Essay on Order and Superstition in the Tragedies of William Shakespeare

Order and fanaticism in the Tragedies of Shakespeare The concept of order was an extremely master(prenominal) one to William Shakespeare, and to Elizabethans in general. We in the existentialist atomic age thrust little pain conceiving of an individual man or woman as the only radio beacon of light in a serviceman at rest(p) irrevocably and irredeemably mad, and this would be inconceivable to Shakespeare and his audience. Shakespeare staunchly followed the common Elizabethan conception of the humankind as deliberately and benevolently patterned and intend when, for some reason, something happened to temporarily force things out of kilter, individual people strength suffer, but the man would soon right itself and life would go on. This sentiment in a presage plan also underwrote Shakespeares usage of portents and omens in such plays as Julius Caesar and Macbeth because he saw the knowledge domain as something plan and reproducible, it is possible to divine that plan through supernatural credits. tho there is little read to try to force ones will against fate, Shakespeare tells us, will inescapably end in tragedy. The presence of superstition would seem to be orthogonal to this passionate opinion in order, but in fact it is unresolvable from it. All clandestine practices, including divination as well as the mold of spells, presuppose a consistent pattern in the universe, where, in the actors line of Sir James Frazer, a red scar. . . may be thought to open the property necessity to produce red note, and when the production of red blood is demanded, the red stone naturally presents itself to the primitive mind as a potential source whence the redness may be borrowed (Frazer, 170). This figure of metaphoric connective between all kinds of rednesses ... ..., it signifies a departure from our implicit in(p) suppositions about how the world really works that is what the word supernatural means. But in Macbeth and Julius Caesar, su ch devices actually work to reinforce Shakespeares perception of the world as an request place in which there is a coherent plan -- both because this is what Shakespeare truly believed and because this is what his audience believed as well. Works Cited Asimov, Isaac. Asimovs hire to Shakespeare. Avenel Books, NY, 1978. Frazer, Sir James. The New opulent Bough. Mentor Books, NY, 1959. Jorgenson, Paul. William Shakespeare The Tragedies. G.K. Hall, Boston, 1995. Shakespeare, William. The Complete Works. Nelson Doubleday Edition, Garden City, NY, 2001. Ferguson, Francis. Macbeth as the fake of an Action, from Shakespeare The Tragedies. Prentice-Hall, NY, 1994. Essay on Order and Superstition in the Tragedies of William ShakespeareOrder and Superstition in the Tragedies of Shakespeare The concept of order was an extremely important one to William Shakespeare, and to Elizabethans in general. We in the existentialist atomic age have little trouble conceiving of an indi vidual man or woman as the only beacon of light in a world gone irrevocably and irredeemably mad, but this would be inconceivable to Shakespeare and his audience. Shakespeare staunchly followed the common Elizabethan conception of the universe as deliberately and benevolently patterned and planned when, for some reason, something happened to temporarily force things out of kilter, individual people might suffer, but the universe would soon right itself and life would go on. This belief in a divine plan also underwrote Shakespeares usage of portents and omens in such plays as Julius Caesar and Macbeth because he saw the world as something planned and coherent, it is possible to divine that plan through supernatural sources. But there is little point to try to force ones will against fate, Shakespeare tells us, will inevitably end in tragedy. The presence of superstition would seem to be unrelated to this passionate belief in order, but in fact it is inextricable from it. All occult practices, including divination as well as the casting of spells, presuppose a consistent pattern in the universe, where, in the words of Sir James Frazer, a red stone. . . may be thought to have the property necessary to produce red blood, and when the production of red blood is demanded, the red stone naturally presents itself to the primitive mind as a potential source whence the redness may be borrowed (Frazer, 170). This kind of metaphoric connection between all kinds of rednesses ... ..., it signifies a departure from our underlying suppositions about how the world really works that is what the word supernatural means. But in Macbeth and Julius Caesar, such devices actually work to reinforce Shakespeares perception of the world as an ordered place in which there is a coherent plan -- both because this is what Shakespeare truly believed and because this is what his audience believed as well. Works Cited Asimov, Isaac. Asimovs Guide to Shakespeare. Avenel Books, NY, 1978. Fra zer, Sir James. The New Golden Bough. Mentor Books, NY, 1959. Jorgenson, Paul. William Shakespeare The Tragedies. G.K. Hall, Boston, 1995. Shakespeare, William. The Complete Works. Nelson Doubleday Edition, Garden City, NY, 2001. Ferguson, Francis. Macbeth as the Imitation of an Action, from Shakespeare The Tragedies. Prentice-Hall, NY, 1994.