Macbeth Genre

Tragedy

People are always running around saying that Macbeth is one of the "greatest tragedies ever written." This might be true, but what the heck's a "tragedy" anyway? (We need to know the answer to this before we can even think about whether or not it's "one of the greatest," right?) It turns out there are some basic rules and conventions that govern the genre of "tragedy" so let's take a peek at our handy-dandy checklist so that we can all be on the same page.

Dramatic work: Check. Macbeth's a play, that's for sure.

Serious or somber theme: The play's all about what causes people to commit evil acts (like murder). So, check.

Hero's got a major flaw of character or conflict with some overpowering force: Check. Macbeth's got some serious ambition (so does his wife), which makes him willing to kill in order to secure his position as King of Scotland. Plus, once Macbeth eliminates Duncan, he can't seem to stop killing people. Is there some other "overpowering force" at work too? Keep reading.

Hero is destined for destruction and downfall: Here's where Shakespeare mixes things up. On the one hand, the "weird sisters" (three witches) prophesize that Macbeth will become King of Scotland. As we know, "weird" comes from the old English ("wyrd") word for "fate," which aligns the witches with the three fates, who are supposed to control man's destiny. So, does that mean the witches control Macbeth's fate? If the answer to this question is yes, then Macbeth is destined to murder Duncan, become king, and get then later get his own head lopped off by his disgruntled countryman. But this isn't necessarily the case. In fact, the play goes out of its way to dramatize Macbeth's deliberation about whether or not he should kill the King. What's more, the three sisters never say anything to Macbeth that is specific about murder. The sisters prophesy that Macbeth will be king, and he comes up with the idea of murder all on his own. So, perhaps the weird sisters don't control Macbeth so much as they are a catalyst. You could argue that they set things in motion and reveal a murderous ambition that's maybe been inside Macbeth all along. There's lots more room for interpretation here so go ahead and take a stab at it.

*Shakespearean tragedies always end in death but with the promise of continuity: Not all tragedies end in death but all of Shakespeare's tragedies do. We know things will end badly – we just want to know how badly. Macduff, of course, lops off Macbeth's head and then runs and presents it to Malcolm, who will soon be crowned king.

Notice here that, despite the deaths of individuals in the play (King Duncan, the guards, Macduff's wife and kids, Lady Macbeth, the Siward's son, etc.), Shakespeare is also interested in the restoration of political order. Macbeth was kind of a tyrant and made his subjects miserable. Perhaps things will be better with Malcolm on the throne. (Though, there may be a minor hitch, which we talk about in "What's Up With the Ending?")

There's also a strong sense of England's own political lineage at work here. Recall, if you will, that in Act IV, Scene i, the weird sisters present a vision of eight kings, all descendents of Banquo. (Banquo was killed by Macbeth's henchman in Act III, Scene iii but his son, Fleance, survived the attack.) King James I of England (a.k.a. King James VI of Scotland), the guy sitting on the throne when Shakespeare wrote Macbeth, traced his lineage back to Banquo so, this whole bit gives King James (and England) some props by helping to sustain the Stuart political myth.

So there you have it. Macbeth is definitely a tragedy. Is it one of the greatest ever written? We think so (and it's definitely one of the most frightening) but you'll have to read the play and decide that one for yourself.