Compare and contrast the evil nature of Shakespeare’s antagonists

The following essay will compare and line of business the wicked temperament of Shakespeares antagonists King Richard and MacBeth. Although Shakespeare in unraveled his play Richard 3 to be a cataclysm most of the play could be considered historical, only if for the purpose of this opus it will be likened the insidiousness of MacBeths conciliatory morals. In the dramatic terminology of degradation and tragedy these two works of art encompass the square of these definitions. While one is comparably a great portrayal of English kings, the other is a absolute example of how circumstance and identity whitethorn become the lingering plight of a man demoralize with autocratic authority. Both however exemplify human geniusistics of paranoia, jealousy and victims of their actions circumstances. The following paper will play on the idea of comparing characters and neverthelesst from the Shakespeares plays Richard 3 and MacBeth.King Richard is a queasy man, with deformities, and a wicked personality. He himself describes his traits as rudely stampd and deformed, unfinishd, who cannot strut before a wanton ambling nymph.I that am curtaild of this fair proportion, /Cheated of feature by dissembling temperament, /Deformd, unfinishd, sent before my time /Into this breathing world, tight half do up, /And that so lamely and unfashionable /That dogs bark at me, as I close up by them/Why, I, in this weak piping time of peace, /gave no delight to pass a panache the time, /Unless to propose my shadow in the sun And descant on exploit own deformity/And therefore, since I cannot build a lover, /To entertain these fair well-spoken days, /I am determined to prove a villain.This tongue give insight into Richards character yet as the speeches made by peeress MacBeth take aim a reader to realize the depressed nature of MacBeth in comparison to his married womans expectations from him, and his willingness to abide by with such(prenominal) actions,(Mac) If we shou ld fail?( wench M.) We FailBut screw your courage to the sticking place,And well not fail. (Act 1, Scene 7).King Richard begins his Machiavellian procedures in gaining the throne in a similar manner as MacBeth although, for the argument of this paper, Richard is the more sinister of the two.The theme of the evil nature of man in King Richard the III deals with politics. It is through and through marriage that the abominable King may become what he wants to be perceived as being in connecting madam Anne he allows himself the illusion that he is someone who is worthy of love even though King Richard had Annes save makeed. The transition qualities of marriage in this play serve to produce a faade of transmit in the characters (Hunt 1997).It is the wooing of Lady Anne that the theme of love or the charade of love as it were in this play becomes apparent to the dynamic of transition. Richard tells Anne that he killed her husband because he (Richard) loved her,No why? When he, tha t is my husband right off /Came to me, as I followed Henrys corpse/When scarce the blood was well washd from his hands,/Which issud from my otherangelhusband, /And that dead saint which accordingly I weeping followd/O when I say, I lookd on Richards face, /This was my wish, Be thou, quoth I, accursd, /For making me so young, so senile a widow /And, when thou weddst, let sorrow haunt thy bed/And be thy wifeif whatever be so mad /More miserable by the life of thee /Than thou hast made me by my dear lords death /Lo ere I can repeat this curse again, Within so abject a time, my charrs heart /Grossly grew captive to his honey words, /And provd the subject of mine own souls curse/Which up to now hath held mine eyes from rest/For never yet one hour in his bed /Did I admire the golden dew of sleep, /But with his timorous dreams was still awakd. /Besides, he hates me for my father Warwick, /And will, no doubt, shortly be loose of me.In this line is found the bewitching personality o f Richard. In this personality there are striking similarities among King Richard and MacBeth. Both men need of their women obediance leastwise they go berserk when not obeyed (as is seen with the later episodes amid Lady MacBeth and MacBeth) as is seen in Act One Scene Five of MacBeth as Lady MacBeth states,The predate himself is hoarse/ That croaks the fatal entrance of Duncan /Under my battlements. Come, you spirits /That tend on mortal thoughts, unsex me here, /And learn me from the crown to the toe top-full /Of direst cruelty. Make thick my blood, /Stop up thaccess and passage to remorse, /That no compunctious visitings of nature /Shake my fell purpose, nor keep peace between /Th effect and it. Come to my womans breasts, /And take my milk for gall, you murdring ministers, /Wherever in your sightless substances /You wait on natures mischief. Come, thick night, /And pall thee in the dunnest smoke of hell, /That my keen poke see not the go against it makes, /Nor heaven peep through the blanket of the dark, /To cry Hold, holdThus is MacBeths evil nature propelled by his wife. However, since MacBeth is the character whom carries on the theme of evil in his autocratic power over the throne, it may also be suggested that MacBeth is the stronger of the two characters, and henceforth, his evil nature becomes entirely his, and not something which is funneled into him from Lady MacBeth. Therefore this demand of obseqious behavior warrents the premise of Shakespeares play being about the dominance of women and their gullability as Lady Anne consecrates to get hitched with a man who killed her husband. In this act is found that Shakespeare has created in Lady Anne a female character who is unable to gain retri providedion for her husbands murder by sticking a knife into Richards chest. Thus, as Lady Anne as a widow may have been of strong character, Lady Anne as she becomes the wife of Richards is duty-bound, sad, and realizes too late what her actions consis ts of, which is her culpability.MacBeth and King Richard are similar characters on other causal agent as well. When MacBeths wife urges him to murder for power, his protests are not long heard in the play, but MacBeths actions speak towards his depraved state. He is given to pity, and self-loathing as well as introverted nature with his overwhelming power once he achieves the throne. King Richard uses a similar ploy when he convinces Anne Neville to marry him even after he kills her father and her husband. In both characters then the capacity to hoodwink the ecumenic populace is exorbitant. However, each character in human action must pay the price of their actions. it is the hunting of the wild boars quality of karma that kills Richard due to his plotting, and MacBeth dies the way the play began, as a warrior, without much power in politics.King Richard sees his ugliness as a crutch, as away to get people to feel sorry for him and olibanum gain power King Richard does this cov ertly. Richard has to disguise his true intentions leastwise he will be decapitated for treason. Richard attempts a charade with Anne when he tells her he had her husband killed because he (Richard) loved her,No why? When he, that is my husband right away /Came to me, as I followed Henrys corse/When scarce the blood was well washd from his hands,/Which issud from my other angel husband, /And that dead saint which then I weeping followd/O when I say, I lookd on Richards face, /This was my wish, Be thou, quoth I, accursd, /For making me so young, so old a widow /And, when thou weddst, let sorrow haunt thy bed/And be thy wifeif any be so mad /More miserable by the life of thee /Than thou hast made me by my dear lords death /Lo ere I can repeat this curse again, Within so small a time, my womans heart /Grossly grew captive to his honey words, /And provd the subject of mine own souls curse/Which hitherto hath held mine eyes from rest/For never yet one hour in his bed /Did I enjoy the go lden dew of sleep, /But with his timorous dreams was still awakd. /Besides, he hates me for my father Warwick, /And will, no doubt, shortly be rid of me.Thus, in Richards view of himself and the man he truly has become is the juxtaposition of pity, jealousy and the actions therein.Another strikingly similar point of evil between these two Shakespearean plays is their willingness to gain power through any means necessary, and often times this involves murder. The realism for MacBeth in knowing that his actions are stygian appears with Banquos ghost, go with Richard, the realization of evil comes from Queen Margaret. Queen Margaret warns nobles about Richard and his devious nature, but her claims go ignored by the table of noblemen. Queen Margaret is ushered out or banished from the court, vertical as MacBeths choice of denying he really did see a ghost attests to him not accepting his own nature of evil.In the insanity that visits MacBeths character in Shakespeares play of the same induce there is a definite fight between Richard and him, as insanity portends to evil. MacBeth becomes increasingly insane throughout the duration of the play due in most authority to the predictions and mis guides of the three witches. MacBeths rise into power in Scotland was begotten due to his frontmost murder (Clausen p. 43).MacBeths obvious insanity, and thus his evil nature can be seen most notably in the way in which he rules his choices of using force, violence, and murder in his autocratic rule tend to be the persuasions of his debilitating sanity. Although his actions may in part speak towards his psychosis, the fact of MacBeths personality the Great Compromiser in that he cannot cope with his active violence and it is way of ruling as a despot which also enables his role as an insane person. MacBeth uses his position to thwart his will on the people and it is his way of ruling which leads to his further violence and his insanity.MacBeths evil nature may be submitt ed to be revealed through the introduction of the play with the three witches. In the dialogue of the play, and the actions therein, which represent this initial scene, the true evil of MacBeth rests at heart his imagination, for this aggrandized factor of his personality is what drives MacBeth to desire power in its tyrant form, and through murder as salad days states, the play depends on its horror of its own imaginings. Imagination is an equivocal matter for Shakespeare and his era where it meant both poetical furor and a gap torn in reality, almost a punishment for the displacement of the pious into the secular. MacBethis a tragedy of the imagination (p. 4).The shortcomings which lead to MacBeths degradation of mind is due in part to his own ambitions (and imagination) and his dealings with the three witches as well as his inferiority complex which in turn causes him to use violence in hallow to rule. Another attribute of MacBeths evil nature is shown with his partner, Lady MacBeth. It is her driving force to have MacBeth kill Duncan which furthers MacBeths self-doubt. Lady MacBeth is inclusive of MacBeths insanity since she urges him to commit the necessary crimes to gain power while also disregarding the guilt burdening MacBeth Lady MacBeth urges MacBeths evil nature, his criminal acts, because she like her husband is addicted to power and knows the necessary means to gain such power, and so, urges her husband past the guilt, and self-doubt in order to achieve their goals.Richard plots to have Clarence killed by his own brother by making Edward believe that George of Clarence is trying to kill. This is accomplished by Edward having a pretense of someone killing him whose name begins with the letter G (George in this case). Richard take afters in this plot and is named King. However, Richards nephews are still in the bulk large of London and could be successors to the throne once they come of age. King Richard has Buckingham murder the nephews. Not only does Richard succeed in his murdering campaign but he also beguiles the kingdom to believe he is a just king, as least for awhile.King Richard is abandoned on the battlefield by Lord Stanley and loses his horse and is murdered in a type of boar hunt. These two characters are similar in this scene in their electron orbit of personality and the actions that haunt them (Bradley p. 56).After Duncans murder however, Lady MacBeths character diminishes and so MacBeth is left even more alone in his act of betrayal which further leads to his suffering mind. Plagued by guilt and patronage for himself and his actions, the reader begins to see the disintegration of MacBeth. Thus, it is proven that both characters of Shakespeares plays, King Richard 3, and MacBeth are evil. Both Richard, and MacBeths mental powers show a decline in power and cohesion as the plays progress with murder and violence.The contrast between these two antagonists seem to depict no true relevant difference but in comparison the evil nature of either of these two men is one in which gross(a) evil is seen. In both of their quests for the throne, and the power which comes with the throne, the more evil of the two seems to be Richard, since his thirst for such a prize entails the con of marriage, as well as of killing his two young nephews, while MacBeths dirty deeds are supported by his wife (Bradley p. 101).These two characters are a great fascination because of their striking similarities. Their evil nature warrants great sacrifice, as well as leading them down the path of fast glory, but ultimately ending in betrayal and death (as with Richards army, and as will Lady MacBeths eventual self-doubt as to MacBeths rise in power, and the means by which he gained it so swiftly).Shakespeares great accomplishment with these two characters is undoubtedly at heart the realm of pure evil, in that neither seems to have great remorse at the end of their power reign. It is in the necessity of guilt whi ch makes a character redeemable to an audience, and by denying any remorse for either character, Shakespeare has created two very strong, evil antagonists. The fact that they remain of interest to the audience is found in just how despicable and evil their deeds, and just how far they are willing to push their power onto others in order to achieve the end of their goals.BibliographyBloom, H. (2004). Shakespeares MacBeth. Riverhead Publishing, New York.Bradley, A.C. (2005). Shakespearean Tragedy. Adamant Media Corporation. London.Clausen, C. (2005). MacBeth Multiplied. Bodleian Publishing, Netherlands.Hunt, M. (1997). Shakespeares King Richard111 and the Problematics of Tudor Bastardy.Papers on Language & Literature, Vol. 33.Shakespeare, W. (1989). King Richard the III. Manchester University Press, UK.Shakespeare, W. (1990). MacBeth. Washington Square Press, New York.