Nothing to say, yet
Transcription
The podcast discusses the concept of persuasion in the play Macbeth. Mark Moussa talks about how Macbeth demonstrates the bad side of human behavior and how persuasion is used in the book. Sophia Palmas focuses on how the witches persuade Macbeth to believe he is better than everyone else and can control his own destiny. Wang Wuzhong discusses how Lady Macbeth persuades the murderers to kill Banquo and his son. The podcast also touches on Lady Macbeth's manipulation of the Thanes during a banquet. Welcome to the Double-Double Mike in Trouble podcast. This is your host Farz Beg. Today we have special guests, Shakespeare experts Mark Moussa, Sophia Palmas, and Wang Wuzhong. Let's get straight into it. I'll start with you, Mark. What are your thoughts on the concept of persuasion and Macbeth? Macbeth was such a hit in the 17th century because it obviously presented a more advanced use of language, but most importantly, it demonstrated the bad side of human behavior. It made readers aware of innate human characteristics such as greed, selfishness, and persuasion. I want to go deeper into the concept of persuasion. What is persuasion, and where was it used in the book? Briefly, persuasion is the act of convincing someone to do something or think something they wouldn't usually do or think. In Macbeth, this concept was used multiple times, but where it stood out to me the most was when Lady Macbeth persuaded Macbeth to kill King Duncan. I found that interesting too. Please enlighten us on how you think persuasion was used during that section of the book. A famous saying explains how the extension of a man's pride makes a man a real man. It's a scene in Act 1 of Scene 7 when Lady Macbeth expresses, when you do it, then you were a man, and to be more than what you were, you would be so much more the man. In other words, Lady Macbeth attacks that pride and makes him question his own masculinity, allowing him to develop the idea that only a real man would go through with a murder. She also lays out her plan in detail, making him think that it is quick, easy, and nothing could go wrong by explaining, in the same act and scene, who did receive the murder, others. That gets his hopes up. Lady Macbeth realizes that and starts making him visualize the benefits of having such power, including him having more honor to his name which is all he's ever wanted as a soldier. I cannot agree more. Ashley, another question just came to mind. I was wondering if you think persuasion could have been used any differently in this part. The thing about persuasion is that it's such a broad concept that there's so many different ways one could persuade someone else. No one is better than another, but some might be considered better in a specific situation. In this part of the book, Lady Macbeth has used persuasion techniques that don't attack Macbeth, but rather make him feel like he's doing it for a reason or he's not doing it alone. In other words, she could have convinced Macbeth that King Duncan was a tyrant by outlining the bad things he had done in his reign, making him believe that killing him is for the greater good of everyone. Another way of persuading him that could have been used is to appeal to fate, meaning, according to the witch's prophecies, it was going to happen either way, so what's the point of not doing it earlier and getting the benefits earlier if it was going to happen either way? Finally, Lady Macbeth is a maiden who visualized how boring and blank their life would be if they had just waited for destiny. Thank you so much for that deep analysis. Listen, I don't want to be rude here. I know you're the host pair, but I want to know what Sophia thinks of the concept of persuasion in Macbeth. Well, of course. Kind of the same way that Mark said about getting the benefits earlier, I focused on the witches and their master Hecate using persuasion to convince Macbeth that he is basically better than everyone else. In Act 3, Hecate states that he will use his magic to convince Macbeth of the illusions that aren't actually true, only to show that Macbeth, through identity of a cold-blooded killer, thirsts for power. Hecate and the witches plan to give Macbeth a false sense of control over his own destiny to then make his life crumble in front of him because of the consequences of his cruel actions. Interesting. Do you think the witches were the ones deciding what happened in the story? Yeah, definitely. Well, just think about it. They were the ones that made him get the idea to both kill Duncan and Banquo in the first place. Without knowing that he would become the king, he would never have a reason to tell the current king to speed up the process of becoming the king himself. And similarly, for Banquo, although the prophecies shown by the witches said that his son would be king, Macbeth got too full of himself to realize that he could not change that and tried to end Banquo's bloodline. All the blood he spilled for the power promised by the prophecy is because the witches convinced him that he could control and change reality more than the already written fate. I see what you mean. I agree. But how did they really persuade him? Well, it's really interesting because they don't really directly tell him to murder the king or anything like Lady Macbeth did, but rather they gain his trust and basically persuade him into thinking he's better than everyone else and that he has the power to change and control the future and present as he pleases. Before meeting Bacchus at a hill, Hecateus says that he shall sprint fast, corner and burn his hopes above with wisdom and grace and fear. And you all know security is mortal's cheapest enemy. Basically saying that he will believe he can go against his fate, make fun of death and that his hopes will be above any fears and wisdom, but also above the reality. This false security and being so full of himself is the biggest enemy of mortals and in this case of Macbeth. Oh yeah, that's really interesting. Do you think it could have been better in any way? It does look like the witches didn't mean it, especially when their master Hecateus basically scolds them for using their magic. But the witches and Hecateus are clear on making Macbeth miserable with his own actions. That's why they keep showing him visions and hallucinations but he fully believes they're real, true and also changeable. Now I'm curious to see what Cersei thinks about it. The scene I wanted to talk about takes place in Act 3 when Macbeth is trying to persuade two murderers into killing Banquo and his son Fleance. What would Macbeth mean mortals for trying to convince the murderers to commit the crime? As we know in the play, Macbeth is very conscious of the prophecies from the three witches. He's certain that the prophecies will all come true ever since the witches predicted that he would become the Thane of Kaldor, which happened almost instantly after. However, another prediction the witches made was that Banquo's ancestors would be a line of generations of kings. After Macbeth killed King Duncan and took the crown, this prophecy weighed heavily on his mind and caused him distress. When talking to himself, Macbeth says, Our fears in Banquo stick deep, meaning that he's very afraid of Banquo since Banquo is a noble and smart man. Banquo also suspects that Macbeth cheated his way onto the throne by killing Duncan. Macbeth needs to have Banquo and his son Fleance killed if he wants to have peace in his mind. Yes, I agree that Macbeth has those motives. I also wanted to know what specific language or tactics do you think Macbeth used in order to convince the murderers to kill Banquo and his son? That's a good question. I think Macbeth is a very good manipulator of people's minds, and he does this perfectly in the scene. Macbeth tells the murderers that Banquo is the reason for them not being promoted and that Banquo is actively working against them. Macbeth tries to incite anger in the murderers by blaming Banquo, the common enemy, for all their misfortunes. However, Macbeth was likely the real reason for the murderers' problems and uses Banquo as a scapegoat. Macbeth also has a lot of rhetorical questions that he asks the murderers to make them think more deeply and second-guess themselves. In one instance, Macbeth even questions the murderers' manhood by comparing them to dogs. Mark, this is really similar to the way that Lady Macbeth convinced Macbeth to kill Duncan. It seems like all the men in this story would do anything to prove that they are men. That's a really good connection. What I want to know is if the proliferation really worked out in the end. Well, partially. Macbeth convinced the murderers to kill Banquo and Fleance pretty easily, but when it came to the actual task, Banquo was killed and Fleance escaped. When the murderers deliver this news to Macbeth, he says, The prophecy of the three witches still holds true because Banquo's ancestor is alive. Macbeth will always be wary because he knows he can't hold the throne for long if the prophecy is to become true. Now, Wanwu, what do you think about the concept of persuasion and of that? I should have seen an act three where Lady Macbeth lies to the Thanes in the banquet in order to avoid the Thanes from further interacting with the king. By doing this, Lady Macbeth was able to set a line in which the Thanes wouldn't interfere further, reducing the risk of their secret to be disclosed. Lady Macbeth acted vigilantly. She said that Macbeth had an innate condition. Afterwards, she carefully guided the Thanes out of the banquet. She says, What was happening at the banquet? The banquet was held in order to celebrate Macbeth's inheritance of the throne. During the banquet, Macbeth suffered seeing a hallucination which she could only see. The hallucination was the ghost of Banquo. Before the banquet, Macbeth had planned to assassinate Banquo and his son. Accordingly, Banquo got murdered by the hired murderers. In the banquet, Banquo reappeared in the form of a ghost. The ghost of Banquo, only visible through Macbeth's eyes, sat on the king's throne, giving mental pressure to Macbeth. As a result, by making Macbeth further suffer mentally, he ruined the banquet. That's unfortunate. Yet Macbeth is Macbeth's concern here. What's your opinion about Lady Macbeth's ways of saying this? I believe it is fair to consider Lady Macbeth has handled the situation well. Although the situation was unexpected, Lady Macbeth behaved with tranquility. To quickly understand the situation, Lady Macbeth instantly made an excuse to calm the Thanes when Macbeth was behaving strangely, despite the fact that the hallucination was only seen by Macbeth. Also, Lady Macbeth ably finished the situation by politely asking the Thanes to leave. She says, at once, good night. Stand not upon the order of your going, but go at once. Seeing so, Lady Macbeth was indeed an expert in this situation. Now finally, what are your thoughts about any other ways to handle the situation better? I believe there is no other possible way which I think Lady Macbeth could have done it better. It can be counter-argued that Lady Macbeth would have controlled her temper a little better in front of Macbeth. However, I believe this is merely a personality trait, and whatever was shown to other Thanes in the banquet was a calm wife who politely asked others to leave to deal with her husband's suffering and conditions. So therefore, there are no problems. Thank you for your opinion, Wang Lu. That was well enjoyable. Well, that was it for today. Thank you guys for listening. See you next time, and don't forget to stay out of trouble, especially double trouble. Bye. Bye.
