Becoming Evil: Macbeth Edition



http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1327866505l/8852.jpg

There have been plenty of stories about a great person suddenly becoming evil after one fateful decision.  Sometimes it is a quick, hasty choice the character does not think twice about and then has to deal with the consequences.  Other times, it is a choice that the protagonist spends time about, weighing the pros and cons, and ultimately chooses what they think is right, but what the audience knows is wrong.  That is what happens in Shakespeare’s story of Macbeth.  The character Macbeth is overall a great man that is honored by everyone else.  Even the king admires him for his loyalty and courage.  Towards the beginning of the play, the king Duncan calls Macbeth, “O valiant cousin, worthy gentleman!” (Macbeth, 1.2).  The admiration was returned.  Macbeth saw himself as the king’s warrior and his friend.  So what made him kill Duncan? Why did a seemingly not evil man take the first step into evil?

There are various reasons one can be led to evil acts.  I think a very common reason is temptation.  If the temptation is too much, the person will be willing to do anything to get what they want.  Wanting something so badly can lead to dangerous acts.  In the play, Macbeth is too tempted to be king that he gives up his innocence when he murders Duncan.  I think it was the witches’ prophecy that tempted him into the action.  They declared that Macbeth would become the thane of Cawdor and king.  When the previous thane of Cawdor was executed and he took his place, he believed the witches.  However, he believed the only way he could become king was to kill Duncan.  In my opinion, it wasn’t fate that led him to this decision.  I think he was still able to make his own choices and that the title of king was something he consciously always wanted.  Therefore, Macbeth was overwhelmed by his desire to consider the consequences killing the king might bring.

Despite his temptation, he was also hesitant about committing the murder.  That’s why I think the other reason a person turns to evil is the influence of others.  Someone can be pushed into something they don’t want to do by another person.  It’s even harder to resist when the act may be something he/she is already considering.  Another person’s advice could be the thing that pushes the decision over the edge and into action.  In Macbeth, Lady Macbeth is the one that pretty much forces Macbeth into killing Duncan.  When he is hesitant, his wife treats him like he’s foolish for not completely be committed to the crime.  She convinces him it’s the right decision, and is able to persuade him into doing it.  Her push led Macbeth to killing his previous friend Duncan so that he can achieve the power he desires so much.

Much of the consequences for causing Duncan’s death are internal.  Talking about the crime beforehand and actually committing it are two very different things.  The aftermath of an evil act can cause negative effects to a previously good person.  They are unexpected and can take control of someone.  The guilt and regret can instantly rise up.  An internal conflict can come about whether the decision was worth it or was it a waste and simply the wrong thing to have done.  These consequences are portrayed through Macbeth after his wrongful deed.  He starts to go a bit crazy.  His mind won't allow him to stop thinking about what he has done.  He becomes frantic and restless, not being able to go to sleep.  He says, "Macbeth shall sleep no more" (Macbeth, 2.2). 

 

Overall, he has trouble accepting what he did.  Simple things like saying "Amen" are even a struggle.  He cries, "I had most need of blessing, and "Amen" stuck in my throat" (Macbeth, 2.2).  Taking steps towards evil can really affect a person and their behavior.  He/she must deal with the consequences.  In the play, Macbeth's innocence disappears and evil only builds up leading him to commit more evil acts, like forcing Banquo's death, to protect his new found power.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contemporary Art Analysis

My sketch of Miradas 1

While walking through the exhibit at the Contemporary Art Museum, I admired all of the wonderful art pieces.  They were all so unique and different from any other art pieces I’ve seen before.  Of the museum itself, I liked the feeling of openness it had.  Everything was spread out and there wasn’t too many art works present.  It’s very different from other art museums which have tons of pieces and makes it a little overwhelming.  In those, I feel like I don’t have enough time to look closely at all of the art.  In this museum, I could spend time viewing each of them carefully.  Also, I like that the exhibits are always changing.  It’s cool that I could go back to the museum and see completely different pieces.

The focus when we went was limited visibility.  Something was missing from each piece and it was our job to figure out what it was.  I think that was such a cool way to view the art works because it has relevance to our everyday lives.  It’s difficult to see the whole picture when people are rushing through life.  This exhibition allowed me to examine each piece through that lens and realize what I simply just glance over without really seeing it for what it is.  The idea of limited visibility was present in each piece in a unique way, causing the exhibition to reflect the concept in various situations.

The one piece I chose to analyze was called Miradas 1.  It was created by a Latin American artist, Moris.  He was born in Mexico City and completed this piece in 2012.  The piece is 640x391.  It consists of black acrylic covering an enlarged digital print on a large canvas.  The piece focuses on the eyes of six people.  The rest of the enlarged photograph is covered in black, which makes the eyes stand out even more.  I think this piece represents the limited visibility people have on others’ personalities and life styles.  I saw it as concealing these people in a way that viewers can’t learn much about them.  The audience can only look at the eyes, which also limits their knowledge on who the actual person is.  Moris is an artist who likes to show a bit of the darker side of Mexico through his work.  He is influenced by the violence and poverty in Mexico.  I think this is seen in this piece because some people in the lower class of Mexico might have to learn to withhold some of who they are to survive. 

The style of this piece is very unique.  It’s significant that the artist chose black paint to block out their bodies.  The color brings a darker tone to the painting.  Furthermore, he does use black, but it’s not solid.  Viewers can point out different shades that were used.  I think it’s very interesting that even though the focus is on the eyes, the rest of the people’s bodies can still be seen if you look hard enough.  I could barely see the outlines of their bodies through the acrylic, but they are there.  I think this is interesting because it shows that the artist didn’t want to block them out completely.  If it was completely black and the bodies were hidden from sight, the piece would just look like random pairs of eyes on a canvas.  However, viewers can still barely see the bodies which show that it was a real photograph that was taken and that there is more of the person to be seen. 
 
Miradas 1 fits right in with the theme of limited visibility.  The idea of this throughout the exhibition draws attention to what is missing.  When looking at this piece, we focus on the eyes that are shown on the canvas.  The piece represents the absence of the rest of the body.  We instantly notice that we’re only shown the eyes and everything else is concealed under the black acrylic.  It’s up to the viewer to fill in the rest of the image.  This may require some imagination on our part.  The people in the piece can be anyone.  The eyes don’t give us enough information to figure out who the actual person in the image is. 

While looking at the piece, I asked myself: Why the eyes?  Why did the artist choose the eyes to show to the viewers rather than any other part of the body?  It made me think of the saying, “the eyes are the windows to the soul.”  In some ways, I think eyes can hold a lot of truth and emotion within them.  They do show some of who a person is.  However, I think there is still more that needs to be shown to fully understand someone.  The artist chose only to show what he wanted.  In this way, the piece reveals something about the people in the society.  The meaning of the piece is that people choose what to display to others.  They’re not giving others a full view of who they are.  It’s very likely that everyone is hiding something that they don’t want to show to the other people around them.  Because of that, we are never allowed a full picture of someone’s true self.  People choose how they wanted to be presented and limit others’ visibility of them.  I think this piece would still have relevance in any time period, because people will still withhold parts of themselves so they can be seen a certain way in society.  Therefore, this piece perfectly fits the idea of limited visibility and reveals a very important message about society.