Macbeth and The Prince: Fate Vs Free Will Portrayal

Introduction

In Macbeth, fate vs free will interpretations that emphasize his freedom misunderstand the fundamental dynamic of the play. Shakespeare introduces Hecate, the witches, and their prophecies precisely to show how Macbeth's actions are driven by forces outside of his control. The story of Macbeth is not the story of a self-controlled man, but rather a fundamentally frail one, driven by both supernatural forces and his wife in a way he never would have chosen by himself. To hold Macbeth responsible is to miss precisely what Shakespeare wishes us to see: how little control we have over what we do.' 

The Role of Fate and Free Will in Macbeth

I do not agree with the claim above on the influence of fate in the play Macbeth. It cannot be denied that supernatural forces play a significant role in the play. The role of supernatural forces makes the dynamic of the play so fascinating. It is true that before these supernatural agents show up in the play, Macbeth was minding his own business and was a great soldier. Moreover, Revelation of the prophecies by three witches, weird sisters, sparks a chain of events that leads to becoming king and eventually killed. But it was Macbeth’s free will that determined how this fate will come true and how event will unfold.

When Macbeth first hears the prophecy from witches, while thinking about killing Duncan, he says “If chance will have me king, why chance may crown me without stir” (Act 1, scene 3). Knowing the consequences of assassinating Duncan, Macbeth decides not to kill him. He obviously has free will to go on and plan killing of Duncan or not, which means that he is practicing his free will. However, later in the act when Lady Macbeth insults him and says he is coward and need courage. This insult to his manhood is what changes Macbeth’s mind and makes him assassinate Duncan, which easily he could have chosen not to. This decision of Macbeth is not something predetermined by fate; rather it is his free will to commit the crime or not. Moreover, another example that shows how Macbeth practices his free will is when Lady Macbeth in says, “Yet do I fear thy nature. it is too full o’the’ milk of human kindness to catch the nearest way” (Act 1, scene 5). Lady Macbeth is afraid that Macbeth’s kindness and gentleness might deter him from killing Duncan. It is important to notice that Macbeth is a great soldier, thane of Cawdor, a person who is famous for his abilities in war. It shows that he knows murdering the king is wrong and have consequences. Though, Lady Macbeth influences Macbeth’s thoughts, it is upon his own conscience and has a choice on whether to accept killing the king or not. Furthermore, in later events in the play such as killing his friend Banquo and Macduff’s family, Macbeth has freedom of choice to murder or not in no way it is predetermined by fate or prophecies of witches.

Ultimately, the power of supernatural forces and fate is significant in the play as well as real life. The influence of other people on us, like Lady Macbeth’s on Macbeth, is something inevitable. However, I believe that it is one’s own conscience to decide what way to choose or what to do. For Macbeth it was predetermined by fate that one day he will become king; however, ultimately the way he chose to achieve his goals was his free will.

Machiavelli's Economy of Violence

“What has been called an obsession with power on Machiavelli’s part might be better described as his conviction that the ‘new way’ could make no greater contribution than to create an economy of violence, a science of the controlled application of force [...] the true test of whether violence had been rightly used was whether cruelties increased or decreased over time.” Sheldon S. Wolin, “The Economy of Violence”.

In his suggestions on the usage of violence, Machiavelli, seeks to elaborate on how should a prince better incorporate cruelty in order to gain or maintain power. He tries to establish a balance in execution of violence, when it should be used, the dosage etc. Machiavelli proposes use of violence in The Prince; however, it is important to remember that he does not recommend use of vicious act for its own sake. He approaches this matter with a realistic position. At the time of him it was common for people or princes to gain power by using wickedness and criminal acts. Therefore, the evil conduct was inevitable. However, he suggests execution of violence but puts limit on it and emphasizes that it should be used only when needed. As an economy of violence, in a sense that with least investment achieve most desirable result possible.

Balancing Violence and Virtue in The Prince

Machiavelli praises the ability(virtu) of a prince to act viciously and decisively whenever it is important for him to gain power or maintain order, stability and security of his state. In chapter VIII Machiavelli talks about those who ascent to princely power by wickedness and criminal act. He gives the examples of two princes Agathocles and Olivertto da Fermo, both who got power through evil conduct. In such cases where prince gains power by using extreme brutalities, violence is inevitable. Therefore, Machiavelli, suggests that violence can be put to good use if used properly, putting limit on the amount and duration of it. Machiavelli believes that if cruelty can be well used if the evil acts are all performed all at one stroke, be it for ascending to prince power or self-preservation; and it should not be practiced in anymore (Ch. VIII, page 27). This way prince can terminate the dangers threatening him as well as avoid being creating a bad image of himself in the eye of subjects. Because it is good for the order and stability of state. Since there are no imminent threats to the power of prince and he does not have to spent time and resources on dealing with these threats. More importantly it prevents formation of a bad image of the prince in people’s eye and avoids hatred. This economy of violence (executing right amount of violence at right time) creates a fear among prince’s subjects. Therefore, prince can preserve his power and position without even having to conduct violence.

Conclusion

Machiavelli does not suggest evil conduct for its own sake. Rather he recommends what a prince should do in a real world where he has people to lead, royals to deal with and preserve the order and stability of his state. However, a prince does not have to be violent but when necessity arises, he should be able to avoid the ruin of his principality with regards to the economy of violence. Economy of violence enables him to get most effective result by acting violently with accordance to circumstances, the amount and duration.

Works Cited

1. Aydın, Can. 'Fate and Freedom in Shakespeare.' Accessed from: https://www.academia.edu/29784209/Fate_and_Freedom_in_Shakespeare