Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Sense of Triumph at the end?

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1

    Sense of Triumph at the end?

    Who has the greater sense of triumph by the end of the play? Malcom or Macduff? Examples would help =D

  2. #2
    Bibliophile JBI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    6,360
    Malcolm, Macduff is a wuss who doesn't have the ambition to take the throne, even though it is easily in his power. In the end Macbeth beats Macduff even from the grave, since he has already killed his family. Whereas Malcolm still has stuff to live for, I would say Macduff really has nothing to live for, and therefore ends up losing regardless of the victory.

  3. #3
    Cur etiam hic es? Redzeppelin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Infinity and Beyond
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by JBI View Post
    Malcolm, Macduff is a wuss who doesn't have the ambition to take the throne, even though it is easily in his power. In the end Macbeth beats Macduff even from the grave, since he has already killed his family. Whereas Malcolm still has stuff to live for, I would say Macduff really has nothing to live for, and therefore ends up losing regardless of the victory.

    Sorry - I beg to differ. Shakespeare gave us subtle hints that Malcolm was not fit to rule (hence Macbeth's disdain for him expressed in act 5 and utter shock in 1.4 when Duncan named him heir to the throne). Macduff has the satisfaction of enacting revenge and assisting the restoration of natural order to the universe by helping put the "rightful" king ("rightful" because of the king's selection of him) back on the throne. Malcolm has done little of note in the play except flee Scotland, wait for word from Scotland, then come back with soldiers who fought for him.
    "I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else." - C.S. Lewis

  4. #4
    Registered User Tabriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1
    Macduff is a wuss who doesn't have the ambition to take the throne, even though it is easily in his power.
    In my opinion, Macduff sound not be deemed a 'wuss' for not taking the throne. I believe he had the ambition to take the throne, but he choose not to act on it. Therefore, seperating his actions and highlighting the differences between him and Macbeth. He shows his true loyality to King and country by handing the throne to Malcolm.

    Malcolm honestly does very little for his country and it is mainly through Macduff's actions that he even ends up on the throne.

  5. #5
    the beloved: Gladys's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,609
    Macduff is a wuss who doesn't have the ambition to take the throne
    A wus? Macduff is a psychopath who abandons his wife, son, relatives and servants to the fury of Macbeth. Why? To experience a patriotic high...loyal lunacy! Even the tyrant Macbeth was protective of his less-deserving wife.

    Can empathy or warmth really be expected from one who describes his own birth as “from his mother's womb untimely ripp'd”?

Similar Threads

  1. Lolita
    By waxmephilosophical in forum General Literature
    Replies: 236
    Last Post: 02-24-2015, 12:26 PM
  2. Review of Sense and Sensibility, dvd.
    By Newcomer in forum Sense and Sensibility
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-26-2008, 06:45 PM
  3. SLOW...BORING.... NO SENSE
    By Nick in forum A Tale of Two Cities
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-17-2007, 07:12 PM
  4. Masterpiece in every sense
    By Cecilia in forum David Copperfield
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-24-2005, 06:07 PM
  5. the concept of sense and sensibility between 2 books
    By pureflora in forum General Literature
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-06-2003, 06:48 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •