Witch-Slapped

Witch-Slapped: Macbeth's fall from grace

1. Why do people who are not "evil" take the first step into evil? What, for instance, is involved in taking that first step "down the primrose path to the everlasting bonfire" (Macbeth, 2.3)? What are the consequences of the individual choosing evil (particularly the internal consequences)? Use examples from the text to support your opinion.

The character Macbeth goes through a drastic arch of development in the play, Macbeth, in which he goes from being a noble, respectable protagonist to the evil being who experiences a dramatic downfall.  This development did not come out of nowhere... it can be credited to a few key characters and events in Shakespeare's plot. 

Although I believe no single person is born "evil", people tend to take actions towards evil due to external forces.  Evil actions are done to acheive a goal, similarly to all other actions.  The external forces come into play with influences such as culture, relationships, and circumstances.  External forces are the sparking motive to result in the first step towards evil.  

Macbeth is a character faced with self convincing motives (to reach a goal), which was formulated by a combination of external forces and internal desire.  The character is not aware of these goals until presented with them by another being, such as the three witches or Lady Macbeth.  By vocalizing a possible path for Macbeth's life, Macbeth realizes his own internal desires.

The first goal Macbeth realizes is shown by his wife.  After hearing his future from the three witches, Macbeth does not adopt a strong desire for his future.  It is only when Lady Macbeth plants the idea in his head, through a variety of methods, that Macbeth begins his evil streak.  With the realization of what his future could potentially look like as king, Macbeth moves towards questionable means to acheive his goals.  His positive nature is overshadowed by an innate desire for a crown, and, because of this, leads to evil actions such as murder.  

Murder is a key theme in Macbeth.  Now maybe this is my unpopular opinion... but "murderous" does not seem to be a common attribute to the protagonist of a historically integral piece of literature. Yet, Shakespeare does not seem to play by the book.  The author is brilliant in Macbeth's development because of its commentary on human nature.

If a seemingly good character is able to adopt murderous ambitions as means of acheiving a goal, then how would the rest of us fare in the same situation.  I like to think I wouldn't be moved to killing my friend if I was promised the throne, but Shakespeare's comment on human nature seems to promote the concept that I may be mistaken in my view.  

All humans being cabable of murder isn't really a fun thing to ponder, but Shakespeare does provide a balance in his critisism of human nature.  Macbeth faces some severe consequences for his actions - the most obvious one being death.  Some other consequences are more subtle, such as mental instability, guilt, parinoia, the loss of his wife, eternal damniation, etc.  Consequences motivate humans to avoid evil actions, even in the midst of a strong goal with prominent ambition.  A regard for consequnces on Macbeth's part is acredited to the supernatural, rather than human nature.   This is the authors way of warning audiences of messing with the supernatural, while still providing insight on the evils of humanity.

Shakespeare = one smart dude