In addition to your five-line memorization and the relatively short reading assignment, please post a comment on the following:
• The dagger speech is one of the most famous moments in this play. Both on stage and especially on screen, it can be a moment when special effects lead us toward one or another interpretation of Macbeth's character and state of mind. If you were directing the play, what would you do? Should the dagger be visible to the audience or not? What questions about the theme of the play would shape your decision?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMy interpretation of the this scene, if I were the director, would be to put the dagger insight and have Macbeth only touch it during his speech. I would set the stage as though he is seeing the dagger on a table or in a case. As a director, I would make it clear to the audience that Macbeth is in rapture with this dagger but also because he knows where it is and loves the feeling of the anticipation of breaking down the last barrier lies between him and his destiny.
ReplyDeleteI imagined the scene this way because I think one major theme of Macbeth is Hallucinating so for the audience to actually see the dagger tells them that Macbeth has crossed a line where his hallucinating unbridled ambition has found it's way into reality and when he picks up the dagger at that moment he does not know where the line of reality and imagination is.
If I were directing a version of Macbeth, I would choose not to show the dagger. I think the concept of an invisible dagger lends itself well to the idea that Macbeth is going crazy with hallucinations from guilt and remorse over his actions.
ReplyDeleteI would make it clear that the dagger is something only visible to Macbeth in his bizarre mental state. Macbeth sees the dagger in his mind, and in turns pulls out his physical dagger: "a dagger of the mind...i see thee yet, in form as palpable as this which i draw"2.1.50-54
This distinction between his mind's convoluted workings and the physical actions that result from them are a good example of what the witch's prophecy has made Macbeth and how obsessed with greed and fate he has become. We can see this is taking a toll on him based on the hints we get about his 'good' character from before he met the weird sisters.
I agree that Hallucination is a major theme of Macbeth's journey towards power and finally demise. However, I would present the scene so that the audience cannot see the dagger leading Macbeth towards murder. The fact that he is hallucinating is key here and especially as an audience during the 17th century, this idea of witchcraft and betrayal should be emphasized to horrify the viewers, as if this man was in fact being possessed. We have seen up to this point in the story that Macbeth is not influenced so much by Banquo, or reason, but rather Lady Macbeth, or desire. It is during Act 2, Scene 1 that the viewers realize that Macbeth is tied up with imagination and desire, and to show the dagger would go against this theme of Macbeth's imaginary yet foreshadowing desires. I also think that not presenting the dagger would make the real bloody blade (that Lady Macbeth sees) more shocking to the audience because the murder was, in fact, part of reality, not Macbeth's imagination.
ReplyDeleteI would make the dagger both visible and invisible. I would use viewpoints in order to achieve the scene I am imagining in my head. I would switch between a view that seems as if we (the audience) are looking through his eyes, and a view that seems like we are watching him from a close distance. In the viewpoint from his eyes I would make the dagger visible in order to make the audience feel more involved in what is going on in Macbeth's head and how the dagger seems very tangible to him. I would use the distant viewpoint to show that there is no dagger and that is it a hallucination that Macbeth is having. These two points would contrast each other and show the audience both perspectives of Macbeth, one as a "crazy-ish" man and one as a man who simply sees a dagger and is speaking about it. I think that this would achieve the level of confusion going on in Macbeth's head.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with Zia that this speech is a good example of Macbeth being a little taken over by power and greed, and how this influences his mind. I also like Andrew's comment that the dagger has to be shown in some way because the murder did actually happen, and it is not one of his hallucinations. I think that it would be too confusing for the viewers to not see the dagger at all, because they may not be able to fully grasp that Macbeth really did commit a murder, although he does not want to accept it himself.
If I were directing a movie, I agree with Nancy's idea of having the dagger visible when looking through Macbeth's eyes, but invisible when in a third person shot of him. However, on stage a director must make a firm decision one way or the other because elaborate special effects were not available in the 17th century. In this scene it is necessary to show that Macbeth is utterly confused about his reality. Because of this I would not show the dagger on stage in order to portray Macbeth’s insanity (or path toward insanity). Also, I think it is also important to discuss the dagger’s symbolism in the play. Since it is what tempts Macbeth to commit the murder, I have interpreted the dagger to represent power and greed.
ReplyDeleteI would make the dagger visible, because (as Andrew's comment says) the murder is not in Macbeth's imagination, but is part of reality. However, I too would want the theme of delusion and madness to be present in the staging, so I would (by interpreting the text a bit more broadly) have the dagger suspended in the middle of the stage (wire, string etc.) and have Macbeth walk around the knife during the first half of the monologue, transfixed on its presence and letting himself slowly walk closer and closer to it. When Macbeth "draws his dagger", he would simply reach out and grab it from its fixed point of levitation. This would show that Macbeth is beginning to lose grip on reality by physicalizing the scene to be less literal and more metaphoric of his losing battle against his desire for power. The element of the supernatural, too, is retained by this approach. What I think is most interesting about this is that Macbeth's descent into insanity is not being told through the perspective of an outsider, but through the eyes of Macbeth himself. The dagger has become the symbol of Macbeth's greed, and by having it be present but floating presents a neutral ground between Macbeth's reality and delusion.
ReplyDeleteI agree with those above who said that the dagger should be visible to the audience, but not visible to Macbeth. Macbeth's hallucinations and inability to actually hold the dagger and feel the literal weight of what he is about to do not only shows the audience how crazed he has become but further separates Macbeth's character from the saneness of the audience. The more that Macbeth begins to see or feel things that are not tangible for the audience, the clearer his downward spiral towards insanity and desperation is. As a director, I would attempt to further this void between Macbeth and the audience as Macbeth becomes more driven by his ambition and the witches' prediction.
ReplyDeleteHowever, having the dagger visible to the audience is crucial. The murder that Macbeth commits is very real, and it is important to show the audience that Macbeth's tormenting insanity is not limited to his mind but translates into a real, terrible act.
I would not make the bloody dagger that Macbeth envisions visible to audience so as to emphasize Macbeth’s descent into madness. Nevertheless, if possible, I would make the actual dagger that Macbeth draws begin to drip blood, which the audience sees but which Macbeth does not. This piece of stagecraft would create a sort of symmetry: first, a bloody dagger that Macbeth sees and the audience does not, and second, a bloody dagger that the audience sees and Macbeth does not. It would allow the audience to best experience what Macbeth experiences and would also compliment Macbeth’s references to witchcraft. Macbeth is horrified by his imaginings, and the audience (especially a 17th century audience) would be horrified by something that appears to be supernatural.
ReplyDeleteIf I were directing this play I would have the dagger be holographic, in that it can be seen floating in a black void yet it cannot be touched. I would achieve this either with holographic technology or by using the illusionary technique John Henry Pepper famously pioneered in the late 1800's. Either way, a ghostly dagger would suddenly appear in front of shadow and darkness, beckoning to Macbeth.
ReplyDeleteI want the daggers existence to be as illusory as the very air we breathe because that is an idea Shakespeare has played with the entire play thus far. We can notice this idea's emergence especially in the behavior of the Weird Sisters; the source of their prophetic wisdom is unknown, but it has to be beyond physicality. Even they themselves at points seem to be as immaterial as their own knowledge-take, for example, lines 83-85 in act 1, scene 3, "BANQUO: Wither are they vanished [weird sisters]? MACBETH: Into the air, and what seemed corporal melted, as breath into the wind. Would they had stayed!". That is why I would choose to have the dagger be a hologram; to continue to play on the idea of a dualism between existence and nonexistence, reality and illusion.
I agree with Johnny Wallace! As a director, I would either want the dagger to be a ghostly projection or holograph or not shown at all. I believe that having an actual dagger on stage would confuse the audience. The audience might think that there is a real dagger in the room with Macbeth during his dagger speech. A holographic dagger or no dagger at all, on the other hand, would emphasize Macbeth's mental state. The dagger speech is an important moment in Macbeth's character development, as it demonstrates his internal struggle and the gradual infiltration of his mind by evil. It is important, therefore, that the audience understands Macbeth's internal struggle with the concepts of morality, reality, and chimera.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIf I were directing the play, the dagger would be invisible throughout the speech. The dagger is merely a symbol of Macbeth's ambition. However, power is a social construct; it is essentially an illusion of the mind. Therefore, a physical dagger would be inadequate in explaining this scene. Macbeth is not disturbed by the fact that he has to kill another human being; he has participated in many wars and ended many lives. He is disturbed by what this death represents: a betrayal of Duncan's trust.
ReplyDeleteHowever, at the end of the soliloquy he should draw his dagger as he walks off stage. This is to show that all of Macbeth's plotting actually ended with Duncan's murder.
If it were up to me I would have the dagger exposed. I think that on the stage having a bloody dagger would really set a dramatic scene. I think that having blood dripping off a royal dagger would go to the theme of Macbeth's good soul being corrupted by violence and greed. Having the dagger would have Macbeth hold a representation of his own soul.
ReplyDeleteWonderful commentary, folks! Great imagination and useful analysis of Macbeth's state of mind and what the dagger, visible or not, says about it. I'm fascinated by Nancy's "both/and" perspective, which true would not be possible on stage, but which would present Macbeth's vision as a singular one, distinct from "normal." Thanks, too, Johnny, for the technical concepts and the reference to various means to the end. I would offer as well that the degree to which we share Macbeth's vision brings us closer (or less close) to his situation and point of view. He could seem less sympathetic or more to us as audience, therefore. Which we would want is entirely dependent on the effect we wish to achieve.
ReplyDeleteThese are all...wow. Excellent ideas, everyone. I would most agree with Johnny's hologram idea, were it not for the necessity (or so I interpret the text) of the dagger to lead Macbeth offstage toward Duncan's demise. For this purpose, I believe that there should be a real dagger on stage, preferably suspended from above the stage by a wire and controlled (to some extent) by a puppeteer. If there is to be a real dagger, I believe that something else in the scene must be manipulated to achieve a difference in tone between his orders to the servant prior and his soliloquy - most likely a change in lighting (and especially a change in the color or angle of the lighting). (The use/addition of (sorry for the cliche) a fog machine could be better suited to a more modern audience.) Creating an onstage environment of Macbeth's inner confusion allows for a real, tangible dagger - because the audience will have been placed within Macbeth's own mind. A real dagger also allows for Macbeth to follow the weapon offstage. However, I do not believe that he should touch it - rather, he should reach out for it and be unable to grasp it, physically because the puppeteer is pulling it away from him and psychologically because it is a mere apparition.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Andrew's point that it would be much more dramatic to not reveal bloody daggers until Scene 2 of this act, when Lady Macbeth first observes her husband still clutching to the instruments of the murder. Thus, although I do believe that the dagger should be real, I don't believe that it should be covered in blood at any point. When Macbeth says "And on thy blade and dudgeon gouts of blood/Which was not so before (2.1:58-9)", the dagger should be altered somehow, most likely through the use of (again) lighting. Were the dagger to be shrouded in, say, red light, rather than be covered in actual blood, it would heighten the audience's sense that they are experiencing something that is not entirely real. Such a setup would make the reveal of the actual blood-covered daggers all the more dramatic and jilting, and create a clear divide between Macbeth, pre-murder (shrouded in his own mind and in psychological torment, surrounded by a strange, intangible mix of hallucination and reality, consumed by thoughts of Duncan's murder but not yet guilty of the deed) and Macbeth, post-murder (paranoid, claustrophobic of the horrific reality of what he has just committed, shaken and occupied by his own thoughts and yet clearly grounded in reality).
Wow, I write really long sentences. I hope that this is legible to at least one of you.
The dagger is not the only apparition that has appeared (and will appear) in this play. The Weird Sisters are above the physical realm (although real in at least some way, since Banquo can also see them), and the hallucinations of Banquo and others that Macbeth experiences later on are most horrifying and affecting if shown. If only for consistency's sake, then, I believe that the dagger should also be physically present onstage. In this way, also, we reinforce the blending of illusion and reality; the audience, as well as the characters, are in some blend of the two, and it is not always immediately obvious which is which. I also believe that Macbeth's madness is not caused merely by internal struggle but by external factors (such as Lady Macbeth), and he is losing his ability to distinguish his own ideas from those of others.
ReplyDeleteI think that the dagger also makes a more potent symbol in physical form, although Andrew and Liz make good points about it perhaps not physically bleeding until after the murder has been committed, to better contrast the before and after of the murder. I also agree with the several people who suggested that the dagger should be suspended in some way, rather than lying on the ground, and that Macbeth should be unable to touch it (despite his attempts). He does, after all, note that this dagger is not real to any of his senses beside sight, unlike his own dagger. And the fact that he walks off the stage with his own, personal, and very physical dagger shows how much he has embraced the deed (at least for the moment). Perhaps he could raise his own dagger up in imitation of the suspended dagger before stalking off to murder Duncan.
It would be symbolic if the hallucinatory dagger were identical to his own dagger; that would make the hallucination more affecting for him, and would also connect the hallucination and his real dagger in the audience's mind.