This can, to an extent, already be seen as a first dramatic depiction of a ‘psychology’, which during Shakespeare’s time was subliminally present at most.
Thereby, he uses imagination as a means of illuminating the ‘functioning’ of Macbeth’s psyche in detail and thus, by internalizing the protagonist, bringing his inner life and his uniqueness as a personality onto the Elizabethan stage. With the repression of the externalized character depiction by a now internalized one, he took on a pioneering role in his time. Harold Bloom also endorses this: “Shakespeare’s final strength is radical internalization, and this is his most internalized drama, played out in the guilty imagination that we share with Macbeth.“ (Bloom, p.545, l.8-10). Despite the still exploratory character of imagination at that time, Shakespeare made an important contribution to the psychologization of the drama by introducing imagination into the stage poetry.
Both internalization as well as imagination as a means for it were repeatedly taken up and perfected during the succession 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. The human, with all his feelings and perceptions, was now placed into the center of society and the cosmos, and during this discovery of the individual, the individual personality progressively moved into the foreground (Unterstenhöfer, p.48, l.1-2).
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.
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.
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 as well as on 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 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).
There clearly has to be more behind it.
The driving force in his inner battle lies in his insuppressible imagination which, along with its impacts on Macbeth as well as on 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 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).
From a traditionally conservative viewpoint of the Middle Ages concerning a now emancipating individualism, the church still denied the concept of the ‘individual’, since humans were not supposed to innerly see themselves as autonomous and rationally-thinking beings – which was perceived as revolutionary, maybe even seditious – but to act as obedient servants of God and the state who only define, or rather fulfill, themselves through the collective mass of devout Christians.
While humanism strives for the human’s autonomy through power over himself, here in Macbeth the tyrant now becomes the counter-violence through power over others, whose right to self-determination he certainly restricts, or even eliminates, through his mostly aggressive exercise of power, and thus reverses this new development. This constitutes a substitution experience, which modern psychology confirms as well (see Unterstenhöfer, p.192, l.27-31).
Further intentions of humanism were the ‘burst’ of class- and national barriers as well as the gradual emancipation from the mental/spiritual limitations caused by an all too authoritarian value- and moral system of the church, or rather religion. This emancipation also entailed the concept of an individual identity.
From a traditionally conservative viewpoint of the Middle Ages concerning a now emancipating individualism, the church still denied the concept of the ‘individual’, since humans were not supposed to innerly see themselves as autonomous and rationally-thinking beings – which was perceived as revolutionary, maybe even seditious – but to act as obedient servants of God and the state who only define, or rather fulfill, themselves through the collective mass of devout Christians.
In contrast to the model of Seneca, who equipped his protagonists with an overriding passion – so that they would end up in madness or fury, such as Atreus in Thyestes – the Elizabethan tragedy rather focuses on the ‘functioning’ of the human in general.
4. Elizabethan Psychology
An all too strong imagination was, according to Elizabethan psychology, perceived as negative and, therefore, had to be avoided by all means since it was thought “that successful action depends upon a well regulated soul and that any departure from the governance of reason is dangerous, […].” (Anderson, p.162, l.10-12).