In Shakespeare’s Macbeth, the title character constantly opposes society for a personal goal. Although this play was written centuries ago, the ethical dilemma between following the individual or the society was made clear. However a more modern example of this conflict can be seen in George Orwell’s novel, “1984.” Winston’s transition through trust and mistrust of societal values questions society’s own jurisdiction over the goals of the individual, as well as shows the lack of Macbeth’s obligation to society. The historical background of the novel plays an influential part of developing the set underlying principles of 1984. Published in post WWII era London, the wars surely had a significance influence on the content of Orwell’s novel. This can be seen in the constant warring of nations in the book. As a means to justify rationing and harsh conditions, the war is necessary cause for the sacrifice of the individual in the novel. This ties into Macbeth’s character, where Macbeth justifies his immoral actions for the crown through fulfilling the prophecy. All of the countries in both world wars utilized the use of rations, which was deemed necessary to end the war, therefore the sacrifice hardly crosses ethical boundaries. So, killing for his sake may be seen to most as immoral, but maybe it’s only human to kill for the expectations brought on the witches. True injustice can be found in the form of an undeserved position in society. Which is representative of the witch’s curse in Macbeth.
The unwarranted curse on Macbeth by the witches inevitably disrupted the natural structure of kingdom which led onto the unfortunate chain of events. In Orwell’s novel, he portrays the unequal class structure produced by society as being the catalyst for Winston’s actions. This structure or change in structure was out of control of the individual in both cases, and in both cases brought great deal of pain to the individual. The ethical dilemma of acting in opposition to society raises many questions. In the case of Macbeth, the person goal of achieving, maintaining, and continuing his position as king can be seen as him acting in favor of society. I think that Macbeth’s drive to fulfill and rely on the prophecies given to him emphasize his desire to work the system constructed around him. I do not think Macbeth was really in opposition to any force in his pursuit for power, as he only followed the will of the prophecy. However, Winston constantly opposes his society directly through his escapes with Julia and participation in underground resistance movements. However, Macbeth just does what he is told. He is told he will be king. So, he becomes king. He is told he will be safe if certain conditions are met. He was safe until those conditions were broken. The contrast between Winston and Macbeth’s character involves the element of personal will versus prophetical will. While Winston would state directly that 2 + 2 does not equal 5, Macbeth would rather ask the witch the answer was. The individual’s ethical obligations to society go so far as he or she can control. Therefore, Macbeth acted morally, since his actions were out of his control.
127 our experts are availableright now
