plot.
The drama 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 committed soldier of the Scottish king into a fear-consumed, bloodthirsty and ruthless tyrant who alienates himself from his original and better nature and, in the process, 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 of his internal struggle lies in his uncontainable imagination which, just as its impacts on Macbeth as well as on the course 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 hunger for power, though here “it is not the victims of wickedness and sin that the play is concerned with, but wickedness and sin itself” (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 problem of evil is made spectacularly concrete by the introduction of the Elizabethan mythology of witchcraft, including elements of popular superstition as well as theological speculation.” (Mehl, p.106, l.5-7), 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 (see 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.
To begin with, this paper will demonstrate the historical background of the tragedy and the Elizabethan psychology, afterwards it will extensively explain the term and significance of Macbeth’s imagination and then touch upon essential characteristics as well as the nature and power of his imagination. Subsequently the dual time structure of the drama shall be pointed out and Macbeth’s imagination as an anticipation of the future as well as an expression of a disturbed psyche shall be made subject of discussion. Finally it will be analyzed whether the protagonist is rather a victim or an offender, or rather in how far one can talk of a rational perpetration in today’s sense at all.
4. The Emergence of the Individual in the Middle Ages
In order to be able to better stake out the intellectual innovations of humanism and Shakespeare in the following, the paper shall, at this point, shortly touch upon the gradual emergence of individualism in the Middle Ages, which especially manifested in personal descriptions within the historiography at that time, by means of Peter Abélard’s (1079-1142) presentation of his Historia Calamitatum.
For instance, in Abélard’s time only the height of a person was considered important for their description; if need be, one would even make up something fitting in a positive sense when it appeared desirable. Thereby, distinctive characteristics of the described person were still forewent. Concerning the general attributes, a great but rather prosaic depiction was preferred (see Vitz, p.432, l.36ff).
The ‘psychology’ of that time – or rather what was considered as such, e.g. the nature, the abilities, talents or wishes of the human – was not secularized yet, but conversely did not differ much from theology. And what primarily interested the theologists of the Middle Ages was not individualization, but divine salvation, damnation, exaltation and decay of the human soul or its hierarchic relationship to God. This fundamental orientation seems to have spread onto the entire medieval thinking concerning human personality and its development. Any psychological change was considered an elevation or degradation, a progress or retreat (Vitz, p.433, ll.20-29).
Only in the modern time people began to seriously show interest in what distinguishes one human from all the others, or rather what we call the ‘individual’ today, meaning the unusual, the diverse, the peculiar or the deviant (Vitz, p.434, l.6-9). In the Middle Ages the individual neither strives for perceiving new and different things, nor for voicing them – just as little as, for instance, differentiating between his own experience of pain and the martyrs’ (Vitz, p.438, l.30-31).
7. The Historical and Intellectual Background with Regard to Individuality
In contrast to the gradual emergence of individualism in the Middle Ages, the same reference shall now be made, and observed more precisely, for the Renaissance, the time of Shakespeare.
The humanism of the Renaissance is also described as the age of the individual, since it especially emphasized the dignity and value of the individual.