He's definitely not a good person. He can be considered "evil" but I don't believe that he's harshly villainous. Macbeth is unstable. At times he does show good qualities. For example, right before he killed Duncan, there was a period in time where he was having doubts and questioned if he should actually go through with it. I'd probably say that Lady Macbeth was the villain in the play. She was the one that pushed Macbeth to do the things that he did. Macbeth is just lopsided. He wants power, but after he completes horrible acts, he does feel guilt.
2007-06-20 08:10:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by lvliss.lvlanda 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
A truly good person would not sacrifice someone else, especially not a person's life, to achieve personal ambitions.
Truly fair and just leaders rise to power by proving their abilities and earning respect and trust of the governed people; or, in the case of divine inheritance, trust in God to put them in power without having to do illegal or dishonest things to get there.
The outside influences who lured MacBeth took advantage of his selfish ambition to deceive him into thinking he could get away without consequences for his actions.
If he had not been self-serving to begin with, he would not have abused his advantages or privilege, at the expense of others, but would still have acted with conscience and justice, regardless of whether or not there were consequences for doing ill. A good person would have acted with reason and responsibility to avoid causing undue harm or suffering.
============================================
In modern politics, a common argument people use to justify hostile takeovers or killing is for the sake of saving more people from worse injustice under a dangerous unfair ruler.
In such cases, it is still debatable whether violence or assassination is justified, or whether there are more civilized ways to overcome oppression. Some people would argue it is never justified to kill or wage war, while others would accept this if the ousted leader was criminal, tyrannical or abusive. The U.S. is often criticized for intervening in foreign affairs in this way, with as many supporters in defense of such actions as "heroic" as critics against them as "corrupt" and hypocritical.
2007-06-20 15:33:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by Nghiem E 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
Of course he was bad. He conspired with his wife to murder Duncan and Banquo. Good guys don't do that.
2007-06-20 15:04:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by ♂ ♫ Timberwolf 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
I think he was supposed to be seen as flawed by his need for power.
2007-06-20 15:38:48
·
answer #4
·
answered by jessie1985 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I hate Shakespeare. All his plays followed the same boring formulas.
2007-06-20 15:06:13
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
5⤋