The Malcontent Figure in Macbeth and King Lear King Lear and Macbeth are two of Shakespeare’s most famous tragedies. They were written and performed at critical moments in England’s history, and both relate to the monarchy in ways that attempt to educate and forewarn the monarchs of proper ruling over the land. In these plays, Shakespeare utilizes a new type of character known as a malcontent figure. This type of character, often associated with Niccolo Machiavelli and his work The Prince, is one who is not satisfied with their place in the world. Even after they gain more power, their ambitious hunger is not satisfied. In both King Lear and Macbeth, the malcontent characters continue to feed their ambitions until their death by slaying. This essay will examine how Shakespeare presents the malcontent figure as seen in Macbeth and King Lear and how the malcontent figure applied to the political context of the Elizabethan and Jacobean era. Machiavelli’s piece The Prince, published in 1532, introduces the malcontent character as someone who manipulates truth and virtue for their own personal gain. The Prince was often referenced as a guide to attaining and maintaining power. (Burns) It was a great influence on the writings of the Renaissance as an idea that was both interesting but repellent. The use of a malcontent figure was to show how far one could or should go for their goals, even when this mindset leads to evil acts. (Burns) The idea of the malcontent figure is not restricted to a specific type of person. In King Lear, the malcontent figure is Edmund. This is easily seen based on his actions in the second scene of the first act, when he forges a letter from his legitimate brother Edgar that causes their father to fear Edgar. As a bastard son, Edmund is entitled to very little compared to the inheritance Edgar will receive, and this displeases Edmund. So he has no qualms over tricking his gullible father and forcing Edgar to flee. Edmund is clearly an antagonistic character, and he does not have any ethical issues against toying with his father and brother. Similarly, Goneril and Regan have some characteristics of a malcontent figure as they take advantage of their father to get more power. Contrastingly, the malcontent character in Macbeth is Macbeth, who plays the role of a protagonist. He is described by the Captain as “Disdaining Fortune, with his brandished steel,/ … Like Valour’s minion, carved out his passage,/ Till he faced the slave.” (Act I, Scene ii) Macbeth is introduced as a character who is selfless and noble. He becomes a malcontent figure when he plots to kill Duncan to ascend to the throne, influenced by the prophecy spoken by the witches. In this way, it can be said that a malcontent figure applies to any type of character. Though Goneril and Regan have some aspects of a malcontent figure, it is Edmund who holds the title in King Lear. Edmund is the illegitimate son of the Earl of Gloucester, who detests his position in society and desires to take the inheritance his legitimate brother Edgar is entitled to. Gloucester describes Edmund at the beginning of the play in a joking, very much derogatory manner. He often “blushed to acknowledge him” (Act I, Scene i), and describes how Edmund was the result of an affair. Edmund, being present during this conversation between Gloucester and Kent, would obviously be insulted and irritated at having this brought up. But, since he strives to surpass his brother and cause his banishment, Edmund would surely know to simply nod his head and conceal his true feelings from his father. In Act I, Scene ii, Edmund reveals in a soliloquy his plans to fool his father with a faux letter from Edgar, claiming he conspires to kill Gloucester. Edmund’s speech at the beginning of this act strongly utilizes the soliloquy format. The audience becomes fully aware of Edmund’s plan, and yet Gloucester and even Edgar remain blind to the setup. (Burns) There is a sense of cruel irony here. Gloucester now relies on his illegitimate son, previously a joke to him, to protect him from his seemingly loyal son who means to kill him. Edmund’s first soliloquy has him questioning the meaning of origins: “Why bastard? Wherefore base?” (Act I, Scene ii) By going through with his plans, he defies all laws and customs that deny him any true power in the kingdom. Throughout the play, it is clear Edmund will go as far as he can to achieve his goals, even to the point where he uses both Goneril and Regan by manipulating their feelings for him. Edmund is a seductive, attractive character, but he is an attractive character for the wrong reasons. (Burns) The use of soliloquies and asides are often utilized when portraying a malcontent figure. This is clearly seen in both King Lear when Edmund is plotting and Macbeth when Macbeth ponders his actions and his future course. The way Macbeth is described in battle would have the audience assume him to be a noble Thane, but this impression is shattered when Macbeth and Banquo encounter the witches. Macbeth becomes shocked when he hears “Two truths are told/ As happy prologues to the swelling act.” (Act I, Scene iii) Knowing the third note of the witches’ prophecy says he will be king, Macbeth cannot be settled with just being Thane of Cawdor. Throughout the last half of Scene iii, Macbeth speaks in asides so the audience knows his true thoughts while his companions are left in the dark. The use of an aside is a powerful tool in theater, as it allows the audience to hear a character’s thoughts and gain a better understanding of this character’s personality. Now that the audience knows Macbeth’s thoughts, “whose murder yet is but fantastical,” (Act I, Scene iii) the slaying of Duncan can be expected. However, there are some differences between Edmund and Macbeth. Edmund’s quest for personal gain was driven by spite, whereas Macbeth desires power but his actions are encouraged by his wife Lady Macbeth. In Act I, Scene v of Macbeth, Lady Macbeth even chides her husband for being squeamish over killing Duncan. After this first act of murdering, Macbeth cannot stop killing the people he believes will bring him down. Macbeth becomes a malcontent figure that is pitied rather than admired, because his ambition can be attributed to him succumbing to the paranoia and promise of power from the prophecies of the witches. Elizabethan and Jacobean writers often used influences based in Machiavellian and Senecan writings of the time. (Burns) Seneca featured key themes and elements such as blood, violence, and the presence of a ghost seeking retribution. Tragedies especially grew popular in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The content of these Senecan shows were often used to comment on politics, displaying a world of evil where reason is trumped out until experience comes into play. (Burns) Seneca and the Machiavellian malcontent figure work well together by identifying tyrants, outlining the concept of succession to the throne, and showing the dangers of ambition as it can lead to disaster. This is seen in Macbeth and King Lear with both of the malcontent figures. Macbeth appears to have been heavily influenced by Senecan and Machiavellian ideas. One of these ideas was the plotline of usurping a king, the tyranny of the usurper, finished by a rebellion. (Burns) Macbeth ascends to the throne after killing Duncan, and his tyranny can be seen as he orders the deaths of Banquo and Macduff’s family. The rebellion, led by Macduff, soon comes after Macbeth misunderstands the witches’ foretelling “Macbeth shall never vanquished be until/ Great Birnam wood to high Dunsinane hill/ Shall come against him.” (Act IV, Scene i) A malcontent figure, being someone who could go to great lengths for their ambitions, would not hesitate to use murderous means to accomplish their goals. The malcontent figure is born from the idea of opposing an established chain of being which was popular in the Elizabethan era. This chain of being established everything in the world on a sort of hierarchy: stones and inanimate things that just exist, plants that exist and live, animals that exist, live, and feel, and finally mankind who exist, live, feel, and think. Furthermore, there are types of human beings, starting with those who are intelligent at the top and descending down to the lazy and gluttons. Accepting one’s place leads to reward after death, while disrupting this chain of being causes chaos. (Burns) This is an idea well established in King Lear and Macbeth. Edmund holds little power because, though he is a prince of Gloucester, he is born out of wedlock. He does not accept this, but rather chooses “Nature … to thy law/ My services are bound.” (Act I, Scene ii) He follows a mindset that would say survival of the fittest, throwing everything into disorder. Similarly, Macbeth chooses to advance to a higher status in the monarchy by leaping over the next step of waiting for Duncan to pass down the role. Tragedy follows as Macbeth goes on a killing spree fueled by his tyrannical paranoia. He even seeks out the witches for another prophecy, when it was the witches’ first prophecy that started this all. It begs the question: what would’ve happened if Macbeth had not heard the witches’ prophecy? Would he still have the ambition to go for kingship? If he never knew he would be king someday, might he have waited until the role was legally passed to him? Shakespeare’s tragedies King Lear and Macbeth embodied several ideals and politics of Elizabethan England, including Seneca, Machiavelli, and the malcontent figure.