ERH 303 Ramayana-rp4rdn

ERH 303 Travel Guide to India-2clpa6q

Capstone 2016

John Armellino

ERH 422 01

COL Miller

December 12, 2016

Macbeth on Manliness

The concept of ‘manliness’ has been the subject of debate since men have been around. What makes a man a man? Dictionary.com defines manliness as “having qualities traditionally ascribed to men, as strength or bravery.” Let us delve deeper into what this means. Men have traditionally been viewed as both the providers and the protectors, while women have traditionally been viewed as the nurturers and home keepers who were ultimately submissive to men. The Christian Bible (a popular book) has many things to say about being a man, including this note on husbandry:

“Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her…” (Ephesians 5:22-25)[i]

Throughout human history, this has been the typical view of men and women. Of course there are many cultures where this is not the case. But, in medieval Scotland, the society in which Macbeth is set, this is absolutely the case. Now, the distinction between male and female roles is important to note. The differences in each gender’s assumed roles in society define each other. Without masculinity, there would be no femininity, and vice versa. So, we can determine that as a whole, people have typically defined masculinity as aggressive and strong, whereas femininity is passive and sensitive. In Macbeth, several characters have their own interpretation of what being a man is. These views range from aligning with the traditional definition to challenging the typical preconceptions of masculinity. This essay will examine these interpretations, and their affect on the play’s title character, which one can see is torn between the conflicting philosophies presented to him. Macbeth is a man struggling with what it means to be a man.

Macbeth gives the impression that he is a lost soul. Although he is a successful warrior and leader, it appears that he is insecure about his manhood. Macbeth is easily manipulated by his wife, Lady Macbeth, into murdering King Duncan in order to take the crown for himself. She challenges the idea that he is a man by saying that he is not cruel enough for the task at hand, that he does not have what it takes to seize what he wants for himself:

“Art not without ambition, but without

The illness should attend it. What thou wouldst highly,

That wouldst thou holily; wouldst not play false,

And yet wouldst wrongly win.” (I. v. 6-10.)[ii]

Lady Macbeth has this almost primeval but also extremely relevant perception of masculinity. In her eyes, true men go after what they want, no matter the cost. Damn the consequences, damn anyone else that they may hurt, if a man wants something he will take it. That is a true man. Lady Macbeth insults her husband by essentially telling him that he does not have the capacity to take what he wants. In her mind, she is saying that he is not a man. The insecure Macbeth is driven to convince his wife and himself that he is a true man. What is interesting about Lady Macbeth’s interpretation of masculinity is that although it is primitive and animalistic (see what you want, take what you want), it does not have a strong bearing with what we have come to know as the more traditional interpretation of manliness, which attributes great value to the concept of honor.[iii]

Macbeth is torn between these varying definitions of manliness, the savage usurper and the honorable servant to his king. Is it better to take what you want or to honor your oaths and your vows? After all, nice guys finish last right? Macbeth knows what the right and honorable thing to do is. However, he is not concerned with honor so much as he is his reputation and his safety.

“We still have judgment here, that we but teach

Bloody instructions, which, being taught, return

To plague th’ inventor: this even-handed justice…” (I. vii. 8-10)

From the quote above, we can infer that Macbeth is concerned that his ambition will have repercussions. We know that Lady Macbeth convinces him to go against his better judgment and murder Duncan. Why? Because, he is not a man if he does not do it.

Macbeth’s view of himself as a man is a reflection of what others think of him. When the witches declare that he will become king, they also state that Banquo is “lesser than Macbeth, but also greater” (I. i. 66). One can interpret this line as sowing the seeds of insecurity and jealousy in side Macbeth’s mind. How could he be greater but lesser? This would not do. People who rely on the opinions of others are always insecure and easily manipulated. The irony of this is that in most western cultures, a key aspect of manliness “is a capacity to exert control or to resist being controlled.”[iv] Macbeth is easily swayed. He believes himself to be an honorable man when others think that of him. The truth is, being honorable was only convenient for him at the time. The second that he believes that it is possible for him to become king, Macbeth’s sense of honor begins to unravel. Yes, he feels guilty at first, but that guilt begins to give way to a cold, hardened heart.

This brings us to another aspect of manhood, emotions. It is a common and unhealthy misconception that men are not as emotional as women, giving rise to men who repress their feelings and who are afraid to show their true emotions. Macduff, Macbeth’s ally turned enemy, is an objection to the belief that men are these stoic creatures. Macduff is a man that feels deeply, and does not repress it like Macbeth does. The tragedy of Macbeth repressing his consciousness is that he is repressing his spirit. He is committing spiritual suicide. By the end of the play, Macbeth is a nihilistic husk of his former, spirited self. Macduff holds onto his emotions for dear life, his love for his family and his grief and anger over their deaths:

“I shall do so,

But I must also feel it as a man.

I cannot but remember such things were

That were most precious to me. Did heaven look on,

And would not take their part? Sinful Macduff,

They were all struck for thee! Naught that I am,

Not for their own demerits, but for mine,

Fell slaughter on their souls. Heaven rest them now.” (IV. iii. 227-234)

He is the opposite of Macbeth, in that he does not show any concern for others’ opinions of him or his manhood. He is already secure in the knowledge that he is a man. He does not have a wife that makes him doubt himself, and there are no insidious prophecies to plague his mind. Macduff is a man in touch with his conscious, and he does not deny that consciousness.

Nowadays, the more modern interpretation of manhood is one of self-identification. To people nowadays, a true man is one who is in touch with who he is, acknowledges his emotions, controls those emotions, and lives his life the way he sees fit. The more Macbeth denies his consciousness, the less of a man he becomes. Macbeth is more interested in appearing like a man rather than being one, as if he does not know the difference. He is much more concerned with what others think of him than a true man would be.

“We will proceed no further in this business.

He hath honored me of late, and I have bought

Golden opinions from all sorts of people,

Which would be worn now in their newest gloss,

Not cast aside so soon.” (I. vii. 31-35)

His argument against murdering Duncan does not necessarily spring exclusively from loyalty toward his king, but also from concern for his own safety and reputation.

Although Macbeth may appear to know what makes a man and, more importantly, what makes a good man, he does not know how to become that model. Instead, he relies on the opinions of others to guide him, which is a road that leads to disastrous consequences. If Macbeth had not given up his soul at the first opportunity to climb the social ladder, he may have been able to remain a good man, or even learn to become a better one. Macbeth’s inability to control his own fate, to be the captain of his soul, makes him the target for manipulation by the witches and his wife. Oddly enough it is the women in his life that open the door to Macbeth to commit treason.

That women in this play are depicted negatively is a bit of an understatement, but if the reader pays attention, he or she will see that it is never the females committing any of the crimes portrayed. The women, being the passive half of the human species, have only presented Macbeth with the option to seize the throne. This is something, I assume, Macbeth would never have thought to do himself lest he heard the prophecies of the three witches. Macbeth is hardly a risk-taker. It is only when he is assured that he will win the throne that he even considers going after it. Lady Macbeth is the decision maker, the risk-taker, and the provocateur. An important aspect of manhood is taking risks, and Macbeth has apparently failed to learn this. This is not to say that what he did was right, but Lady Macbeth was correct that her husband, in order to achieve his goal, must be willing to take risks.

When Macbeth takes his wife’s challenge, albeit reluctantly, he is still using the prophecies as a crutch. His unwavering confidence until the end of the play is the result of this crutch. Even in his darkest hour, he is confident in the word of the witches’ prophecies. This steely resolve all but disappears when he learns of Macduff’s unique birth. It was confidence in the witches that Macbeth had, not himself.

Perhaps that was always Macbeth’s issue. He was simply not confident enough in himself to make his own decisions, to follow his own conscience, and to just be a better man. In the end, he died alone and in shame. The most important aspects of manhood were lost to Macbeth, and that cost him everything. When a man does not know how to be a man, he will struggle with it his whole life and let the words of others poison his mind all too easily.

Sources:

[i] The Holy Bible Containing the Old and New Testaments. Trenton: I. Collins, 1791. Print.

[ii] Shakespeare, William, and Alfred Harbage. Macbeth. Baltimore: Penguin, 1971. Print.

[iii] Mansfield, H. “Be a Man-Take Risks, Win Money and Honor Manliness-and Enterprise-Aren’t About Playing It Safe.” American Enterprise Washington. 11 (2000): 38-39. Print.

[iv] Schrock, Douglas, and Michael Schwalbe. “Men, Masculinity, and Manhood Acts.” Annual Review of Sociology 35.1 (2009): 277-95. Web.

1. Of all of our short assignments, I enjoyed discussing Brutus’ speech from Julius Caesar the most. It was interesting to compare it to Antony’s speech, which extended to comparing the two conflicting characters.
2. Julius Caesar was the most interesting play for its morally gray themes. It could be difficult to justify Brutus killing one of his best friends for the greater good. The battle between loyalty to the state and to one’s friends makes it hard to choose sides.
3. Although Julius Caesar may have been the most interesting play to me, the most intriguing character to me would have to be Don John, the villain of Much Ado About Nothing. His motives remain a mystery to me, and I would like to know more about the personality that strives to ruin everyone else’s lives like he did.
4. Much Ado About Nothing’s themes of love and deception were particularly touching to me for some reason. As someone who is conflicted about the whole idea of marriage, I would like to go more in depth with how marriage worked back in the renaissance.
5. As I said above, I would like to learn more about marriage during the renaissance.

John Armellino

ERH 422W 01

COL Miller

10/17/16

Short Paper on Julius Caesar

Brutus’ eulogy for Julius Caesar was more of a justification for his actions than anything else. One can tell that Brutus wishes to maintain both his honor and Caesar’s, making him out to be a reluctant killer. Brutus presented himself to be a sympathetic figure with nothing but the best of intentions for Rome and her people. He addresses them as “Romans, countrymen, and lovers.” (III. II. 13.) This speech, although it defended Brutus’ part in the conspiracy to murder Caesar, also did well to defend Caesar’s character. It is a difficult thing to do, to justify the killing an individual while also praising the character of that individual. But, Brutus provides the best reason, the only reason that one should kill for, freedom. “Had you rather Caesar were living, and die all slaves, than that Caesar were dead, to live all free men?” (III. II. 22-24.) He compares living under Caesar’s inevitable rule to slavery and death, while a world without Caesar is full of life and freedom. Brutus essentially gave his audience no choice but to believe that killing Julius Caesar was the right thing to do.

In his speech, Brutus even asks the audience, dares them to speak up in objection. He calls such people who would speak against him “so vile that will not love his country.” (III. II. 31-32) Brutus subtly praises his own actions as noble and for the good of Rome, while he shames anyone who would disagree with him. When I say subtly, I mean that he is subtly praising himself. Although the speech is anything but subtle, Brutus does not directly say that he is acting out of nobility, only that those who disagree with him are not noble and do not have Rome’s best interests at heart.

What is interesting though is that Brutus does heap praise onto Caesar while explaining the necessity of his death. He calls Caesar “valiant,” “fortunate,” and “ambitious.” (III. II. 25-26) By singing the praises of Caesar, Brutus sways the crowd. When you compliment someone, people tend to associate those compliments with you. Even though you said them about someone else, it was you that said them. The crowd began to understand that it was not easy for Brutus to make this decision, and that it must have been difficult to kill someone so loved. Brutus is known for his honor. For him to kill Caesar means that he must have had good reason. His speech does a wonderful job of conveying the importance of the freedom of the Roman people.

John Armellino

ERH 422W 01

COL Miller

October 3, 2016

Short Paper on Henry V

One of Henry’s most famous speeches in the play “Once more unto the breach…” (III. i) is used to motivate his men, to move them literally and figuratively. The speech takes place in the middle of a desperate struggle between the English aggressors (led by Henry V himself) and the French defenders. The Battle for Harfleur has become a bloody struggle for a “breach” (gap) in the walls of the city. The English have made the breach but the French are eagerly defending it. Henry’s men are tired, but he encourages them to keep fighting, to keep trying one more time. Rather than acknowledge the inherent shittiness of their situation, Henry focuses on the ideas of courage and pride while giving the men no choice but to complete their mission.

Henry does give them one alternative to taking the town, and that is “closing the wall up with our English dead!” (III. i.) He challenges their manhood and pride, lest they “dishonor” their mothers. The men are tired and bloodied. It must be extremely easy to give up in a situation like that. But, Henry appeals to the men’s sense of duty and courage He exclaims that they “were made in England.” (III. i.) The men are not without a sense of patriotism and loyalty to their leader who has led them this far. By giving the men no choice but to move forward, die, or live in shame, Henry has secured their enthusiastic loyalty to the cause.

The language seen in this speech is grandiose and somewhat pandering. The men are only there to fight for one man’s throne but Henry makes it about them, and their courage. Henry appeals to the men’s pride and masculinity, making them forget about the negatives of their experience.

“Much Ado About Nothing” (Prompt 1)

One of the most obvious examples of miscommunication in “Much Ado About Nothing” takes the form of Benedick and Beatrice’s relationship. Benedick, the “confirmed bachelor” is engaged in a “merry war” of wit and will with the equally confirmed bachelorette Beatrice. Benedick spurns Beatrice and insults her nearly every time the two meet, seemingly making it quite clear that he loathes her. However, we all know that this is not the case. For whatever reason, Benedick is incapable of admitting to himself or anyone else that he is in love with Beatrice. The reason for this may be that Benedick is simply afraid of his feelings. It is only after he “learns” that Beatrice “loves” him that he begins to reconcile these emotions. This could be that Benedick feared rejection and embarrassment, for if in this “merry war” one of the two combatants admitted to loving the other, well that could be easily exploited and used to hurt the other one’s pride.

Fortunately, neither Beatrice nor Benedick appear to be so cruel, and both are, in fact, in love with each other. But, before either of them could admit that, they had to overcome a mountain of miscommunication. The biggest problem here is trust. Most miscommunication problems stem from a lack of trust. Neither of the two trusted each other with their feelings. Even after the main conflict is resolved and Hero’s honor is restored, when confronted with their love for each other in public, both of them deny it. When Benedick asks, “Do not you love me?” Beatrice refuses to publicly requite, saying “Why no! No more than reason.” Benedick, fearing rejection and further embarrassment, denies his love for Beatrice in return. Once again the would-be couple’s friends are forced to intervene.

If it were not for their pride, there perhaps would not be any miscommunication, as it seems to be a point of pride for both Benedick and Beatrice that they will never fall victim to love. For whatever reason, Benedick takes pride in being a bachelor, so it would take an extraordinary woman for him to overcome this pride, as he “truly loves none.” It is often true that pride can get in the way of proper communication. Many of you surely can remember how difficult it is to admit that you were wrong about something, or that you have had a meaningful change of heart about an important subject. Benedick is going through the same challenge. He fears mockery from his friends, who despite their playful intentions do subtly mock him throughout the story.

Luckily, those same friends also force him to confront his fears and get over his stubborn pride in order to accept what makes him truly happy, Beatrice. Beatrice overcomes her pride and mistrust as well, and when it is made clear in public that the couple loves each other, there is no more left to fear. The only way for Benedick and Beatrice to overcome their fears was for them to be confronted with them head on.

John Armellino

ERH 422W

COL Miller

Due 9/9/16

“Romeo and Juliet” Short Paper

As far as their relationship is concerned, Romeo and Juliet are both responsible for jumpstarting the events of the play. This is obvious. The question is, are they responsible for the specific outcome of the play? It can be argued that both our protagonists are quite young, and have little to no idea what kind of consequences that their actions would bring. Throughout the play, there are numerous references to fate and destiny, in all their inevitability. It appears the play has contradictory views on the subject. Yes, there are circumstances that could not have been avoided by the protagonists, such as their families’ feud and the fact that they are attracted to each other. But, many other unfortunate circumstances are the direct result of Romeo and Juliet’s impulsive and irresponsible behavior. Shakespeare may be making the case that we love who we love, and there is nothing we can do about it, but there is also the argument that Romeo and Juliet were simply two confused people who acted on pure impulse.

It can be argued that Romeo and Juliet cannot help their attraction to each other. However, they act on that attraction alone throughout the story. The romance even begins with Romeo crashing a Capulet event, a dangerous and unwise thing to do.

Although at first, they may appear to be cautious of their newfound feelings, the two almost immediately act on their romantic impulses. The two are married despite hardly knowing each other. The two of them, especially Romeo, continually let their emotions do the thinking for them. Romeo is quick to resort to violence when Tybalt kills his friend Mercutio. An understandable reaction, yes, but this emotional outburst of violence gets Romeo banished from Verona, leaving him unaware of the Friar’s plan later in the story.

Romeo and Juliet’s intentions were never malicious, yet they caused tremendous pain with their deaths. When considering and ultimately committing suicide, neither of the two lovers thought about their friends or family, only themselves or each other. The two young lovers could have prevented all of this by simply being smarter in their approach to love. Rather than rush to be married, rush to be together, and ultimately rush to die, Romeo and Juliet could have simply seen each other whenever possible. However, Juliet would have eventually married Paris.

Was Shakespeare trying to say that no matter what, someone would have ended up unhappy or worse? Would Romeo have simply moved on if Juliet ended up marrying Paris, or would the worst kind of tragedy happen? Would Romeo and Juliet be alive but not with the person they were meant to be with? I argue that the story of the play is one of fate bringing two people together, two people who simply could not help themselves. Perhaps it was simply their destiny to die, to finally bring peace between their two families. If not, it was only a meaningless tragedy that could have been avoided.

I have learned that a writer is always learning. He or she is constantly in the process of discovery and creation. I have learned to never be satisfied, and to always be humble. I realize of course that this sounds like a half-baked answer that seeks to prey on the professor’s sentiments, but I have always been a fan of the clichéd. Sue me. As for the more technical aspects of writing, I have already discussed my desire to formulate my own “stored problem representations.” I have also learned that writing is a method of solving problems, and that the problem to be solved is the writer’s topic. In order to successfully do so, a writer must pull from within as well as outside influences.

I was at first a believer in the idea that writing is purely from the writer’s own imagination and consciousness. But now I realize that it is not that simple. Writing is a complicated process with many creative steps between the conception of a topic and the final draft.  Every writer’s process is unique.

In order to better myself as a writer, I must open my mind to outside influences and unfamiliar methods, rather than get trapped inside the circle of uncreativity