Why is Macbeth a Monster and Loki Simply Mischievous? - or - Theatre Rant the First!
A comparison and discussion of two epic heroes and villians of stage and screen!
Post extract: "it’s easier to just pigeonhole Macbeth as a ‘dead butcher’ (5.9) rather than examine the familiar, if flawed, characteristics of a man in context, a man not so far removed from who we ourselves may be...A lot has been said of the similarities of the first Thor movie with Shakespeare’s Hamlet, I want to look at Loki as Macbeth...Macbeth is evil and yet Loki is misunderstood, mischievous, conflicted or even victimised! Why?"
(Wikimedia Commons - Macbeth meets the Witches)
Macbeth Versus Loki!
I, financially, experientially and due to chronic health problems and a defeatist attitude, will probably never get to train in acting and theatre but my passion will always lie with the stage. So, rather pathetically, I often find myself debating with myself over some theatrical production or concept as there’s not many people, outside of the circles that I find myself outside of, who would endure a filibuster on the Brechtian influences in Edward Albee or a discussion on blind casting in Shakespeare. Thus, I am my own audience and tonight I somehow found myself in a fit of pique over the tyrannisation of Macbeth.
Associations with the play and the person label him a butcher, inherently evil, psychopathic, irredeemable and yes, of course there’s evidence for this in the text but what I love about the Bard, and a quality which I believe has immortalised his works and kept them forever relevant, is the nuance and complexity of his characters. He wasn’t interested in morality plays of diametrically good versus evil, but all the shades of the soul and of human experience.
However because the "Scottish Play" is 400+ years old and tends to be taught in a certain way with so many preconceptions to the point that a lot of its lines and characters are referenced in common parlance, it’s hard to meet Macbeth a fresh. But to me, Macbeth was always just a man, not a monster and Lady Mac was an iconic female force not because she was evil and manipulative, ‘a fiend-like queen’(5.9) but because she was strong, respected and loved by her husband, her own woman and also an equal “partner in greatness” (1.5). Fairly progressive for an Elizabethan damsel! Screw Romeo and Juliet, they were foolish impulsive children, idealising love without ever living through it. The Macbeth’s are Shakespeare’s greatest love story. There is nothing that those two when together would not do for one another.
Ah but you’re unconvinced. I don’t blame you, after all, it’s easier to just pigeonhole Macbeth as a ‘dead butcher’ (5.9) rather than examine the familiar, if flawed, characteristics of a man in context, a man not so far removed from who we ourselves may be. So, I decided (in this argument inside my head) to try to make Macbeth more relatable! MCU anyone?
xXx
A lot has been said of the similarities of the first Thor movie with Shakespeare’s Hamlet, I want to look at Loki as Macbeth! Loki has literally an army of global fans out there, of which I am one, and I guarantee that, by overwhelming majority, if you asked the question, ‘Is Loki evil?’ the resonant answer would be ‘No’! Macbeth is evil and yet Loki is misunderstood, mischievous, conflicted or even victimised! Why? Context, and the ‘be botheredness’ of a modern audience to look for it!
I put it to you that both Loki and Macbeth begin as good, even honourable men. Loki is raised as prince in a King’s court, a man of learning, exceptional skill and position. Macbeth is dutiful to the King. He has marred and bloodied his body in his service, has acted with bravery, fierceness, authority and honour. In that war-torn time he is exemplary as a warrior, a leader, a subject and a man. The notion of murdering his King is completely out of character when we encounter him.
"This tyrant...was once thought honest" (4.3)
Yes, both Loki and Macbeth harbour a simmering ambition
within their breasts but this is tempered and not an unusual trait in great
men. It takes a catalyst to fan that
flame. In Loki’s case he is faced not only with a lifetime of slights and
biased comparison, of never being Odin’s favourite son, and never ascending to what
he sees as his ‘birthright’ – the throne – but is ignited on the discovery that Odin isn’t
even his father. Betrayed, angry, displaced
and confused, no longer knowing who he is or where he belongs, he acts out his rage
and emotional turmoil and, when one is imbued with the power and passion
of Loki, this will involve annihilating a small to midsized planet! In
another man, their reaction may simply involve passive aggressively burning their brother’s toast
every morning for a month but in Loki, such a sheer force of nature, he simply
has bigger reach, his actions have naturally more consequences and carnage, like placing
barrels of gun powder beside an open fire!
Macbeth, in Act 1, has a wife whom he loves, a castle in Inverness, he’s rising through the ranks with his military prowess and then he encounters the wyrd sisters who speak in riddles and prophecy. Likely, he would have given no mind to the matter except that their words are proven in truth (Thane of Cawdor) and now, what is he to believe? Who grants these witches their vision? Is he divinely, if not humanly, ordained? Heaven blessed? If it is written in the very fabric of the universe that he is to be King one can understand his dismay when, freshly crowned in the blood of King Duncan’s enemies, he too is overlooked, he has reached his career ceiling for the unproven Malcolm, Duncan’s son, is to be heir apparent.
Ideas have incredible power, once they take root they are hard to unearth and in this case they stoke that fiery, just-stepped-off-the-battlefield, ambition to boiling, to that tragic flaw and the committal of a crime that is actually completely out of character, that would have been abhorrent to Macbeth only moments before as “[Duncan’s] kinsman and his subject, strong both against the deed” (1.7).
A man acts without mercy in murder in the cause of his King and he is a hero and patriot "[Macbeth] unseam'd him from the nave to the chaps" (1.2), but the same traits that have forged his bravery and brought him glory, when misdirected for sole gain, bring only ruin. (I could actually three-way this to correlate with Coriolanus also but that’s for another day!)
After this, sanity dissolves and matters spiral out of control. Neither character knows how to live in this new reality, or with this version of themselves. The impulsive deeds are done. Loki has driven his father into a coma (effectively) and Macbeth has committed the ultimate sin – regicide – an act against Divine will, against God himself, anything after that is gravy! Now, already damned, unable to go back, they go forward, embracing the only path left to them. If they must burn in hell then they will become the devil.
But perhaps even here both could be redeemed. These are life-changing events, yes, they are self-fulfilling but they’d leave a man exposed, malleable and flailing to redefine their identity. How do you put that back in the box? (In Loki’s much longer character arch we learn that it takes many trials and many years). But what I believe is the ultimate undoing of both is the effect this critical event has on their supportive relationships. Macbeth begins to distance from his wife, act in secret and alone and Loki becomes filled with hatred for his brother, keeping him in exile.
Once they have crossed that threshold, unmade themselves, it
has to be worth it. They both zealously
and bloodily endeavour to hold the throne they have so falsely won. That’s their redemption. That’s honouring their father, brother, King
and proving who they are, proving they were right, that they are 'worthy'. Without this neither can reconcile themselves
to themselves. With one such single-minded, desperate objective they crush all
those in their way – Banquo the best friend, countless disquieted Scottish
citizens, marriage, partnership, love; Loki scrambles to send a fire-breathing, hunk of metal,
destroyer to barbeque Thor!
Like wheels rolling down a hill, not knowing how to stop, both escalate until they are so lost, so foreign to themselves, that Lady Mac, already widowed, heartbroken, takes her life and both, having nothing of themselves or their lives left, effectively commit suicide, one on his Roman sword and the other correcting the decision that saved him at his birth, falling from the rainbow bridge.
Neither were able to live with who they were or what they’d done. People who are evil, without empathy or remorse, have no trouble sleeping, “Macbeth shall sleep no more” (2.2) or behave so self-destructively. In a way, that first cut was the wound that would kill them, it just took a long time to bleed out and, like wounded animals, their death throes were epic! But it killed them because it was out of character and not because it was ‘in’ some secret evil character.
Good and evil, as well as people, are rarely that absolute and simplistic. And I argue that it is the rich tapestry of human emotion and behaviour that makes Macbeth one of Shakespeare’s best known plays. It may be more comforting to cast him as unrelatable but to do so, for me, shuts down so many questions about human nature, morality, justice and power that are both vital and potentially transformative. This, I admit, is an overly empathic, even sentimentalised, portrayal of one of drama’s greatest villains but it’s intended to spark discussion (probably with myself) because it’s worth remembering that people don’t generally set out to be villains, in fact their behaviour is often logical, even reasonable or right within their own construction of reality. Or, as my Loki t-shirt says, “Every villain is a hero in in his own mind” (apparently a quote from the man himself – Tom Hiddleston. PS. You can get my tee on Redbubble via Adder24’s shop).
xXx
If you’ve read my ramble thanks so much. Hope it was food for thought. I’ve plenty more ‘head-discussions’ in me if anyone wants me to take them out of my head and onto a page!
Comments
Post a Comment