Villanious and Tragic Heroic Characteristics of Macbeth and Richard III

In the plays Macbeth and the Tragedy of Richard III, the actions of the protagonists shape the history and events. Both of the characters fit the characteristics of an Aristotelian tragic hero; they come from a noble background and their hamartia or tragic flaw lead them to their downfall. However, the striking difference between the two characters is that the audience is curious about what Richard III will do next, rather than the feeling that occurs when he performs an action. In Macbeth’s case, the audience is more concerned about the thoughts and feelings, not the action he produces. So, this separates Richard III from being a typical tragic hero, makes him a Machiavellian villain.

In Shakespearean plays, a typical tragic hero is involved with external and internal problems that ruin his psychological and physical state. For the audience, the inner state of the character is more important because they feel pity and show sympathy towards the hero. This relationship between the character and audience usually starts to develop before the hero makes his mistake. At the beginning of the play, Macbeth is seen as an admired, good soldier who is loyal to his king. This shows that Macbeth is a responsible man and aware of the moral rules of his culture. Thus, this creates humanly contact with the audience. Later on in the play, he starts to change after the encounter with the witches, his ambition of becoming a king becomes an obsession. Murdering King Duncan leads him to a battle with the patriotism and loyalty of Malcolm and Macduff; at the same time these forces collide and rips his soul apart. The internal struggle is what matters in a Shakespearean tragedy. At the end of the play where the tragic hero faces the consequences of his downfall, has to understand what he has become and what he lost. Macbeth knows his state and the audience is pitying him when he faces the consequences: “My way of life is fall'n into the sere, the yellow leaf; and that which should accompany old age; as honor, love, obedience, troops of friends; I must not look to have, but, in their stead; curses, not loud but deep, mouth-honor, breath; which the poor heart would fain deny and dare not.” (Act 5, Scene 3, Page 2)

On the other hand, Richard’s problems are involved with external forces and little to no signs of the inner state. “Even the ghosts of his victims do not generate any meaningful encounter deep within his being.” (Hart, Evalee, pg. 826) He is scared of the dream he saw but he quickly recovers. It is hard for the audience to feel pity towards an emotionless man and according to Aristotle, the tragic hero has to be pitiable. The other reason which shows Richard is not a suitable tragic hero is that him being a “Machiavellian” villain. Machiavellian is a person who will deceive, manipulate, and exploit others to achieve their goals. Richard is a witty deceiver, a manipulator who also plays with language very well. Richard seeks his progress by his wit and he is beyond conventional morality. By saying conventional morality, meaning that individualism -one of the most controversial innovations of humanist thought at that time- that is connected with the policies of Machiavelli himself. Richard shows his villainous nature rather than his heroic features because he is cruel from heart and constitution.  

To sum up, Richard and Macbeth have many similarities in regards to being tragic hero and they show the characteristics of a tragic hero. They both come from a noble background, have flaws and downfalls. However, their personalities put them into a different categorization. Macbeth cannot be considered as a villain because he does not have traits that a villain has and Richard cannot be a tragic hero because he is too emotionless and has no remorse.

Bibliography

Booth, Wayne C. “MACBETH AS TRAGIC HERO.” The Journal of General Education, vol. 6, no. 1, 1951, pp. 17–25. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/27795368.

Bruening, Sheila. "The Aristotelian Tragic Hero: Vision, Voice, And The Solitary Self". Purdue E-Pubs, 1997, https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/dissertations/AAI9821711/#:~:text=The%20present%20study%20investigates%20the,of%20an%20infirmity%20of%20character.

Keenan, S. (2017) Re-Reading Shakespeare’s Richard III: Tragic Hero and Villain?. Linguaculture, The Journal of Linguaculture Centre of (Inter)cultural and (Inter)lingual Research, Alexandru Ioan Cuza Univieristy of Iasi, 8:1

Reeves, Charles H. “The Aristotelian Concept of the Tragic Hero.” The American Journal of Philology, vol. 73, no. 2, 1952, pp. 172–188. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/291812.

Donkor, Michael. "Richard III And Machiavelli". The British Library, 2016, https://www.bl.uk/shakespeare/articles/richard-iii-and-machiavelli.

Hart, Evalee. “A Comparative Study: ‘Macbeth’ and ‘Richard III.’” The English Journal, vol. 61, no. 6, 1972, pp. 824–830. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/813984.

cf. Keeton: Shakespeare’s background. p. 328.