Actes Des Congrès De La Société Française Shakespeare
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Actes des congrès de la Société française Shakespeare 36 | 2018 Shakespeare et la peur From fear to anxiety in Shakespeare’s Macbeth Christine Sukic Édition électronique URL : https://journals.openedition.org/shakespeare/4141 DOI : 10.4000/shakespeare.4141 ISSN : 2271-6424 Éditeur Société Française Shakespeare Référence électronique Christine Sukic, « From fear to anxiety in Shakespeare’s Macbeth », Actes des congrès de la Société française Shakespeare [En ligne], 36 | 2018, mis en ligne le 07 octobre 2019, consulté le 25 août 2021. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/shakespeare/4141 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/shakespeare. 4141 Ce document a été généré automatiquement le 25 août 2021. © SFS From fear to anxiety in Shakespeare’s Macbeth 1 From fear to anxiety in Shakespeare’s Macbeth Christine Sukic 1 In the early modern period, fear was either a necessary passion, as when Christians are said to live in the “fear of God”1, or an emotion that had to be suppressed or at least mitigated, when it concerned the “fear of death”. There are numerous books of ars moriendi that claim, in their titles, that they intend to “take away the feare of death”2 or will “comfort” Christians against that fear3. In a Christian context, fear was thus seen as a sort of natural passion, which was acceptable as long as it was “holy fear”, as Emilia calls it in Two Noble Kinsmen (5.1.149), but that had to be alleviated in order for Christians to “die well”, with as little fear as possible. In Measure for Measure, Claudio seems to have learned to “encounter darkness as a bride / And hug it in [his] arms” (3.1.83-4) until Isabella’s visit reminds him that “Death is a fearful thing” (3.1.115). 2 At a time when moral philosophers were discussing the status of the passions and their significance, the passion of fear was most commonly envisaged in a moderate way— mainly under the influence of Aristotle. Jacques Hurault, who was Henri III of France’s councillor, recommended, like many of his contemporaries, control over the passions in Les Trois livres des offices d’Estat (1586), his work about the education of princes that was translated into English by Arthur Golding and published in 1595 under the title Politicke, Moral, and Martial Discourses: Let us for example take Hardines, which is a meane betweene Fearfulnesse and Over-boldnesse, of which two this latter is the excesse of boldnesse, in offering a mans selfe to danger, and the other is the default or want of boldnesse in the same case, when Boldnesse is requisit or expedient. 4 3 Fearfulness is here defined as excess, while its opposite is the absence of fear (“Over- boldnesse”). For Hurault, the ideal position towards those passions is “hardiness”, which he sees as a middle ground between two excesses. He insists on the importance of the absence of fear, a cardinal virtue that can be called “Fortitude, Prowes, or Valiantnesse” and that he opposes to “Fearfulnesse or Cowardlinesse”: “This vertue is more generallie followed of princes”, Hurault adds. 5In other words, fear is defined in a negative way, as its absence is a princely and heroic virtue. Hurault thus introduces a Actes des congrès de la Société française Shakespeare, 36 | 2018 From fear to anxiety in Shakespeare’s Macbeth 2 social dimension in the definition of fear by attributing its opposite, a cardinal virtue, to princes and great men (“as we have seene in Alexander, Pirrhus, Hanniball, Pompey, Iulius Caesar, Themistocles, Alcibiades, and manie others”). 6The absence of fear could therefore be seen as a definition of heroism, as Hurault’s list of great men suggests here. Unsurprisingly, he also associates the absence of fear to the value of honour: Aristotle saith, It is the dutie of Prowesse to be utterlie undismaied with the feare of death, to be constant in suffering adversitie, to be void of dread of danger, to chuse to die with honour, than to live with dishonour, or to be conquered in battell. At a word, it is the dutie of prowesse, to be unafraid of any dangers, which reason sheweth that we ought not to feare. 7 4 The social dimension of fear and courage is confirmed by military memoirs such as the Discourses of the Huguenot captain François La Noue, who writes—in the 1588 English translation—that “There are other reasons, besides the equitie of a cause and urgent necessitie, that stirre up men to fight couragiously: As the presence of noble persons which detest cowardlinesse and exalt prowess”. 8 5 Shakespeare partakes of the same social framing when it comes to fear and courage: when war is at stake, courage is exalted and generates greatness while cowardice is scorned and defines base men. Henry V excites his men to action with “greater courage” in a situation of “great danger” (4.1.1), while cowardice is associated with the treachery of Cambridge, Grey and Scroop—their blood is “cowarded” (2.2.72)—or with the baseness of Pistol. In 1Henry IV, Shakespeare also opposes fear and courage by staging the death of the fearless hero Hotspur while having Falstaff stage his own counterfeit heroic gest and dismiss “honour” as an empty value (5.1.134). In Macbeth, Shakespeare envisages another kind of opposition between courage and fear, since it concerns the same character, a brave warrior that becomes a fearful and tormented tragic hero. 6 When Macbeth comes back from the war, after his encounter with the Weird Sisters, he and Banquo are met by Ross who reports to him the admiration of King Duncan for his brave action at war: “He finds thee in the stout Norweyan ranks, / Nothing afeard of what thyself didst make, / Strange images of death” (1.3.95-97). This passage confirms what we witness in 1.2, when at the King’s camp, messengers come in, full of stories of war containing what Robin Headlam Wells calls “the obscene detail of epic convention”,9 evoking narratives of men with “brandish’d steel”, smoking with “bloody execution”, where wounds do not provoke fear but “smack of honour” (1.2.17-18 and 45). Macbeth is part of this martial world of epic heroism where great men are brave and are not afraid of “strange images of death”. And yet, as soon as he learns he has been made Thane of Cawdor, he is immediately taken by the most terrible fear: If good, why do I yield to that suggestion Whose horrid image doth unfix my hair, And make my seated heart knock at my ribs, Against the use of nature? Present fears Are less than horrible imaginings (1.3.134-8). 7 While he is not affected by anything that is under his eyes (“Present fears”), what he discovers inside himself he finds to be worthy of terror, as he confirms it himself a few lines further down in order to explain to his companions why he was so lost in his thoughts: “my dull brain was wrought / With things forgotten” (150-1). This fear of the self is further explained by Macbeth in the next scene, when he refuses to see his “black and deep desires”, that which “the eye fears” (1.4.51-3). Actes des congrès de la Société française Shakespeare, 36 | 2018 From fear to anxiety in Shakespeare’s Macbeth 3 8 This opposition takes the form of a passage from a world in which fear does not seem to exist, where no spectacle is able to frighten a heroic character, be it a “strange image of death”, to another one in which something that does not exist materially is an object of fear for a former martial hero. More than just a social reconfiguration, this passage illustrates an epistemological crisis according to which fear is no longer a social criterion, that which defines a social class against another, or a superior class of heroes against the rest of the world, but a passion that affects all humankind, therefore defining humanity. As such, it is integrated into Shakespearean drama as a source of fiction: fear creates stories. 9 The beginning of Macbeth corresponds to a common discourse—literary or not—in the early modern period, a topos that states that fear is the opposite of bravery, and that noblemen are characterised by courage. The great French historian of fear, Jean Delumeau, in his seminal book about fear in the western world, (La Peur en Occident, first published in 1978), pointed to the early modern taste for that literary discourse glorifying temerity and courage, virtues that were associated with the upper classes, seen as fearless in the conduct of war, while the masses were generally defined as being without courage. He cites a classical source10 that, according to him, already established that difference between high and low birth, when Virgil, in the 4th book of the Aeneid, dissociated fear from nobility and had Queen Dido exclaim about Aeneas: “Who is this stranger guest who has entered our home? How noble his mien! How brave in heart and feats of arms! I believe it well—nor is my confidence vain—that he is sprung from gods. It is fear that proves souls base-born”.11 Fear is here relegated to the lower, non-heroic categories of humans. There are some emblematic models of those fearless classes such as Jean Ier de Bourgogne, John the Fear-Less at the turn of the 14th and 15th centuries, or Bayard, the knight “without fear or beyond reproach”, who lived about a century later.