Here is your chance to show me your understanding of Macbeth. Ask great questions, make sure to reference whom you are speaking to and, most of all, dazzle everyone with your wisdom!
How would the story have changed if Macbeth had disregarded the prophecy as false, or as inevitable?
2. If Macbeth hadn't had a past in the military, would he be as able to murder, or would the "first-time" syndrom keep him from his tasks?
3. If Lady Macbeth had never found out about the prophecy, how would the plotline of the story change? In other words, without an accomplice, would Macbeth have done the same things?
4. How did Banqou's benevolence affect the conscience of Macbeth in his actions throughout the story?
annes- Banquo and Duncan were very similar in their actions. Duncan didn't do anything wrong, and neither did Banquo! But, alas, Macbeth killed them both because of his fear!
I think that Macbeth would still have become king because prophecies are a prediction of the future. He may not have killed Duncan for the job, but would have become king eventually.
annes- To answer your third question, I think the plot line would have changed a lot if Lady Macbeth had never found out about the prophecy. I don't think Macbeth would have been able to follow through with killing Duncan without someone egging him on and calling him a coward for not wanting to kill him. Macbeth was too loyal to Duncan at the beginning of the play to even think of betraying him.
annes 's question 1 - I honestly think that if macbeth had disregarded the prophecies as false, the story would have changed because I think they would have never come true. For the witches told these things to Macbeth knowing that he would do all he could to make the prophecy come true. So if Macbeth had used his wisdom and disregarded the prophecies and not tried to act on fate, he would not have become King.
I have wondered througout Macbeth why Lady Macbeth is so supportive of Macbeth murdering Duncan. Did she really just want to be Queen? I think she may have had another reason but as I think about it more I'm really not sure what it could be.
Do you think she may have had anything to do with the weird sisters either?
AnneS - I do not think that the murders would have been easy for macbeth if he had not been able to remove himself from the actions he was committing. It was as if he was in war mode the entire time - thinking that killing Duncan and Banquo were merely other opponents in the war for the throne and control of Scottland.
I think that Macbeth is to much of qa lemming to make up his own mind. He just hears what other people say, and makes up his own reasons to back them up. He's a wussy sponge.
Annes: 1. If Macbeth didn't believe the witches' prophecies then I think that there wouldn't be a plot at all. I mean, Macbeth's ability to trust is one of the things that landed him in this situatuion. For example if he wouldn't have been as cocky, because they basically told him he was invincable.
annes- in respone to your question three, I think that Macbeth would have killed duncan anyways, because he knew of the prophecy and was driven by reckless ambition. Thats not to say that Lady Macbeth didn't have a hand in playing up this ambition, feeding his ego and asking him if he was a man or not.
AnneS-#2 I think being in the military didn't matter anyway,he still went insane from killing Duncan and Banquo, and he was still unsure about killing at first even with his wife's persuasion.
But in the long run, Macbeth kind of had to kill them. It was meant to be and was stated in the prophecy. It's been pretty firmly established that no one can change the set future, isn't that what the book's about?
annes- if macbeth had disregarded the prophecy, i think he still would have become king, but he would not have killed duncan, banquo, and macduff's family to achieve the throne. His reign might have still been fruitless, but people wouldnt think of him as a hellhound devil.
1. i think that the prophecy was based off of natural instict, so i think that it was going to happen no matter what b/c i think that the prophecy was based off of the free will.
2. again, like my last answer-it was meant to be, but i think he still would have done it, b/c the murder of Duncan was really his first murder that was-in his mind-evil.
3.again-it was meant to be. but i think that the entire thing wouldn't have happened b/c she had great influence over Macbeth
4. I think Banquo's benevolence made macbeth very INSECURE and UNCOMFORTABLE. he must have felt the needed to rid of the living conscience that Banquo provided
In responce to question number 3. I don't think that Macbeth would have done the same thing because there were so many times that he was going to turn around and not kill Duncan but than lady macbeth persuaded him to keep going. There are a lot of times that people wouldn't continue on without the pressure/encouragement of others.
mattf- I definitely agree with you. But, maybe the witches said that part of the prophecy knowing that when Macbeth heard that, he would rush into it. Does this make sense? Maybe the prophecy was that Macbeth would be king no matter what.
annes- Macbeth still would have had the desire to kill Duncan, but may not have wanted to kill Duncan or have the strength to do the deed. Macbeth probably wouldn't have killed Duncan, as he was scared of the repercussions of his actions.
AnneS- Question 2: I think that Macbeth still would have murdered Duncan, Banquo, and Macduffs family because he had the drive and determination. I do think that a key fact was his past military training because he knew how to kill and was used to it, but he wasn't prepared and would never be for the first time he killed someone he loved
AnneS--If Macbeth decided to disregard the prophesy he would have never killed Duncan or Banquoe, and he would not have gotten into the whole downward spiral of murder. He would have become king eventually, but when that happened, he would probably be a good king, and rather than the hatred he recieved, he would have recieved praise.
2. I don't think the millitary background would have changed too much, because he seemed to already have a slight predisposition to murder.
3. I think that if he was not married to Lady Macbeth he wouldn't have murdered the first time, and would probably not led down the slippery slope towards evil. She was the one who forced him to murder first!
I agree with mitchs. Lady Macbeth has a lot to do with Macbeths actions. If it weren't for Lady Macbeth chalenging Macbeths manhood Duncan would have survived the night wich would have prevented Malcom running away and forming alliences against Macbeth.
annes- To respond to your first question, I think if Macbeth had never been in the military he would have been much less violent and much much less accustomed to murder then he is.
Laurenc - I think that Lady Macbeth is interested in power, but i also think that she wanted him to be king, so that she could maybe kill him, and then take the throne for herself. But eventually she dies, and Macbeth seems more evil. But it seems like the sort of thing she'd do....
If Macbeth had just been like "oh look at that i am gonna be king" and not tried to speed it along the stoy line would have been way different. Macbeth probably would still have become King. he could have just left well enough alone and he would still have become king because that was his destiny. But it was his destiny to act like he did, so asking the question is kinda stupid.
annes & whitneys- I agree with that because I think that if Macbeth disregarded the prophesies, then I do think that the propheies woulkd have come true, but in a natural way, not the forced way.
macmm- I'm going to have to disagree with you. I don't think that Macbeth would have killed Duncan if Lady Macbeth hadn't been pushing him to kill Duncan. He was talking about how it was hard for him to kill Duncan because it was going to happen in his own house, where he was supposed to protect people in his house. He was too loyal to Duncan to kill him on his own causes.
Well in reponse to the discussion on our opinion on macbeth, I really liked the book macbeth once I got into it. The plot would thinken every time you turned the page and I just got sucked into it like morgan said. Shakespeare wrote it really well.
morgant- thank you, and your idea may be true. But then this goes into the theory that time is one big circle and the future influences the past. Its complicated
mitchs - I agree with you on the plot line without Lady Macbeth. Macbeth would definately not have murdered King Duncan without the encouragement of his wife. Because he wasn't going to go through with it until Lady Macbeth challenged his manly hood and made it an issue of his pride. Also before killing King Duncan Macbeth still had his goodness and through the whole dagger scene monologue and then when Lady Macbeth rung the bell, it was forcing him to go again.
annes- 2. if macbeth hadnt been in the military, i think he still would have been able to murder everyone he did because he had the will power and the dedication to do so.
AnneS-I think that if he disregarded the prophecy, if it was a true prophecy it would have come true anyway, but if it was false, then he wouldn't have become king, but he wouldn't have become insane about the killings either.
Annes- in response to question 2, if macbeth never had a military backround i do think that he could have killed duncan, because in the military when he killed, he didn't know the people he killed, so he probably did't care so much about what happened, but he could still kill duncan, but he would just feel worse about his first kill, and the consequences of killing the king.
Going off of what Morgan w said at the beginning of the converstaion- i read both LOF and Macbeth and 6th grade, and never saw any connections, but with these new tools, i feel like i have neve learned better or more in depth.
Ya, lady macbeth is really one of the majo causes, but if Macbeth hadn't heard the prophecy it wouldn't have happened, so I guess they really did their job and caused chaos
Annes - I think the answer to the third question is kind of obvious, because He's had so much experience in killing that it would not have affected it, if it had not been a friend (or king) but it says that he was a powerful warrior, who could kill without hesitation....
laurenc- I don't think that Lady Macbeth had anything to do with the weird sisters, I don't even know if Lady Macbeth has ever met the weird sisters, so I don't really think there was ever a connection.
whitneys- nice word choice with "manly hood". I really agree with you as I said before. Macbeth is like Roger: always in the background making things happen.
Annes1- I think this question depends on whether you believe in fate or not. If there is a predetermined destiny for everyone, than no matter what, Macbeth would have become a tyrant. If fate doesn't exsist, than I think Macbeth still would have become who he became because his own insecurities would have led him to act on the prophecy regardless whether he believed it or not. Also, I feel Lady Macbeth would have pushed him to "be a man" and he still would have killed Duncan and lead himself to his own downfall.
Well have you ever tyied to kill anyone Ryanm? It's probably hard the first time, but after you are a seasoned veteran, it gets easier. Also the fact that when you're in a war, you fell like you're killing people, but for your country.
in response to question annes's #3 question.. i have a feeling that Macbeth would not have become as savage if Lady Macbeth did not find out about the prophecy beacuse Lady Macbeth was really the one to bring out this horrrible side in Macbeth. She was the one who originally put these thoughts of "challenging fate" and to get going on this whole king idea. What do you guys think?
I think that the death of Lady Macbeth is a lot like the death of Piggy-Macbeth didn't grieve, but he simply said that she shouldn't have died right then, kind of like how Ralph didn't care too much about Piggy, but missed his common sense when he was dead.
laurenc: I think that one of the reasons that Lady Macbeth supported Macbeth all the way through the murder of Duncan, was because back in that day, woman didn't have aplace really other than behind their husband. If her husband was to become king, then she would become queen, and that could really bring her statis up. Also I really think that she loved her husband, and knew that he really needed her support at this time of internal conflict.
macm - I agree with you. I think Lady Macbeth definatly had a hand in helping Macbeth decide to kill Duncan but I still believe he would have done it anyway. Macbeth was obviously crushed when he found out Malcom would be King instead of him and probably was so verngeful and blinded by the witches promise that murder wouldn't have been a far off deed
I agree with beckyg, I think that if Macbeth had disregarded the prophecies then he would have become King eventually, but he wouldn't have had to kill anyone. He would have been a loyal servant to Duncan until the end and then probably have been a well loved King.
annes- Well personally, I think that it would've come true, because of the evidence from the seecond "predictions the witches or apparitions made came true and MAcbeth didn't do quite as much as he did to make them come true. For example, when Bernum Wood came to Dunsinane Hill Macbeth didn't do anything to stop it from happening. So, I think that everything would've happened, just in a different way.
I agree with Ryan M that even if Macbeth wasn't in the militery he still had the ability to murder though he made not have had the same interest in fact if he wasn't in the military he never would have run into the witches in the first place.
mitchs and whitneys- I agree that Lady macbeth I think needed to take the lead for the story to have reached the point that it did, she was the instigator, and then later Macbeth took the reins for himself.
morganw-I think the prophecys weren't really predicted, but almost acted as a guideline to inspire Macbeth to do what he did. The witches are all about chaos so they could have set up a "prophecy" knowing that Macbeth would take the bait.
Maddieh - I agree with you. You do have to believe in Faith or not, and I don't. I actually don't because it doesn't mattere to me. If I could tell the future, and find out when I'd die, I admit, I might try to stop it. But I don't, so I just keep living, and I dont care if I already have a path set out in front of me- cuz I dont know it.
I think that almost the entire book and pretty much everyone in it showed appearance vs. reality. All the characters were trying to decieve each other and were trying to hide their true feelings. For example, when Malcom and Macduff met Malcom pretended to be something he's not to make sure the Macduff wasn't lying or deceiving. Not only that, but obviously Macbeth, Lady Macbeth, and Banquo also showed Appearance vs. Reality
laurenc- I don't think that Macbeth would have killed Duncan if Lady Macbeth hadn't been pushing him to do it. While Malcolm becoming heir to the throne definitely made Macbeth angry, I don't think it would have pushed him to kill Duncan. If Macbeth had waited, maybe someting would have happened to Malcolm and he would have become heir to the throne. He obviously didn't have very much patience, or if he did have patience, Lady Macbeth pushed him over the edge.
Do you think there is free choice or destiny, I think that you write your own destiny through free choice, but God can see what you're going to do already.?
tylerg: I definitally agree. It almost seems like women have a larger impact than men on Macbeth. Maybehe trusts women more, because it is normally men that betray each other in this time period.
I agree, Lady Macbeth was really the one who pushed Macbeth into the murders, because she was egging him on and saying that she would do it, but she was a hypocrite because she wouldn't kill Duncan because, "He looked too much like my father", and at night, she's sleepwalking and wishing she didn't have the blood on her hands.
Macbeth seemed to bring everything down on himself by telling Lady macbeth about the prophecy. he probably wouldn't have done anything if she hadn't egged him on he would never have killed duncan.
annes- i think that if macbeth forgot about the prophecy, i think that maybe everything that happened would still have, because duncan might have been killed by another person who wanted macbeth to be king. Or malcolm wanted to speed up the process of becoming king, and he was caught in the act so macbeth would become king that way. But i do think that macbeth would have become a better king one of these ways, because he wouldn't feel guilty. Macbeth would however still would have to kill banquo and his son to stay the king.
That is a good question about prophesies. I think that a lot of times when prophesy is unknown it happens anyways but then there are times when people know of it like macbeth and try to change it and it ends up happening anyways. So either way the prophesies are true. A prophesy is a prophesy.
Mitch S.- remeber when we had that long conversation about what we believe in fait? Part of me wonders if Macbeth could have become King and had a peaceful life if he hadn't tried to MAKE SURE that everything happend. Maybe lives wouldn't have to be taken in order for him to become king.
The realtionship between LM and Macbeth is like the relationship between Ralph and Piggy. LM and Piggy would always suggest, influence and manipulate Ralph and Macbeth. These are parallels.
morganw - I think what makes a prophecy true is whether or not the person prophecized believes it or not. Mabye a prophecy is figured out by someones personality and what they are known to do
people have been saying that if Macbeth ahd become king without killing duncan he would have been ok. but he still would have wanted to hang onto the throne, ao would he still kill Banquo and macduff's family?
To rya and Whitney, in a way, i don't agree with you that MAcbeth is like Roger. I see much more relationship between Macbeth and Jack. I don't see Roger being a tragic hero because he didn't have a major mistake and a major downfall. Yes, Roger recieved way more than he deserved but Jack was "cool" at first remember? People kind of liked Jack at first, similar to Macbeth. Then at the end, Jack turned "evil" and started killing everyone who tried to get in his way.
cont. our discussion from the talkers I think that murder is, I agree, out of passion and want for that person to die for a certain reason and when you are in battle you are not killing that certain person for one thing that they did.
It seems that the darkness is a big theme in both Macbeth and LOF, because the darkness makes the beast seem real and encourages them to do bad things, like try to kill Ralph, and in Macbeth, the darkness reveals Lady Macbeth's guilt.
maddieh- I think that BAnquo showed appearance vs. reality because he knew exactally what Macbeth was doing, yet still remained "calm" on the outside. He knew that Macbeth had killed Duncan (or at least suspected it) but kept to himslef and acted as though he agreed with everyone else. These aren't great examples, but it just goes to show that almost everyone showed appearance vs. reality
Okay on the talking disscusion, I can't get this in, but we keep talking about guilt, and how Lady Macbeth kept trying to cover up her guilt. But did anyone ever think that maybe Lady Macbeth was trying to keep her husband from taking all the guilt, like she was trying to be strong for him.
mattf- I think that guilt appears at night because at night there usually isn't anything to do. If you hide your guilt during the day by your actions, you are consciously thinking about hiding your guilt, but when night comes you have no one to hide the guilt from but yourself. So when you are sitting alone at night that is when you can no longer disregard your conscience.
mATTF - I think that evil is a symbol of darkness, But it's alos revealing because the clouds go away and you can see the stars and sky and all that stuff.
When Lady Macbeth rants about a spot on her hand, It of course symbolizes blood. But since she was sleep walking. Like Whitney just said - we can choose to disreguard our conscience if we want.
Appearance versus reality is such a huge issue. In darkness, the unknown brings a feeling of loneliness and a lack of grasp on material things. Also, during sleep you cannot control your conscience and what your dreams will be. Same with the mask. When Jack is behind it, he doesn't have to think that the words are coming out of his mouth, but another.
Matt F- I think guilt appears at night because that is when we are our most vunerable. We are asleep so we don't have our gaurd up. Everything we are afraid of is out in the open for all to see. In the day, however, the "light" is too overpowering for anyone to our secrets and internal struggles. I don't think dark symbolizes evil, but more of a symbolizism of vunerablity and because of that, people see night as something to fear.
i think that from the outside discussion of murder is that if a person does something for their country, then it is heroic, but if it is something that hurts the country, then it is murder, or treason like what macbeth did.
Mitchl and everyone else talking about the 2 question - I think that the military background did help him with the murder of King Duncan because he had killed someone before so he knew what it looked like to see death. So that wouldn't be the shock, the shock was killing a man who was good and was his king and Kinsmen.
catem- i totally agree with you. I think that Lady Macbeth was totally trying to stay strong for her husband because she knew what he was going through. Also, because it was so obvious that she's an independent woman, she felt the need to feel guilty. (Oh, and i can't get ANYTHING in the outside conversation either arg!)
annes- 3 i think macbeth wouldnt have been able to execute his actions without his wife. Lady Macbeth is the reason macbeth wasnt caught in the act of killing Duncan. Lady Macbeth is the one who plotted most of the murders.
4- i think Macbeth felt the need to eliminate banquo and his blood line because the thought of a shortened fruitless reign scared macbeth so much.
I think that the ending of Maceth's innocence is parallel with the ending of LOF when the naval officer shows up and Ralph realizes that the innocence he had when he came to the island was lost and the naval officer "turns around and looks at his boat and lets the boys pull themselves together". this is the most powerful line in LOF and event in Macbeth. It shows how experiece reminds you of your POV and ruins the peacefulness of innocence.
I just had a random connection-- but when Duncan died there was unnatural disturbance, and the witches always "fly" when it is bad weather, or almost unnatural disturbances and it seems like the witches are the basis of these murders and choas.
What about sleep? Can you control what you can do what you can sleep? In one book, when the character sleeped, he possessed special powers where he could do supernational things. Does Lady Macbeth have supernatural powers? just throwing it out there...
lesliel- I meant that LADY MACBETH is like Roger. Sorry if I said Macbeth. I agree with, you though, that Macbeth is like Jack a apearing cool and collected at first but is transformed my his actions to a person who is forced to run from his concience.
DawnielleN- That's what I meant. It was Macbeth's desitny (or fate) to become King, but there were two paths to the throne. He could have waited for the prophecy to come true by being loyal to Duncan and serving him, or the path he took. He murdered Duncan to get to the throne more quickly. If he had more patience, he would not have felt guilt and would have been a much more liked King.
mattf- I think that's a really good question. Night is like a time to reflect and think about stuff, and wen people start thinking through things tey get more and more guilty about what they've done.
Also, the darkness almost eliminates trust. It's when the most murders occur, so I wouldn't really want to be asleep when tos of people want to kill me.
tylerg: I think that Macbeth is trying to hide from his own soul, because it shows his concience/guilt, so I think that he trys to tear away at his concience until it is gone all together.
tylerg- I think that it is a mixture of both, that we can't have just one, that we can make our free choices and totally challenge what we thought would happen in our life or what the paln was, because most people kind of have a basic outline of what they want in there life and where it is going to take them, and just one choice or decion can change that whole outlook.
tyler - to me it seems like he and lady Macbeth switch places. At the beggining he was unsure and stuff, and she was hard. Then at the end, he was hard and she was guilty.
Katyj-I think he wouldn't have because Macduff wouldn't have a reson to suspect him because Macbeth didn't kill Duncan, and Macbeth would still have a good relationship with Banquo, so he wouldn't want to kill him.
I agree w/ Hannahl, because we all hide something from somebody - no matter how much we trust them. Like you might not tell your parents some inside joke that your friends came up sith.
Like Ms. Smith ust said - I think the hands are always to blame. That sounds like the excuse I used in fourth grade. And like Mac just said- Spiderman - You feel like you should act a certain way under the mask, but only because nobody knows it's you and you can act however you want and not change your normal life.
Tylerg.- i totally saw this in macbeth too because in the beginning, he acutally cares for his wife, and fears killing duncan, but in the end, it seems that he is careless about what he does, and seems that he lost every emotion he posseses.
we all seem to wear a mask during the day. Whether we mean to or not and whether we are being sincere during the day or not, our true colors show through at night. The same true colors of mankind are also shown in solitude. When we are alone we can truly say what we think and act how we truly are. In the day we have to put on a persona and act a different way. Is this just common curtesy? You wouldn't go up to a teacher you don't like and scream that you hate them. Same goes with your peers or co-workers. We all have to put on this mask sometimes and be false to our selves. If someone wears the mask too often then the true nature will be bottled up and come out full force.
I don't think it is evil, just animalistic. It is not evil necessarily to blame other people, it is "evil" to accept human nature and just decide consciously to be an animal and kill anything.
whitneys- I think you are right that his military experience did help with the murder of Duncan. He knew how to kill, he'd done it a lot before. He was really only scared of that fact that he had killed his own King and kinsman.
Ya, we blame everything on others to avoid trouble naturally, but in Macbeth, by blaming things they drive themselves insane and make it more obvious that they killed him
ya selena i see your point about Macduff but i think that he would probably still kill Banquo, because he wouldn't want Banqou's desendants to rule on "his" throne
Mattw- yeah, i agree-and what you said reminds me of how the scene in LOF when Ralph discusses the death of Simon and Piggy-like LM after the death of Duncan-convinces Ralph(or Macbeth) that he wasn't involved- "a little water clears us of this deed."
I think the reason Macbeth and Lady Macbeth "switch" places is because they have different ways of coping with what they did. Lady Macbeth was tough in the beginning, but she was really hiding a soft interior, and the pressure of hiding that interior got to her and made her weak. Macbeth was soft in the beginning, but to cope with the murders he committed he covered up that softness so he became insensitive to everything.
laurenc- i don't agree with you saying that everyone wears a mask during the day. I think that people have certain points where they are not themselves, but not necessarly a mask. For me, i act how i am. I might act a different way around different people, but those are just the surroundings and circumstances. I don't act differenty, but different parts of my personality come out.
jordanh - I disagree with you about the way Ralph feels towards Piggy's death and Macbeth feels towards Lady Macbeth. I think that they are completely different. Ralph doesn't show that much emotion to Piggy's death because he has his own life to worry about. While Macbeth had nothing to do and just kinda disegarded it. Ralph could do NOTHING about Piggy's death except stand there and watch.
stephen, that comment made me think about the new halloween commercial because it says that everyone has a dark side, and what sets them apart from each other is their ability to control it, or to follow their temptations and let the evil come out inside them
MattF - When we sleep our conciouses (pardon the spelling) run free. No one knows everything about the brain but it can do some pretty amazing things, especially in sleep. Some people believe dreams hold special meanings or visions of "previous lives" I'm not sure whether or not they can give special powers but who knows? In response to whether or not Lady Macbeth has powers, i really don't think she did. I think she so wanted to be strong for her husband (as was already said) that she was willing to "sell her soul" and become "unsexed"
Has anyone else noticed the connection between the character's in Macbeth and the Lord of the Flies losing their innocence through murder? All of the boys lost some of their innocence when they were part of the dance that killed Simon, and then Roger really lost his innocence when he dropped the rock and killed Piggy. However, no one really realized the effects of what had happened until the naval officer came. The arrival of the naval officer is similar to night time in Macbeth. Both of these are times when the chracters start to realize their guilt.
So back to what Jordan said in the conversation outloud, since I can't get a word out and the subject has long passed, what he said about the kids being naturally evil makes me think of church and Natural Sin. Where children have a Natural Sin that doesn't go away until you get baptized. Did anyone else think of that?
jordanh- for saying "a little water clears us of this deed" I wonder if Lady Macbeth ever thought of mental cleanliness. Sure, you can get physically clean, but...When she was sleepwalking, it sure seemed like she did.
Are people inherintently evil. I think that we naturally evil. Think about it, we are taught to share and be friendly. Kids have to be taught to share, not to be mean to others. We naturally want to be mean and control others to do what we want. In LOF, the older kids throw sand into the little ones eyes repeatedly.
Are people inherintently evil. I think that we naturally evil. Think about it, we are taught to share and be friendly. Kids have to be taught to share, not to be mean to others. We naturally want to be mean and control others to do what we want. In LOF, the older kids throw sand into the little ones eyes repeatedly.
I have to disagree whitneys b/c i think that Macbeth did have things to do- he had to go face his death in the great battle just like Ralph did, so i think that they were in the same boat.
I completely agree with Hannah. O think that if an animal kills another creature - its not evil - its nature. But if a human kills an animal thats fine to. Like the PETA association- they thinks it sompletely wrong to hurt an animal whatsoever. Well then are tigers evil? Sharks? Spiders? well spiders are..............
I don't think that fate exists. Or, if it does, fate is not personal, but rather highly dependant on other people. If you say that someone in Rwanda's fate was to be part of a genocide, that is not all. It is rather their fate that no one will care. But, by people caring about others, they can change the fate of others, however the person themself cannot change it.
alexf - I understand what your talking about. I should have worded what I said a bit differently. I think we don't neccesarily wear a mask everyday but on occasions we don't act truthfully. This is just how humans are though, we can't act truthfully all the time. or can we? I suppose its debatable
Mitchs: I disagree with what you said. I think that Macbeth's military background made it actually harder to kill Duncan other than it would have been if he didn't have this background. In the military he was loyal to the king, and killed traitors to the kingdom. So when he betrayed his king, it was even more difficult.
alexf- I don't think that Banquo actually knew that Macbeth killed Duncan, I think he may have had an idea but he didn't really show apperance vs. reality, he was just being himself.
KatyJ- It depends on your perception of faith. Some people think that your fate is set and some don't believe in fate at all. Religion is really a big part of that.
i think that if people think about changing their destiny like ms. smith said, they do change their own fate, because they think about their choices more carefully so they could choose to not do something like ingnore peer pressure and save yourself from getting into trouble.
hannahl- i think fate exists but very loosely. your fate is decided by your decisions. if you are destined to become a moviestar, but you dedicate your life to singing, you may become a singer and btray your fate
tylerg-fate is THOUGHT to be set in stone-i don't believe that it is indefintely true, but i do agree that it is the choices that we make will get us there
Ok, well first of all I think that evil is a strong word and is inapropratly used. The boys on the island AREN'T evil...sure they have characteristics of being evil, but to be evil is so drastic! They have good characteristics too...for example, Jack felt compelled to feed his troops and to give them good shelter. He's not evil, he just have bad characteristics
I think fate relates to many things. I think no fate is premenetly set. A person's fate may suddenly be majorly changed do to someone else's actions. If fate really is set up then it is quite the tangled web
tylerg-If there was a "godly" figure at all, I think it'd be either Banquo (becaus he was a good charecter/person) or Macduff (because he conquered evil a.k.a Macbeth)
I agree that religion really has a big part of fate so it depends on what you belive, christians believe that god sets your fate, vs. athiasits belive in free will
tylerg- I agree, you can not change your fate, just the way you get there. A good example of this is Macbeth killing Duncan to become King. He would have become King either way, he just didn't have the patience. You can also affect the way people to react to your fate by the way you get there. However, you can't change your actual fate.
going off of a common focus, I thnk that all of mankind has a common inherited trait of animal likeness. Even according to science deffinition we are mammals and all animals have an underlying fight to survive and that will come out when it is needed like Macbeth felt it needed to come out inn order for him to be king and keep the throne after he got it and Jack felt he needed to resort to that in order to have respect in the tribe and have meat to survive. And I think that humans all connect through the animal institct within. It is our common trait/connection.
maddieh, I don't necessarily think that opinions on fate depend on religion. I know that people who strongly believe in G-d will most likely beleive that all things that happend are G-d's will. However, people who don't believe in G-d might also say that people are driven by an outer force. This could just have to do with thier amount of personal responsabilty.
leslie- i have not heard that saying before, but i don't agree with it, because believing in something is enough, i think you have to actually take action and do something about it to to make it happen.
I definately do not believe that it is impossible for every human to overcome human nature and be good. I also do no think it is okay for one person to say that by another person pouring water on a person, that they are not good. We can't each decide what the other person is, we can just decide what we are.
tyler g- not necessarlily-i'm christian, and i do think i have a fate, but i think that it is based off of our natural free will. we do have free will, everybody has sinned before (which is free will) so we do have free will
tylerg!- This is kind of a extension of your question. I think Macduff and Macbeth were the same but different.
Macbeth killed King Duncan, Macduff found him. Macbeth didn't feel really any emotion when Lady Macbeth died, Macduff says, "I will take it like a man, but I have to also feel it like a man." Macduff wins over Macbeth in the end.
Well I can't get a word in on the disscusion, but this is my take on fate. You know how every year we have to take the MAPS tests. On those tests each question has four or so choices. Depending on which choice you make, depends on if you move up or down. No matter what choice you make, each one will have an effect on the ovverall score.
maddieh- I agree I think that someones religion is a big part as to what we belive is fate and how our lives will turn out, I think everyone has their own idea of what will happen in life and how fate and personal choice palys into the final goal.
jordanh- I am also christian, and I don't really believe in fate... I believe that it is God's plan for us, and it will work out in His way no matter what. Does this make sense?
jordan, im also a christian and god gives us free choice, but he already knows the choices we will makes so he is watching our life from above and can see what we willd do, so free choice is really god's will
mattf- personally, i don't think that ANYONe is evil (besides the devil) like i said, i think that people have characteristics of evil, but no one is actually fully and wholley evil.
Mtichl- I agree that you have to take action to make the things you beleive in. You can beleive that you will be the best at something there ever was but unless you practice and work hard it won't happen.
Well, it's in a lizards self intrest to grab everything for itself to survive, food, water, shelter, because by keeping everything to itself the lizard species has a a better chance to survive. Vampire bats die if they don't eat after two days, so a bat that has fed will give blood to a bat that hasn't. It's in the bat's self intrest to share so it's species will survive. Humans have to be taught to share, because as a sentient species, it's in our best intrest to share, but if we weren't sentient, then in order to survive, we would have to grab everything for ourselves to survive. Now, we have to defy our old instincts to grab everything for ourselves, and share so we survive.
cont from in class_ I think that events and natural inheritance of fight for survival lead to evil and accomplises/encouraging egg it on and with these things you can either use your trait for good or evil.
lesliel- I don't agree with that saying. Just because you believe in something doesn't mean it will happen. If I believe that the Yankees will win every game they play, I don't think that will happen. If you believe something will happen, you have to work hard for it and if you work hard enough, you just might get it. Nothing comes freely to anyone. Hard work has to be involved.
It is never okay for one person to say that another is right, wrong, good, or bad. It is also never okay to decide if a life should be taken. This is not in the context of human nature obviously, but rather the rebellion against it.
I was trying to say this outloud but i'll just post it. For the sake of conversation I have to point out
What is good and evil? Who decides what is right and wrong? We have since birth been taught what is generally right or wrong but like MattW said outloud, both sides in the war think they are right
Laurenc- I TOTALLY AGREE about the mask thing. We all do wear masks during the day. Mainly when we think about this we think about hiding who we really and trying to impress other people.Yet you bring up an intersting topic about wearing a mask and acting differently because we can't just go up and yell or punch some one when we feel like because our anger take control of us. So I think the mask can hide the boys in Lord of the Flies and let them perform on the evil, yet it can also be like something to mask the evil and keep it under control...
HannahL- Religion is such a touchy subject because everyone has different views. Other religions than Christianity believe in entirely different things. Some don't even believe in fate at all. Atheists may say that there is no fate because that goes against what the believe, that there is nothing bigger than us. Therefore, depending on someone's views (which for the majority of people are based on the presence or absence in religion), then their idea of fate is determined on that.
Well, that saying was taught to me when I was littler but it's like if somebody says "gosh now I'm GOING to trip after school!" and someone else says "don't think/say that or it'll come true!" thats kind of what i'm trying to say. Sometimes it just depends
Tylerg! although i doubt that you'll come back to read this, i agree with you now-i misunderstood you at first because i thought that you were saying taht we had no free will at all and that only our fate exists, but now that you deepened your response, i completely agree, and that is my view on fate and free will- we all have a plan, but our plan i based off of the free will choices that our fate knows that we make. sorry if i sound contradictory, but that is the point that i've been trying to get across
Alexf I agree with you in the sense that "evil" is used a little "out of place" in LOF, however not in Macbeth. I looked up the term "evil" and these were some of the results... 1. morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked: evil deeds; an evil life. 2. harmful; injurious: evil laws Macbeth, in my onion was morally wrong or bad and he was harmful. So I think the word "evil" can be used to describe Macbeth and his actions just because he was so morally wrong to go ahead and kill those innocent people. In LOF I do agree with you that the boys are not evil as much as I think they are savage. Like you said they have characteristics of being evil, but I think savage is a better word to describe the boys in LOF. I looked up savage and here are some of the results... 1. fierce, ferocious, or cruel; untamed: savage beasts. 2. uncivilized; barbarous: savage tribes. I think the idea of becoming savage really pertains to the beast in LOF and the boys on the island really do become savage. Alexf I like the discussion you brought up about the word "evil" I was thinking about this is class today when people used the word “evil” I was not sure myself if it really fit in but when I looked it up it gave me a better understanding!!
laurenc- Yeah, I agree with you and mattw on how there relly isn't a person or a group of people that really decide hat is right and wrong, and when I had a similar conversation with my dad and brother,we have heard of some people that feel that they are doing a good and "holy" thing by strapping bombs to themselves and killing themselves but also innocent people. We may think that it is wrong and wonder how anyone could do something lke that, but they think that they ar being honorable. So really, there are total opposites thoughts of good and evil. But I do think that all humans have some sort of good, right and wrong, written on their hearts to some extent. So I guess you say that there is no right or wrong, who are we to say?
alexf- I agree with the fact that people are not completely evil. And you may say that this contidicts what I said in class, but people are born, I think with evil, and like I said, that's why in the chatholic religion, we get baptized as a baby to clear ourselves from the sin we were born with, and that's why we have to teach the kids to do good things because their nature is to do the selfish and bad things. But I also don't think that anyone is totally evil, but the devil like you said.
I think it is really interesting listening/reading about everyone’s view on fate. I watched part of the movie “The Secret” and it was an interesting point Ms. Smith brought up. In the movie there was this one part where this boy wanted a bike and if he I guess thought about it hard and really believed he would get a bike, then sooner or later he would get a bike. Personally I don’t think that you can just really believe in something and it will happen. Fate to me is an outcome, or a result of actions. I think that you have to see what your fate could be and then take action on, not necessarily challenge it, like Macbeth did but look at opportunities you are given and decide if that’s what you want or not.
Whitney and Lauren - I agree with both of you too. I think that people do wear masks because people have strict standards in society. Its like Challenging the system-you can act different and be yourself, but "yourself" might completely offend somebody elses "yourself"; so that brings up the question: If everyone just acted like themselves instead of living up to societies standards, would the world be a better place?
Melissaz - I'm not religious at all, but I really understand what you mant by the whole baptizing thing. People are born with evil, and being baptized (in Catholicism) redeems them from that evil influence. But I actually don't think that people are born into evil. I dont think its fair to say that because if a child was born and had absolutely nothing influence him all his life until he was old enough for "rational" thought, would his actions be good or evil? Altough it is human nature to preserve our own well-being over all, that doesn't mean a person will never help another. Hasn't there ever been a case where one person puts another in front of themselves?????
Kristinah- That is a very interesting take on humans and animals. I have never really thought about it that way. You are right in saying that we all have an instinct to survive just like animals. Now, I'm not saying that humans are animal like...but you know what I mean.
Hey Mattw, this is mattW! I totally agree with everything you said!!! Your first question poses a difficult queary... I believe that people should act like themselves despite peer pressure. I think the world would be better because thwere would be no standards, and pople would be so open to everyone elses ideas. Just because youre being yourself doesn't mean you have to be cruel to others. Ya, of course there has been a non-selfish act in history, but wouldn't it take a special person to do that? Society's standards aren't actually so bad once you think about it. They may expect you to act a certain way, but it also implies that if a person is in trouble, or hurt, you would be looked down upon for passing them by. It is totally human nature to help other people. So because of that I think that manking i basically good.
maddisonm - I've heard of that movie but never seen it. The idea of believing something will happen seems really cool. I can connect this to Pirates of the Carribean 2, because Jack has a compass that points to what he most wants in the world. But the problem is that he doesn't know what he wants more than anything else. So the kid knew that he wanted the bike more than all else, so much so that he "knew" he'd get one. So he did.
207 comments:
1 – 200 of 207 Newer› Newest»Hi everybody!!!!
Lets get more comments then hour 2!! Lets show them what we have! =D
How would the story have changed if Macbeth had disregarded the prophecy as false, or as inevitable?
2. If Macbeth hadn't had a past in the military, would he be as able to murder, or would the "first-time" syndrom keep him from his tasks?
3. If Lady Macbeth had never found out about the prophecy, how would the plotline of the story change? In other words, without an accomplice, would Macbeth have done the same things?
4. How did Banqou's benevolence affect the conscience of Macbeth in his actions throughout the story?
i agree morgant! lets show period two what weve got
Hey the pressure is on. Only do fantastic work good luck.
hah i figured it out
annes- question 1 would depend on which prophecy? Which one is it?
annes- Banquo and Duncan were very similar in their actions. Duncan didn't do anything wrong, and neither did Banquo! But, alas, Macbeth killed them both because of his fear!
I think that Macbeth would still have become king because prophecies are a prediction of the future. He may not have killed Duncan for the job, but would have become king eventually.
annes-
To answer your third question, I think the plot line would have changed a lot if Lady Macbeth had never found out about the prophecy. I don't think Macbeth would have been able to follow through with killing Duncan without someone egging him on and calling him a coward for not wanting to kill him. Macbeth was too loyal to Duncan at the beginning of the play to even think of betraying him.
What killing sent Macbeth into insanity? I don't really know because it seemed like Banquo might, but then after Macduff's family I had no idea
annes 's question 1 - I honestly think that if macbeth had disregarded the prophecies as false, the story would have changed because I think they would have never come true. For the witches told these things to Macbeth knowing that he would do all he could to make the prophecy come true. So if Macbeth had used his wisdom and disregarded the prophecies and not tried to act on fate, he would not have become King.
I have wondered througout Macbeth why Lady Macbeth is so supportive of Macbeth murdering Duncan. Did she really just want to be Queen? I think she may have had another reason but as I think about it more I'm really not sure what it could be.
Do you think she may have had anything to do with the weird sisters either?
AnneS - I do not think that the murders would have been easy for macbeth if he had not been able to remove himself from the actions he was committing. It was as if he was in war mode the entire time - thinking that killing Duncan and Banquo were merely other opponents in the war for the throne and control of Scottland.
I think that Macbeth is to much of qa lemming to make up his own mind. He just hears what other people say, and makes up his own reasons to back them up. He's a wussy sponge.
Annes: 1. If Macbeth didn't believe the witches' prophecies then I think that there wouldn't be a plot at all. I mean, Macbeth's ability to trust is one of the things that landed him in this situatuion. For example if he wouldn't have been as cocky, because they basically told him he was invincable.
annes- in respone to your question three, I think that Macbeth would have killed duncan anyways, because he knew of the prophecy and was driven by reckless ambition. Thats not to say that Lady Macbeth didn't have a hand in playing up this ambition, feeding his ego and asking him if he was a man or not.
AnneS-#2 I think being in the military didn't matter anyway,he still went insane from killing Duncan and Banquo, and he was still unsure about killing at first even with his wife's persuasion.
But in the long run, Macbeth kind of had to kill them. It was meant to be and was stated in the prophecy. It's been pretty firmly established that no one can change the set future, isn't that what the book's about?
annes- if macbeth had disregarded the prophecy, i think he still would have become king, but he would not have killed duncan, banquo, and macduff's family to achieve the throne. His reign might have still been fruitless, but people wouldnt think of him as a hellhound devil.
1. i think that the prophecy was based off of natural instict, so i think that it was going to happen no matter what b/c i think that the prophecy was based off of the free will.
2. again, like my last answer-it was meant to be, but i think he still would have done it, b/c the murder of Duncan was really his first murder that was-in his mind-evil.
3.again-it was meant to be. but i think that the entire thing wouldn't have happened b/c she had great influence over Macbeth
4. I think Banquo's benevolence made macbeth very INSECURE and UNCOMFORTABLE. he must have felt the needed to rid of the living conscience that Banquo provided
In responce to question number 3. I don't think that Macbeth would have done the same thing because there were so many times that he was going to turn around and not kill Duncan but than lady macbeth persuaded him to keep going. There are a lot of times that people wouldn't continue on without the pressure/encouragement of others.
mattf- I definitely agree with you. But, maybe the witches said that part of the prophecy knowing that when Macbeth heard that, he would rush into it. Does this make sense? Maybe the prophecy was that Macbeth would be king no matter what.
annes- Macbeth still would have had the desire to kill Duncan, but may not have wanted to kill Duncan or have the strength to do the deed. Macbeth probably wouldn't have killed Duncan, as he was scared of the repercussions of his actions.
AnneS- Question 2: I think that Macbeth still would have murdered Duncan, Banquo, and Macduffs family because he had the drive and determination. I do think that a key fact was his past military training because he knew how to kill and was used to it, but he wasn't prepared and would never be for the first time he killed someone he loved
AnneS--If Macbeth decided to disregard the prophesy he would have never killed Duncan or Banquoe, and he would not have gotten into the whole downward spiral of murder. He would have become king eventually, but when that happened, he would probably be a good king, and rather than the hatred he recieved, he would have recieved praise.
2. I don't think the millitary background would have changed too much, because he seemed to already have a slight predisposition to murder.
3. I think that if he was not married to Lady Macbeth he wouldn't have murdered the first time, and would probably not led down the slippery slope towards evil. She was the one who forced him to murder first!
I agree with mitchs. Lady Macbeth has a lot to do with Macbeths actions. If it weren't for Lady Macbeth chalenging Macbeths manhood Duncan would have survived the night wich would have prevented Malcom running away and forming alliences against Macbeth.
annes- To respond to your first question, I think if Macbeth had never been in the military he would have been much less violent and much much less accustomed to murder then he is.
Laurenc - I think that Lady Macbeth is interested in power, but i also think that she wanted him to be king, so that she could maybe kill him, and then take the throne for herself. But eventually she dies, and Macbeth seems more evil. But it seems like the sort of thing she'd do....
I agree with Morgan, no matter what Macbeth did he would be king so it didn't really matter who e killed, maybe they knew he would kill them
If Macbeth had just been like "oh look at that i am gonna be king" and not tried to speed it along the stoy line would have been way different. Macbeth probably would still have become King. he could have just left well enough alone and he would still have become king because that was his destiny. But it was his destiny to act like he did, so asking the question is kinda stupid.
annes & whitneys- I agree with that because I think that if Macbeth disregarded the prophesies, then I do think that the propheies woulkd have come true, but in a natural way, not the forced way.
macmm- I'm going to have to disagree with you. I don't think that Macbeth would have killed Duncan if Lady Macbeth hadn't been pushing him to kill Duncan. He was talking about how it was hard for him to kill Duncan because it was going to happen in his own house, where he was supposed to protect people in his house. He was too loyal to Duncan to kill him on his own causes.
Well in reponse to the discussion on our opinion on macbeth, I really liked the book macbeth once I got into it. The plot would thinken every time you turned the page and I just got sucked into it like morgan said. Shakespeare wrote it really well.
morgant- thank you, and your idea may be true. But then this goes into the theory that time is one big circle and the future influences the past. Its complicated
mitchs - I agree with you on the plot line without Lady Macbeth. Macbeth would definately not have murdered King Duncan without the encouragement of his wife. Because he wasn't going to go through with it until Lady Macbeth challenged his manly hood and made it an issue of his pride. Also before killing King Duncan Macbeth still had his goodness and through the whole dagger scene monologue and then when Lady Macbeth rung the bell, it was forcing him to go again.
annes- 2. if macbeth hadnt been in the military, i think he still would have been able to murder everyone he did because he had the will power and the dedication to do so.
AnneS-I think that if he disregarded the prophecy, if it was a true prophecy it would have come true anyway, but if it was false, then he wouldn't have become king, but he wouldn't have become insane about the killings either.
Annes- in response to question 2, if macbeth never had a military backround i do think that he could have killed duncan, because in the military when he killed, he didn't know the people he killed, so he probably did't care so much about what happened, but he could still kill duncan, but he would just feel worse about his first kill, and the consequences of killing the king.
Going off of what Morgan w said at the beginning of the converstaion- i read both LOF and Macbeth and 6th grade, and never saw any connections, but with these new tools, i feel like i have neve learned better or more in depth.
Ya, lady macbeth is really one of the majo causes, but if Macbeth hadn't heard the prophecy it wouldn't have happened, so I guess they really did their job and caused chaos
Annes - I think the answer to the third question is kind of obvious, because He's had so much experience in killing that it would not have affected it, if it had not been a friend (or king) but it says that he was a powerful warrior, who could kill without hesitation....
laurenc- I don't think that Lady Macbeth had anything to do with the weird sisters, I don't even know if Lady Macbeth has ever met the weird sisters, so I don't really think there was ever a connection.
whitneys- nice word choice with "manly hood". I really agree with you as I said before. Macbeth is like Roger: always in the background making things happen.
Annes1- I think this question depends on whether you believe in fate or not. If there is a predetermined destiny for everyone, than no matter what, Macbeth would have become a tyrant. If fate doesn't exsist, than I think Macbeth still would have become who he became because his own insecurities would have led him to act on the prophecy regardless whether he believed it or not. Also, I feel Lady Macbeth would have pushed him to "be a man" and he still would have killed Duncan and lead himself to his own downfall.
Well have you ever tyied to kill anyone Ryanm? It's probably hard the first time, but after you are a seasoned veteran, it gets easier. Also the fact that when you're in a war, you fell like you're killing people, but for your country.
in response to question annes's #3 question.. i have a feeling that Macbeth would not have become as savage if Lady Macbeth did not find out about the prophecy beacuse Lady Macbeth was really the one to bring out this horrrible side in Macbeth. She was the one who originally put these thoughts of "challenging fate" and to get going on this whole king idea. What do you guys think?
To Everybody - what do you think makes a prophecy false or true? How do you know whether or not Macbeth's prophecies were true or not?
I think that the death of Lady Macbeth is a lot like the death of Piggy-Macbeth didn't grieve, but he simply said that she shouldn't have died right then, kind of like how Ralph didn't care too much about Piggy, but missed his common sense when he was dead.
laurenc: I think that one of the reasons that Lady Macbeth supported Macbeth all the way through the murder of Duncan, was because back in that day, woman didn't have aplace really other than behind their husband. If her husband was to become king, then she would become queen, and that could really bring her statis up. Also I really think that she loved her husband, and knew that he really needed her support at this time of internal conflict.
macm - I agree with you. I think Lady Macbeth definatly had a hand in helping Macbeth decide to kill Duncan but I still believe he would have done it anyway. Macbeth was obviously crushed when he found out Malcom would be King instead of him and probably was so verngeful and blinded by the witches promise that murder wouldn't have been a far off deed
I wasn't saying lady macbeth had a relationship with the witches, but they both had an impact on macbeth's choices
Rya, do you mean Lady Macbeth rather than Macbeth?
I agree with beckyg, I think that if Macbeth had disregarded the prophecies then he would have become King eventually, but he wouldn't have had to kill anyone. He would have been a loyal servant to Duncan until the end and then probably have been a well loved King.
annes- Well personally, I think that it would've come true, because of the evidence from the seecond "predictions the witches or apparitions made came true and MAcbeth didn't do quite as much as he did to make them come true. For example, when Bernum Wood came to Dunsinane Hill Macbeth didn't do anything to stop it from happening. So, I think that everything would've happened, just in a different way.
Would macbeth had made those choices if ower wasn't involved if it was just riches or other things, or would anything better have pushed him over?
I agree with Ryan M that even if Macbeth wasn't in the militery he still had the ability to murder though he made not have had the same interest in fact if he wasn't in the military he never would have run into the witches in the first place.
mitchs and whitneys- I agree that Lady macbeth I think needed to take the lead for the story to have reached the point that it did, she was the instigator, and then later Macbeth took the reins for himself.
morganw-I think the prophecys weren't really predicted, but almost acted as a guideline to inspire Macbeth to do what he did. The witches are all about chaos so they could have set up a "prophecy" knowing that Macbeth would take the bait.
Maddieh - I agree with you. You do have to believe in Faith or not, and I don't. I actually don't because it doesn't mattere to me. If I could tell the future, and find out when I'd die, I admit, I might try to stop it. But I don't, so I just keep living, and I dont care if I already have a path set out in front of me- cuz I dont know it.
Ignorance is Bliss.........................
I think that almost the entire book and pretty much everyone in it showed appearance vs. reality. All the characters were trying to decieve each other and were trying to hide their true feelings. For example, when Malcom and Macduff met Malcom pretended to be something he's not to make sure the Macduff wasn't lying or deceiving. Not only that, but obviously Macbeth, Lady Macbeth, and Banquo also showed Appearance vs. Reality
whitneys- yes i meant Lady Macbeth
morganw- I think peoples actions are what makes a prophacy true. Everything we say and do is baised on other people's reations
laurenc- I don't think that Macbeth would have killed Duncan if Lady Macbeth hadn't been pushing him to do it. While Malcolm becoming heir to the throne definitely made Macbeth angry, I don't think it would have pushed him to kill Duncan. If Macbeth had waited, maybe someting would have happened to Malcolm and he would have become heir to the throne. He obviously didn't have very much patience, or if he did have patience, Lady Macbeth pushed him over the edge.
Do you think there is free choice or destiny, I think that you write your own destiny through free choice, but God can see what you're going to do already.?
tylerg: I definitally agree. It almost seems like women have a larger impact than men on Macbeth. Maybehe trusts women more, because it is normally men that betray each other in this time period.
I agree, Lady Macbeth was really the one who pushed Macbeth into the murders, because she was egging him on and saying that she would do it, but she was a hypocrite because she wouldn't kill Duncan because, "He looked too much like my father", and at night, she's sleepwalking and wishing she didn't have the blood on her hands.
Macbeth seemed to bring everything down on himself by telling Lady macbeth about the prophecy. he probably wouldn't have done anything if she hadn't egged him on he would never have killed duncan.
annes- i think that if macbeth forgot about the prophecy, i think that maybe everything that happened would still have, because duncan might have been killed by another person who wanted macbeth to be king. Or malcolm wanted to speed up the process of becoming king, and he was caught in the act so macbeth would become king that way. But i do think that macbeth would have become a better king one of these ways, because he wouldn't feel guilty. Macbeth would however still would have to kill banquo and his son to stay the king.
That is a good question about prophesies. I think that a lot of times when prophesy is unknown it happens anyways but then there are times when people know of it like macbeth and try to change it and it ends up happening anyways. So either way the prophesies are true. A prophesy is a prophesy.
OH SURE, NOBODY COMMENT ON ME!!!
Guilt only appears at night. Is that because the night is dark, which is a symbol of evil?
Alex F- How did Banquo show appearance vs. reality?
I agree with you but I just can't think of a way that he did that.
Mitch S.- remeber when we had that long conversation about what we believe in fait? Part of me wonders if Macbeth could have become King and had a peaceful life if he hadn't tried to MAKE SURE that everything happend. Maybe lives wouldn't have to be taken in order for him to become king.
I think that guilt appears any time you've done somethin and someone wants to like talk to you or something, not only at night
The realtionship between LM and Macbeth is like the relationship between Ralph and Piggy. LM and Piggy would always suggest, influence and manipulate Ralph and Macbeth. These are parallels.
morganw - I think what makes a prophecy true is whether or not the person prophecized believes it or not. Mabye a prophecy is figured out by someones personality and what they are known to do
people have been saying that if Macbeth ahd become king without killing duncan he would have been ok. but he still would have wanted to hang onto the throne, ao would he still kill Banquo and macduff's family?
To rya and Whitney, in a way, i don't agree with you that MAcbeth is like Roger. I see much more relationship between Macbeth and Jack. I don't see Roger being a tragic hero because he didn't have a major mistake and a major downfall. Yes, Roger recieved way more than he deserved but Jack was "cool" at first remember? People kind of liked Jack at first, similar to Macbeth. Then at the end, Jack turned "evil" and started killing everyone who tried to get in his way.
cont. our discussion from the talkers I think that murder is, I agree, out of passion and want for that person to die for a certain reason and when you are in battle you are not killing that certain person for one thing that they did.
It seems that the darkness is a big theme in both Macbeth and LOF, because the darkness makes the beast seem real and encourages them to do bad things, like try to kill Ralph, and in Macbeth, the darkness reveals Lady Macbeth's guilt.
maddieh- I think that BAnquo showed appearance vs. reality because he knew exactally what Macbeth was doing, yet still remained "calm" on the outside. He knew that Macbeth had killed Duncan (or at least suspected it) but kept to himslef and acted as though he agreed with everyone else. These aren't great examples, but it just goes to show that almost everyone showed appearance vs. reality
Okay on the talking disscusion, I can't get this in, but we keep talking about guilt, and how Lady Macbeth kept trying to cover up her guilt. But did anyone ever think that maybe Lady Macbeth was trying to keep her husband from taking all the guilt, like she was trying to be strong for him.
mattf- I think that guilt appears at night because at night there usually isn't anything to do. If you hide your guilt during the day by your actions, you are consciously thinking about hiding your guilt, but when night comes you have no one to hide the guilt from but yourself. So when you are sitting alone at night that is when you can no longer disregard your conscience.
I'm not sure why, but as Macbeth progresses through the book it seems that he loses his emotions and is just a straight face totally focussed on power
Darkness is the thing we dread and seek It hides us but it can also hide other things aswell.
mATTF - I think that evil is a symbol of darkness, But it's alos revealing because the clouds go away and you can see the stars and sky and all that stuff.
When Lady Macbeth rants about a spot on her hand, It of course symbolizes blood. But since she was sleep walking. Like Whitney just said - we can choose to disreguard our conscience if we want.
Appearance versus reality is such a huge issue. In darkness, the unknown brings a feeling of loneliness and a lack of grasp on material things. Also, during sleep you cannot control your conscience and what your dreams will be. Same with the mask. When Jack is behind it, he doesn't have to think that the words are coming out of his mouth, but another.
tylerg-I think he loses some human traits like compassion, but gains others like self pity.
Matt F- I think guilt appears at night because that is when we are our most vunerable. We are asleep so we don't have our gaurd up. Everything we are afraid of is out in the open for all to see. In the day, however, the "light" is too overpowering for anyone to our secrets and internal struggles. I don't think dark symbolizes evil, but more of a symbolizism of vunerablity and because of that, people see night as something to fear.
i think that from the outside discussion of murder is that if a person does something for their country, then it is heroic, but if it is something that hurts the country, then it is murder, or treason like what macbeth did.
Mitchl and everyone else talking about the 2 question - I think that the military background did help him with the murder of King Duncan because he had killed someone before so he knew what it looked like to see death. So that wouldn't be the shock, the shock was killing a man who was good and was his king and Kinsmen.
catem- i totally agree with you. I think that Lady Macbeth was totally trying to stay strong for her husband because she knew what he was going through. Also, because it was so obvious that she's an independent woman, she felt the need to feel guilty. (Oh, and i can't get ANYTHING in the outside conversation either arg!)
annes- 3 i think macbeth wouldnt have been able to execute his actions without his wife. Lady Macbeth is the reason macbeth wasnt caught in the act of killing Duncan. Lady Macbeth is the one who plotted most of the murders.
4- i think Macbeth felt the need to eliminate banquo and his blood line because the thought of a shortened fruitless reign scared macbeth so much.
I think that the ending of Maceth's innocence is parallel with the ending of LOF when the naval officer shows up and Ralph realizes that the innocence he had when he came to the island was lost and the naval officer "turns around and looks at his boat and lets the boys pull themselves together". this is the most powerful line in LOF and event in Macbeth. It shows how experiece reminds you of your POV and ruins the peacefulness of innocence.
I just had a random connection-- but when Duncan died there was unnatural disturbance, and the witches always "fly" when it is bad weather, or almost unnatural disturbances and it seems like the witches are the basis of these murders and choas.
What about sleep? Can you control what you can do what you can sleep? In one book, when the character sleeped, he possessed special powers where he could do supernational things. Does Lady Macbeth have supernatural powers? just throwing it out there...
lesliel- I meant that LADY MACBETH is like Roger. Sorry if I said Macbeth. I agree with, you though, that Macbeth is like Jack a apearing cool and collected at first but is transformed my his actions to a person who is forced to run from his concience.
DawnielleN- That's what I meant. It was Macbeth's desitny (or fate) to become King, but there were two paths to the throne. He could have waited for the prophecy to come true by being loyal to Duncan and serving him, or the path he took. He murdered Duncan to get to the throne more quickly. If he had more patience, he would not have felt guilt and would have been a much more liked King.
mattf- I think that's a really good question. Night is like a time to reflect and think about stuff, and wen people start thinking through things tey get more and more guilty about what they've done.
Also, the darkness almost eliminates trust. It's when the most murders occur, so I wouldn't really want to be asleep when tos of people want to kill me.
ech, badly phrased but you get my point.
tylerg: I think that Macbeth is trying to hide from his own soul, because it shows his concience/guilt, so I think that he trys to tear away at his concience until it is gone all together.
I don't see him pitting himself, he knows what he did and he just wants to fight and die on the field, so he isn't hiding or pitting himself
mattf- That could very well be! Darkness symbolizes many things. It can be interpreted in any way. Anyone have insights?
tylerg- I think that it is a mixture of both, that we can't have just one, that we can make our free choices and totally challenge what we thought would happen in our life or what the paln was, because most people kind of have a basic outline of what they want in there life and where it is going to take them, and just one choice or decion can change that whole outlook.
tyler - to me it seems like he and lady Macbeth switch places. At the beggining he was unsure and stuff, and she was hard. Then at the end, he was hard and she was guilty.
Katyj-I think he wouldn't have because Macduff wouldn't have a reson to suspect him because Macbeth didn't kill Duncan, and Macbeth would still have a good relationship with Banquo, so he wouldn't want to kill him.
I agree w/ Hannahl, because we all hide something from somebody - no matter how much we trust them. Like you might not tell your parents some inside joke that your friends came up sith.
Like Ms. Smith ust said - I think the hands are always to blame. That sounds like the excuse I used in fourth grade. And like Mac just said- Spiderman - You feel like you should act a certain way under the mask, but only because nobody knows it's you and you can act however you want and not change your normal life.
Tylerg.- i totally saw this in macbeth too because in the beginning, he acutally cares for his wife, and fears killing duncan, but in the end, it seems that he is careless about what he does, and seems that he lost every emotion he posseses.
we all seem to wear a mask during the day. Whether we mean to or not and whether we are being sincere during the day or not, our true colors show through at night. The same true colors of mankind are also shown in solitude. When we are alone we can truly say what we think and act how we truly are. In the day we have to put on a persona and act a different way. Is this just common curtesy? You wouldn't go up to a teacher you don't like and scream that you hate them. Same goes with your peers or co-workers. We all have to put on this mask sometimes and be false to our selves. If someone wears the mask too often then the true nature will be bottled up and come out full force.
i think everyone has a dark side it's the ability to control that side that seperates us.
I don't think it is evil, just animalistic. It is not evil necessarily to blame other people, it is "evil" to accept human nature and just decide consciously to be an animal and kill anything.
whitneys- I think you are right that his military experience did help with the murder of Duncan. He knew how to kill, he'd done it a lot before. He was really only scared of that fact that he had killed his own King and kinsman.
Ya, we blame everything on others to avoid trouble naturally, but in Macbeth, by blaming things they drive themselves insane and make it more obvious that they killed him
ya selena i see your point about Macduff but i think that he would probably still kill Banquo, because he wouldn't want Banqou's desendants to rule on "his" throne
whitneys and mitchs, i respectfully disagree, macbeth had the determination and will power the murder for his own gain.
keep up the comments guys! We need to get more than 175 comments!!
Mattw- yeah, i agree-and what you said reminds me of how the scene in LOF when Ralph discusses the death of Simon and Piggy-like LM after the death of Duncan-convinces Ralph(or Macbeth) that he wasn't involved- "a little water clears us of this deed."
I think the reason Macbeth and Lady Macbeth "switch" places is because they have different ways of coping with what they did. Lady Macbeth was tough in the beginning, but she was really hiding a soft interior, and the pressure of hiding that interior got to her and made her weak. Macbeth was soft in the beginning, but to cope with the murders he committed he covered up that softness so he became insensitive to everything.
laurenc- i don't agree with you saying that everyone wears a mask during the day. I think that people have certain points where they are not themselves, but not necessarly a mask. For me, i act how i am. I might act a different way around different people, but those are just the surroundings and circumstances. I don't act differenty, but different parts of my personality come out.
jordanh - I disagree with you about the way Ralph feels towards Piggy's death and Macbeth feels towards Lady Macbeth. I think that they are completely different. Ralph doesn't show that much emotion to Piggy's death because he has his own life to worry about. While Macbeth had nothing to do and just kinda disegarded it. Ralph could do NOTHING about Piggy's death except stand there and watch.
stephen, that comment made me think about the new halloween commercial because it says that everyone has a dark side, and what sets them apart from each other is their ability to control it, or to follow their temptations and let the evil come out inside them
cont. discussion in class I thnk that the stripping of innocents is due to events that happen to us.
Katiej thank you for agreeing with me
MattF - When we sleep our conciouses (pardon the spelling) run free. No one knows everything about the brain but it can do some pretty amazing things, especially in sleep. Some people believe dreams hold special meanings or visions of "previous lives" I'm not sure whether or not they can give special powers but who knows? In response to whether or not Lady Macbeth has powers, i really don't think she did. I think she so wanted to be strong for her husband (as was already said) that she was willing to "sell her soul" and become "unsexed"
Has anyone else noticed the connection between the character's in Macbeth and the Lord of the Flies losing their innocence through murder? All of the boys lost some of their innocence when they were part of the dance that killed Simon, and then Roger really lost his innocence when he dropped the rock and killed Piggy. However, no one really realized the effects of what had happened until the naval officer came. The arrival of the naval officer is similar to night time in Macbeth. Both of these are times when the chracters start to realize their guilt.
I totally see that connection mitchs
So back to what Jordan said in the conversation outloud, since I can't get a word out and the subject has long passed, what he said about the kids being naturally evil makes me think of church and Natural Sin. Where children have a Natural Sin that doesn't go away until you get baptized. Did anyone else think of that?
jordanh- for saying "a little water clears us of this deed" I wonder if Lady Macbeth ever thought of mental cleanliness. Sure, you can get physically clean, but...When she was sleepwalking, it sure seemed like she did.
Can you change your fate???????
Are people inherintently evil. I think that we naturally evil. Think about it, we are taught to share and be friendly. Kids have to be taught to share, not to be mean to others. We naturally want to be mean and control others to do what we want. In LOF, the older kids throw sand into the little ones eyes repeatedly.
Are people inherintently evil. I think that we naturally evil. Think about it, we are taught to share and be friendly. Kids have to be taught to share, not to be mean to others. We naturally want to be mean and control others to do what we want. In LOF, the older kids throw sand into the little ones eyes repeatedly.
I have to disagree whitneys b/c i think that Macbeth did have things to do- he had to go face his death in the great battle just like Ralph did, so i think that they were in the same boat.
no, katiej, fate is set in stone, but the choices you make to geth there will affect the path you take to get to your fate, good question
I completely agree with Hannah. O think that if an animal kills another creature - its not evil - its nature. But if a human kills an animal thats fine to. Like the PETA association- they thinks it sompletely wrong to hurt an animal whatsoever. Well then are tigers evil? Sharks? Spiders? well spiders are..............
morgant- i agree lady macbeth needed the mental clensing of the plots and murders that have been weighing on her mind.
I don't think that fate exists. Or, if it does, fate is not personal, but rather highly dependant on other people. If you say that someone in Rwanda's fate was to be part of a genocide, that is not all. It is rather their fate that no one will care. But, by people caring about others, they can change the fate of others, however the person themself cannot change it.
alexf - I understand what your talking about. I should have worded what I said a bit differently. I think we don't neccesarily wear a mask everyday but on occasions we don't act truthfully. This is just how humans are though, we can't act truthfully all the time. or can we? I suppose its debatable
katej-that all depends on if you beleive in fate or not.
Mitchs: I disagree with what you said. I think that Macbeth's military background made it actually harder to kill Duncan other than it would have been if he didn't have this background. In the military he was loyal to the king, and killed traitors to the kingdom. So when he betrayed his king, it was even more difficult.
who represented the godly figure in macbeth
alexf- I don't think that Banquo actually knew that Macbeth killed Duncan, I think he may have had an idea but he didn't really show apperance vs. reality, he was just being himself.
KatyJ- It depends on your perception of faith. Some people think that your fate is set and some don't believe in fate at all. Religion is really a big part of that.
i think that if people think about changing their destiny like ms. smith said, they do change their own fate, because they think about their choices more carefully so they could choose to not do something like ingnore peer pressure and save yourself from getting into trouble.
WWWWWEEEEEEEEE NNNNNNNNEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDDDDD MMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE CCCCCCCCCCCCOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMEEEEEEEEEEEENNNNNNNNNNNNTTTTTTTTTTTTSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
mattw stop screwing around
hannahl- i think fate exists but very loosely. your fate is decided by your decisions. if you are destined to become a moviestar, but you dedicate your life to singing, you may become a singer and btray your fate
katyj- I think that question depends on what you believe about fate. Many people have different views about fate.
tylerg-fate is THOUGHT to be set in stone-i don't believe that it is indefintely true, but i do agree that it is the choices that we make will get us there
Has anyone heard of the saying "if you believe in it, it will happen"? Because that may be the case in Macbeth.
tylerg!- how do you know fate is set in stone, then do you not believe in luck?
Come on guys!! Keep it up!! Approximately 30 comments to go!!
=D
Ok, well first of all I think that evil is a strong word and is inapropratly used. The boys on the island AREN'T evil...sure they have characteristics of being evil, but to be evil is so drastic! They have good characteristics too...for example, Jack felt compelled to feed his troops and to give them good shelter. He's not evil, he just have bad characteristics
I think fate relates to many things. I think no fate is premenetly set. A person's fate may suddenly be majorly changed do to someone else's actions. If fate really is set up then it is quite the tangled web
tylerg-If there was a "godly" figure at all, I think it'd be either Banquo (becaus he was a good charecter/person) or Macduff (because he conquered evil a.k.a Macbeth)
I agree that religion really has a big part of fate so it depends on what you belive, christians believe that god sets your fate, vs. athiasits belive in free will
tylerg- I agree, you can not change your fate, just the way you get there. A good example of this is Macbeth killing Duncan to become King. He would have become King either way, he just didn't have the patience. You can also affect the way people to react to your fate by the way you get there. However, you can't change your actual fate.
going off of a common focus, I thnk that all of mankind has a common inherited trait of animal likeness. Even according to science deffinition we are mammals and all animals have an underlying fight to survive and that will come out when it is needed like Macbeth felt it needed to come out inn order for him to be king and keep the throne after he got it and Jack felt he needed to resort to that in order to have respect in the tribe and have meat to survive. And I think that humans all connect through the animal institct within. It is our common trait/connection.
maddieh, I don't necessarily think that opinions on fate depend on religion. I know that people who strongly believe in G-d will most likely beleive that all things that happend are G-d's will. However, people who don't believe in G-d might also say that people are driven by an outer force. This could just have to do with thier amount of personal responsabilty.
i agree mattw. a lot more comments.
anyway i think that fate exsists but that, by trying hard enough, we can change it, but only for the better baecause it is our nature to be bad.
leslie- i have not heard that saying before, but i don't agree with it, because believing in something is enough, i think you have to actually take action and do something about it to to make it happen.
15 more comments, but 14 after me
alexf- then how would you describe the boys on the island. who would you describe with the word "evil"?
Mitchs- but what if everything is set, like it was part of your faith to get to, for lack of better words, the main points.
I definately do not believe that it is impossible for every human to overcome human nature and be good. I also do no think it is okay for one person to say that by another person pouring water on a person, that they are not good. We can't each decide what the other person is, we can just decide what we are.
My computers about to die....bye everybody!!!
tyler g- not necessarlily-i'm christian, and i do think i have a fate, but i think that it is based off of our natural free will. we do have free will, everybody has sinned before (which is free will) so we do have free will
tylerg!- This is kind of a extension of your question.
I think Macduff and Macbeth were the same but different.
Macbeth killed King Duncan, Macduff found him.
Macbeth didn't feel really any emotion when Lady Macbeth died, Macduff says, "I will take it like a man, but I have to also feel it like a man." Macduff wins over Macbeth in the end.
Did anyone notice this?
Well I can't get a word in on the disscusion, but this is my take on fate. You know how every year we have to take the MAPS tests. On those tests each question has four or so choices. Depending on which choice you make, depends on if you move up or down. No matter what choice you make, each one will have an effect on the ovverall score.
maddieh- I agree I think that someones religion is a big part as to what we belive is fate and how our lives will turn out, I think everyone has their own idea of what will happen in life and how fate and personal choice palys into the final goal.
jordanh- I am also christian, and I don't really believe in fate... I believe that it is God's plan for us, and it will work out in His way no matter what. Does this make sense?
jordan, im also a christian and god gives us free choice, but he already knows the choices we will makes so he is watching our life from above and can see what we willd do, so free choice is really god's will
What about fate vs free will. Can you control your fate or do we even have free will?
mattf- personally, i don't think that ANYONe is evil (besides the devil) like i said, i think that people have characteristics of evil, but no one is actually fully and wholley evil.
We need 6 more comments to beat hour 2!!! GO GO GO!!!=D
Mtichl- I agree that you have to take action to make the things you beleive in. You can beleive that you will be the best at something there ever was but unless you practice and work hard it won't happen.
Well, it's in a lizards self intrest to grab everything for itself to survive, food, water, shelter, because by keeping everything to itself the lizard species has a a better chance to survive. Vampire bats die if they don't eat after two days, so a bat that has fed will give blood to a bat that hasn't. It's in the bat's self intrest to share so it's species will survive. Humans have to be taught to share, because as a sentient species, it's in our best intrest to share, but if we weren't sentient, then in order to survive, we would have to grab everything for ourselves to survive. Now, we have to defy our old instincts to grab everything for ourselves, and share so we survive.
cont from in class_ I think that events and natural inheritance of fight for survival lead to evil and accomplises/encouraging egg it on and with these things you can either use your trait for good or evil.
i agree with morgant
catem- whata a great comparison- i completely agree, and i think that fate is based off of our free will
lesliel- I don't agree with that saying. Just because you believe in something doesn't mean it will happen. If I believe that the Yankees will win every game they play, I don't think that will happen. If you believe something will happen, you have to work hard for it and if you work hard enough, you just might get it. Nothing comes freely to anyone. Hard work has to be involved.
Yay! We win!!!
more comments than period 2
It is never okay for one person to say that another is right, wrong, good, or bad. It is also never okay to decide if a life should be taken. This is not in the context of human nature obviously, but rather the rebellion against it.
george2, respond to my comment
mattf- controlling your fate is free will. If you didn't have free will, you couldn't do certain acts to control your faith.
I was trying to say this outloud but i'll just post it. For the sake of conversation I have to point out
What is good and evil? Who decides what is right and wrong? We have since birth been taught what is generally right or wrong but like MattW said outloud, both sides in the war think they are right
Laurenc- I TOTALLY AGREE about the mask thing. We all do wear masks during the day. Mainly when we think about this we think about hiding who we really and trying to impress other people.Yet you bring up an intersting topic about wearing a mask and acting differently because we can't just go up and yell or punch some one when we feel like because our anger take control of us. So I think the mask can hide the boys in Lord of the Flies and let them perform on the evil, yet it can also be like something to mask the evil and keep it under control...
Oops! I meant fate on my last comment.
Success!!!!! more than hour 2!
HannahL- Religion is such a touchy subject because everyone has different views. Other religions than Christianity believe in entirely different things. Some don't even believe in fate at all. Atheists may say that there is no fate because that goes against what the believe, that there is nothing bigger than us. Therefore, depending on someone's views (which for the majority of people are based on the presence or absence in religion), then their idea of fate is determined on that.
Well, that saying was taught to me when I was littler but it's like if somebody says "gosh now I'm GOING to trip after school!" and someone else says "don't think/say that or it'll come true!" thats kind of what i'm trying to say. Sometimes it just depends
Cate - i know exactly what you mean. it is exactly like fate because everyone gets a different test because of the answers they choose.
Tylerg! although i doubt that you'll come back to read this, i agree with you now-i misunderstood you at first because i thought that you were saying taht we had no free will at all and that only our fate exists, but now that you deepened your response, i completely agree, and that is my view on fate and free will- we all have a plan, but our plan i based off of the free will choices that our fate knows that we make. sorry if i sound contradictory, but that is the point that i've been trying to get across
Alexf I agree with you in the sense that "evil" is used a little "out of place" in LOF, however not in Macbeth. I looked up the term "evil" and these were some of the results...
1. morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked: evil deeds; an evil life.
2. harmful; injurious: evil laws
Macbeth, in my onion was morally wrong or bad and he was harmful. So I think the word "evil" can be used to describe Macbeth and his actions just because he was so morally wrong to go ahead and kill those innocent people. In LOF I do agree with you that the boys are not evil as much as I think they are savage. Like you said they have characteristics of being evil, but I think savage is a better word to describe the boys in LOF. I looked up savage and here are some of the results...
1. fierce, ferocious, or cruel; untamed: savage beasts.
2. uncivilized; barbarous: savage tribes.
I think the idea of becoming savage really pertains to the beast in LOF and the boys on the island really do become savage.
Alexf I like the discussion you brought up about the word "evil" I was thinking about this is class today when people used the word “evil” I was not sure myself if it really fit in but when I looked it up it gave me a better understanding!!
laurenc- Yeah, I agree with you and mattw on how there relly isn't a person or a group of people that really decide hat is right and wrong, and when I had a similar conversation with my dad and brother,we have heard of some people that feel that they are doing a good and "holy" thing by strapping bombs to themselves and killing themselves but also innocent people. We may think that it is wrong and wonder how anyone could do something lke that, but they think that they ar being honorable. So really, there are total opposites thoughts of good and evil. But I do think that all humans have some sort of good, right and wrong, written on their hearts to some extent. So I guess you say that there is no right or wrong, who are we to say?
alexf- I agree with the fact that people are not completely evil. And you may say that this contidicts what I said in class, but people are born, I think with evil, and like I said, that's why in the chatholic religion, we get baptized as a baby to clear ourselves from the sin we were born with, and that's why we have to teach the kids to do good things because their nature is to do the selfish and bad things. But I also don't think that anyone is totally evil, but the devil like you said.
I think it is really interesting listening/reading about everyone’s view on fate. I watched part of the movie “The Secret” and it was an interesting point Ms. Smith brought up. In the movie there was this one part where this boy wanted a bike and if he I guess thought about it hard and really believed he would get a bike, then sooner or later he would get a bike. Personally I don’t think that you can just really believe in something and it will happen. Fate to me is an outcome, or a result of actions. I think that you have to see what your fate could be and then take action on, not necessarily challenge it, like Macbeth did but look at opportunities you are given and decide if that’s what you want or not.
Whitney and Lauren - I agree with both of you too. I think that people do wear masks because people have strict standards in society. Its like Challenging the system-you can act different and be yourself, but "yourself" might completely offend somebody elses "yourself"; so that brings up the question:
If everyone just acted like themselves instead of living up to societies standards, would the world be a better place?
Melissaz - I'm not religious at all, but I really understand what you mant by the whole baptizing thing. People are born with evil, and being baptized (in Catholicism) redeems them from that evil influence. But I actually don't think that people are born into evil. I dont think its fair to say that because if a child was born and had absolutely nothing influence him all his life until he was old enough for "rational" thought, would his actions be good or evil? Altough it is human nature to preserve our own well-being over all, that doesn't mean a person will never help another. Hasn't there ever been a case where one person puts another in front of themselves?????
Good job you guys!!! We accomplished our goal!
Kristinah- That is a very interesting take on humans and animals. I have never really thought about it that way. You are right in saying that we all have an instinct to survive just like animals. Now, I'm not saying that humans are animal like...but you know what I mean.
Hey Mattw, this is mattW! I totally agree with everything you said!!! Your first question poses a difficult queary... I believe that people should act like themselves despite peer pressure. I think the world would be better because thwere would be no standards, and pople would be so open to everyone elses ideas. Just because youre being yourself doesn't mean you have to be cruel to others.
Ya, of course there has been a non-selfish act in history, but wouldn't it take a special person to do that? Society's standards aren't actually so bad once you think about it. They may expect you to act a certain way, but it also implies that if a person is in trouble, or hurt, you would be looked down upon for passing them by. It is totally human nature to help other people. So because of that I think that manking i basically good.
maddisonm - I've heard of that movie but never seen it. The idea of believing something will happen seems really cool. I can connect this to Pirates of the Carribean 2, because Jack has a compass that points to what he most wants in the world. But the problem is that he doesn't know what he wants more than anything else. So the kid knew that he wanted the bike more than all else, so much so that he "knew" he'd get one. So he did.
Post a Comment