Jehehehejej Poem by imani halley

Marginn is defending the character of Lady Macbeth. He argues that her guiding passion is her love for Hasbicth and that her participation in Duncan’s murder is motivated by her concern for him. This criticism comes from a reliable source: papers analyzing Lady Macbeth by a protester who studied Macbeth. This information is the complete opposite of what my thesis statement is about. I was describing how Lady Macbeth was a bad person, but instead my resources suggest she was a good person. I don’t plan on researching this topic further.

This article is saying that Lady Macbeth never acquired the thrown for any personal gain. That stands ready to sacrifice her soul solely from a women’s desire to fulfill her husband’s wishes. He also argues that she is not naturally cruel. No woman cruel by nature could suffer as she suffered in the final scenes. Her stimulation of cruelty is merely one of the prices she has to pay, and which she stands ready to pay. All this to present her husband with his much desired gift. Williams says Macbeth is the opposite he’s the tragedy of the mobility to endure the consequences of crime. This is what makes them compatible for each other. This criticism comes from an outdated source: published in 1929. The view of Williams was one I hadn't thought of. I never looked at Lady Macbeth as just being a wife fulfilling the needs of her husband. I plan on using this topic to further my research.

Aristide’s article is arguing how Lady Macbeth is the ultimate reason for the change in personalities between Macbeth and Lady Macbeth. She is arguing Lady Macbeth’s constant belittling and ostracizing of Macbeth is what ultimately pushed him to become the brute of a king he became. But in the midst of making judgment calls of Macbeth, Lady Macbeth was the one truly out of touch with who she was. Lady Macbeth never changed throughout the story. She was always the instigator never the perpetrator. My thesis statement agrees with what Aristide is saying. I never believed Lady Macbeth changed but instead couldn't handle the consequences her wickedness brought. I disagree that she is the sole blame for Macbeth’s change. This source is useful it supports my argument but also disagrees with it. This gives me more room for ideas. I will continue to research this connection.

Mcgrail is approaching Macbeth as a study in tyranny. He focuses on Macbeth’s unbounded cruelty and ambition. Macbeth ruled only in his own self-interest which defines on what a tyrant is. How his lack of conscience and self-awareness was in a sense dehumanized. My thesis doesn’t discuss the issue of Macbeth’s tyrannical behavior as king. In comparison to my other sources this source attacks Macbeth’s character more greatly. I don’t plan on using this source in my research.

Sadowski asserts that the masculine principle is a crucial agent in Macbeth’s progression from being concerned with honor and conscience. To being preoccupied with remorseless ambition and the consolidation of power. The masculine principle is Sadowski’s idea that a man has to go through different changes to protect his manhood whether it is good or bad. My thesis doesn’t discuss this topic, but I hadn’t thought of Macbeth this way. Instead of me just attacking Lady Macbeth for changing Macbeth. I have a point to go off that could argue that Macbeth changed by his own doing this can make my essay stronger. This is a reliable source it was polished by the University of America. This source effectively links the pros and cons of my thesis statement regarding Lady Macbeth’s effect on Macbeth. I plan on researching this topic more.

Markel reads Macbeth as a tragedy of personal degeneration. He concentrates on Macbeth as a tragic figure according to the classical definition. But how his character still has the ability to elicit sympathy and find redemption. This source is outdated it was written in 1932. My thesis takes the blame of Macbeth, and shifts it other people. I also have an argument to back it up because the audience still fells sympathy for Macbeth. I plan on using this as a source.

Kahn is arguing that Macbeth pursues the goal marked out by him from a woman. That when he does this he dedicates himself to an all-encompassing rivalry with another man, a bloody centagonist as binding as marriage. That his rival is an enemy twin, the kind of man he would like to be, so that to triumph over him is to assimilate him. The criticism comes from a reliable source because it was published by university of California. I never thought of Macbeth doing away with all those he wanted to be. But it makes sense (killing King Duncan to be hanged) . This will be useful in my essay, and I plan on doing further research.