Printable View
OK so basically in my class we are doing debates and we each have been give topic to debate about in Macbeth and i my team has been given the topic king Duncan was not a very important character in the play and i have not been able to think of any points please help.
Do not confuse stage time, or number of lines with importance. Duncan is a pivotal role on which the entire play hinges. 1) He's the current King of Scotland. Bear in mind, Scotland didn't practice primogenitor in the 11th century. Scottish Kings
were generally chosen for military prowess, battlefield tested, massive battle skills in combat, strategy. Many Scottish Kings died either on the battlefield, or by assassination/coup. Now, couple of important points. Shakespeare wrote with the knowledge that Elizabeth I or James I was watching his work. That's why, with the exception of Richard II you never see one of 'God's Annnointed Kings by Divine Right' being killed. There were assassination attempts on Elizabeth the First's life, and many a Papist plot were discovered during her reign. (Henry VI parts 1, 2 and 3 have plenty of assassinations but they are done to the opposing team, not the house that ultimately becomes the Tudors. In fact, Hemmings and Burbage, two of Shakespeare's actors almost got their noses slit for performing Richard II because it showed the deposing and murder of one of God's Annointed Kings. This was a touchy subject no matter WHERE you set the play.) Now, Macbeth is written and performed AFTER Elizabeth's death when James I takes the throne. The Scottish lineage of James I is established all the way back to Banquo, historically. These are not fictional characters. (Principle source for the play comes from the Scottish section of Raphael Holinshed's CHRONICLES [1587] which Shakespeare also used for his English history plays. The reigns of Duncan and Macbeth historically span 1034-1057) They are historical despite liberties Shakespeare takes with witches, etc. Additionally James I was a big fan of the occult. ( James I wrote the DAEMONOLOGY in 1599). Shakespeare was wise to curry favor by the elements he chose to put in this play. As long as Duncan is ALIVE, nobody else can be King. Duncan is old but not entirely feeble, WELL LOVED and respected and very wise. NOBODY expected him to choose his own son Malcolm to succeed him. In fact, both Macbeth and Banquo had reasonable expectations of that appointment based on their well recognized skill sets and performance record. If you believe the witches, which Macbeth does when he's rewarded Thane of Cawdor according to their prophecy, he knows he's going to be King He just doesn't know how. Lady Macbeth may be more ambitious and bloodthirsty than Macbeth, but even if Duncan IS murdered, the crown goes to Malcolm ANYWAY. Happily, Malcolm and his brother Donalbain decide to flee in fear for their lives, after all, Dad's been killed and it's a pretty good guess it was for his crown. Macbeth can now throw suspicion on the sons, goes to Scone where you HAVE to go to be crowned a Scottish King, by getting there before Malcolm and Donalbain he effectively usurps the throne and the population initially wouldn't mind due to the legends of his prowess. So, if Duncan DOESN'T die, there is no play. If Duncan is feeble, inept, corrupt and unloved, there is no play. Macbeth has a real difficulty killing a man he regards as his surrogate Father and friend. Even Lady Macbeth remarks that Duncan looks like HER father. So that's plenty of guilt to send you into a spiral of questionable sanity. I highly recommend getting your hands on A.C. BRADLEYS'S SHAKESPEAREAN TRAGEDIES. He has a chapter dedicated to the paly and it gives a brilliant summary and plenty of fodder to use in any debate.