The Structure of Macbeth "William Shakespeare"


Before studying the structure of the play, we should mention one important point about the play. The Equivocation (theme of appearance and reality) which is central to Macbeth. Macbeth is a play about illusions where its situations are ambiguous. The murder of Duncan is the main theme of the play. Murdering Duncan is the right thing for Macbeth; however, this is the worst thing he did for himself and for his people. 

The WitchesThey appear to be predicting success, yet the prophecies appear to be disastrous for Macbeth. Their prophecies are interpreted in someway, but in fact they mean something different.

Macbeth: He seems to be a loyal hero, yet he reveals to be a traitor.

Lady Macbeth: she is not at all what she seems. Even though she appears very strong and confident at the beginning of the play, she declines (after the banquet scene) and becomes a pathetic character. At the end, she is nothing more than a mortal woman. She becomes a weak person who is suffering, feeling guilty about the pains of her conscience. 

Malcolm: he seems to be a villain, but in fact he is a hero, and he was thinking in order to rebuild his country. He is ready to give himself to Scotland and to Macduff. Although he seems to be innocent and inexperienced man, he is the one who recognizes the equivocation of the witches prophecy. 

     "Everything the witches said was only an illusion." 

Therefore, we could say that the language, the verse, and the structure of the whole play is built on this equivocation. 

Language: (images)
Macbeth is the play that has a distinguished quality because the images evoke more action than any other play. In this play, thought and consequent movement become nearly one.

Soliloquy: every soliloquy that Macbeth speaks is active, but it implies evil. There are images that are very evocative (Macduff's family). 

Supernatural elements: in Hamlet and Julius Caesar, these elements seem to add in the action of the play, for we could easily dismiss the ghost in Hamlet because the appearance of the ghost added to Hamlet's melancholy, but it was not the cause. By nature, Hamlet is melancholic. The ghost just added his melancholy (his character didn't really change with the appearance of the ghost). We could dismiss the ghost from our experience of the play. The ghost of Hamlet's father can't escape our tendency to be skeptical, irritated, and amused (it doesn't have an effect). 

The witches: they are the "weird sisters". They are not described as ghosts, and the fact that they are "weird sisters" gives them a status that is more real (natural). Their appearance makes everything weird to be more natural (domestic). The power of the witches is expressed in different ways. We can't look at the witches in the same way as we look at the ghost because the ghost is a supernatural power. 

Verse/Prose: 
Verse:
In all shakespeare's plays, the most part is written in blank verse-iambic pentameter. Occasionally, Shakespeare uses in this play rhyming couplets (the witches speech). Macbeth uses rhyming couplets more often than any other character in the play.

Prose: 
We have 4 situations: 
1) Macbeth's letter to his wife - Act 1 scene 5 
2) The porter scene - Act 2 scene 3        
3) The dialogue between Macduff's lady and her son - Act 4 scene 2 
4) The sleep walking scene - Act 5 scene 1 

Prose denotes the low social position or situation that is abnormal (sleep walking scene). 
The play is full of tumult (no calm), wherever, the witches appear, we can hear a thunderstorm. When they are absent, we can hear shipwreck, blowing down churches, trees and castles. We have profusion of storms, sounds, and tumult.

The Structure: (How the play is built)
It is the shortest play among the shakespearean tragedies, for it consists of five acts. One of the most striking aspects is the rapidity at which the action happens. It is a play that is full of events and actions. Our attention is focused on Macbeth. It is his letter that Lady Macbeth speaks. He doesn't appear in the act, but it is his letter and his character (even if he is not present).

Act 4 scene 3: It is in the English court and we have a long discussion between Malcolm and Macduff about loyalty. In addition, throughout the conversation, we can't prevent ourselves from remembering Macbeth. We know that Macbeth doesn't have any of the qualities of the king. Anyway, Macbeth is referred to throughout the play. Although Lady Macbeth is important, she disappears and never been mentioned. 

Irony:
Unlike many of Shakespeare's plays, in this play we don't have any sub plots or secondary actions. The concentration is on Macbeth and his action. In this play, Shakespeare uses fewer characters especially to comment on the central action. We have a series of contrasts (parallels) through the 'we' of the dramatic ironies. 

Act 1 scene 4: We know from the previous scene that Macbeth has intentions (because of what we know, we can't prevent ourselves from applying this talk to Macbeth).

Act 5 scene 1: Irony lies in the contrast between what is obvious and the hidden meaning of the apparition of the bloody child, yet the most striking irony in the play is the answer which Banquo gives to Macbeth.

At any of Shakespeare's plays, we have a comic relief and it is used in order to relief the atmosphere (the porter's scene in act 5). The first act of the play is speedy and very intense. At the end of act 1, we have a new Macbeth. He is confident that he can kill the king. He becomes different (change). He is confident that he can pretend to be the host. In this play, we have two parts: the first half is greater than the second one. Lady Macbeth appears more in the first half than in the second one. It is a one man play. Acts 1and 5 are speedy, for the end comes very quickly. 

It is here that all of Macbeth's hopes are stripped away: his wife died - Birnamwood seemed to move - his forces desert him - he is cornered in the castle - he is left alone. 
Finally, Macbeth will die just as the beginning (in a courageous way). So, we have the repetition of the same act, but in different purpose. Macbeth is distinguished by its simplicity although it contains a lot of images. Two great figures are Macbeth and Lady Macbeth: they are simple except being compared with Hamlet.

We have three important passages because they distract us from Macbeth:
1) In the first passage, where the porter appears, the tone changes in a way so as to give us relief. 
2) The second passage between Lady Macbeth and her son. 
3) The third passage when Macbeth receives the news of his wife's death. 

Shakespeare constructs the hero in a way that it gives a new dimension in the struggle between good and evil. Macbeth is a noble man and a soldier, but these qualities are a mere surface if we compare them to what he thinks in his mind.

The fact that Macbeth murdered the king is not just a political rebellion, but it is a violation of all the laws of hospitality, kingship and human decency. 

Chaos is defeated, order is reestablished. We find it fair to find Macbeth dead because as long as he lives there will be chaos. 

Tragic flaw:
In Shakespeare's tragedies there is always a tragic flaw of his main character. Macbeth's tragic flaw is his evil ambition. On the other hand, the tragic flaw of Hamlet is hesitation and lack of decision, whereas Othello's tragic flaw is jealousy. 

How Strindberg & Ibsen Tackle “The Rejection of God” Issue Throughout Their Careers

As Ibsen continues to reject God, Strindberg wavers between 'Affirmation and Negation', finally giving way to a 'Melancholy Fatalism' which one never finds in Ibsen.

Ibsen's revolt is total. He is dissatisfied with the 'Whole Creation', and not just certain contemporary aspects of it. His deepest quarrel is probably less with those pillars of church, state, and community who dominate his plays, than with the supreme authority figure, God himself. Behind his demand for a new beginning for 'Mankind', one can glimpse his half-hidden desire to 'fashion a new creation', more in keeping with the logic of his poetic imagination. With this 'New Creation' represented by the body of his art, the basic Ibsenist conflict is frequently messianic-its Hero a Rebel against God, and its issue not superficial changes in the social structure, but a complete alteration in the moral nature of man.

On the other hand, identification with Lucifer and rebelling against a mad, merciless, mechanical will are important aspects of the first phase of Strindberg's career. In his opposition to established authority, Strindberg's also identifies with related figures like Cain, Prometheus, Ishmael--all 'Rebels of God'. Strindberg's  admiration for Religious Rebels pass him well beyond the usual revolutionary postures to an embrace of Satanism, under the spell of which he practices, black arts/magic, worships the occult, and studies the transmigration of souls.

As the Confessor says in The Road to Damascus: "This man is a demon who must be kept confined. He belongs to the dangerous race of rebels; he'd misuse his gifts, if he could, to do evil". Strindberg's flair for self-dramatization leads him to exaggerate his demonic activities, for they were really harmful to nobody but himself. However, there is no doubt that he thought himself pledged Lucifer by way of a Mephistophelian pact. This seems like a much more radical form of rebellion than anything found in Ibsen. But as Strindberg implies in Inferno, "Ever since childhood, I have looked for God and found the Devil". His revolt against authority is reality the reverse of his desire for authority posture, Strindberg's revolt is always a little nervous and uncertain, rather like the act of a man in constant dread of retribution.

And while Ibsen's messianism remains constant, Strindberg is gradually tempered by his fears of divine revenge from an omnipotent power. Even when he considers himself a 'Free-thinking Atheist, these fears are never far from the surface. He became an unbeliever, as he declares in Inferno, when "the unknown powers let slip their hold on the world, and gave no more sign of life. But when these "unknown powers" do begin to appear to him in the "nineties", his messianism becomes less and less defiant, until he finally becomes convinced that the powers are personally guiding his destiny, and revealing themselves to him in every material object.

Strindberg has been suffering from a religious state called "Devestatio". God has been seeking him, and he has been too proud to let himself be found. Freed from his torment after his insight, he determines to live a life of 'Repentance'. He, therefore, gives up his occult and scientific studies, begins to wear a habit of monkish penitential cut, and even contemplates entering a monastery after the publication of 'Inferno'. Theologians might say that he has finally found his way to God after a long period of resisting him. No longer defying the Universe, or trying to become God, Strindberg is now yielding to the unknown and seeking to do its will, looking for correspondences rather than causes. He has replaced his former Naturalism and Atheism with a new concern for the supernal forces behind material things. The frequent subject of his satire now, in fact, is his old impious self, the rationalistic, blasphemous male with aspirations towards the superhuman. For, in this second phase of his career, many of Strindberg's plays are designed as 'Acts of Penance', in which he tries to expiate his sense of guilt, and scourge his desire for worldly vanities.

While the tones of his plays are more saintly and forgiving, Strindberg's thematic concerns have also remained essentially the same. Even his new religious humility is modified by traces of the old skeptical arrogance. If Strindberg is no longer fighting God, he is still questioning him, for he is still a rebel, raging against the lawful limitations of his humanity. He has tried to escape from life into a realm of pure spirit, but he cannot resist the pulls of the body which drags him back into the filth, muck, and flesh of the material world. With his work in our hands, it is perfectly clear that this rebel's eternal struggle with God is the key to his greatness.

Ibsen continues to believe in the importance of the will, and begins to measure his rebellious ideals against the social reality. He seeks a spiritual and moral revolution which will transform the soul of man. Strindberg, on the other hand, comes to believe in a strict determinism (The Higher Power), and loses faith in his rebellious ideals. He seeks deeper spiritual insights in order to resolve his own painful dilemmas.

Macbeth: The Development of Shakespeare's Characters

Shakespearean Tragedy:
Macbeth is the most dramatic and tremendous play among the Shakespearean tragedies. A Shakespearean tragedy, as a rule, has a special tone or atmosphere of its own. The effect of this atmosphere is marked with unusual strength in Macbeth. The main theme of the play is ambition; however, there are other themes which are equivocation, appearance, reality and the murder of Duncan. 

Macbeth is a play about illusions where all the situations are ambiguous. In the play we have two main characters Macbeth and Lady Macbeth. Macbeth is represented by the critics as "a coward who is cold-blooded, calculating, and pitiless who shrinks from crime because it is dangerous." However, Shakespeare presented him as ambitious man who was corrupted by his ambition to become king of Scotland. This ambition lead him to murder Duncan and order the slaying of anyone who threatens his kingship. On the other hand, Shakespeare presented Lady Macbeth as ambitious as her husband, she taunts Macbeth's courage to insure that he will murder Duncan and become king. Fear and remorse eventually cause her to go mad. Therefore, before we approach the consideration of the characters and the action we should distinguish some of the ingredients of this general effect: 

Images of darkness or blackness, broads over this tragedy. It is remarkable that almost all the scenes take place either at night or in some dark spot: The vision of the dagger - the murder of Duncan - the murder of Banquo - the sleep walking of Lady Macbeth. The blackness of night is to the hero a thing of fear, even of horror; and what he feels becomes the spirit of the play. In the whole drama the sun seems to shine only twice (where Duncan sees the swallows flitting round the castle of death, and when at the close avenging army gathers to rid the earth of its shame). 

Atmosphere it is not that of unknown relieved blackness. Macbeth leaves a decided impression of color;  it is the impression of a black night broken by flashes of light and color (the lights and colors of the thunderstorm-the dagger hanging before Macbeth's eyes and glittering alone in the midnight air-the flames beneath the boiling caldron from which the apparitions in the cavern rose) and above all the color is the color of blood. The most horrible lines in the whole tragedy are those of her shuddering cry:
"Yet who would have thought the old man to have had 
so much blood in him?"

Vividness, magnitude, violence of the imagery and their influence contributes to form its atmosphere (of pouring the sweet milk of concord into hell-of the mind full of scorpions).

Irony there is an ironical juxtaposition of persons and events:
The very first words uttered by Macbeth: "so foul and fair a day I have not seen"
The words of the witches in first scene: "fair is foul, and foul is fair."
When Macbeth emerging from his murderous reverie, turns to the nobles saying: "Let us toward the king" his words are innocent but to the reader have double meaning. So does the contrast between the obvious and the hidden meanings of the apparitions.

Now let us start with the a brief comparison of both characters. Macbeth and Lady Macbeth are sublime, and both inspire the feeling of awe. They are never detached in imagination from the atmosphere which surrounds them and adds to their grandeur and terror. For, within them is all that we felt without-the darkness of night, lit with the flame of tempest and the hues of blood, spirits of remorse, and maddening visions of peace lost and judgement to come. These two characters are fired by one and the same passion of ambition. They are born to rule, if not to reign. They are contemptuous to their inferiors, so we observe in them no love of country, and no interest in the welfare of anyone outside their family. They have no separate ambitions, they support and love one another, they suffer together. On the other hand, they are also contrasted, and the action is built upon this contrast. Their attitude towards the projected murder of Duncan are quiet different, and it produces in them equally different effects.

On one hand, Macbeth was thought honest, or honorable; he was trusted, apparently, by everyone; Macduff loved him well. He was exceedingly ambitious, it has been so by temper and must have been strengthened by marriage. It becomes a passion. Therefore, his passion for power and his instinct of self-assertion are so vehement that no inward misery could persuade him to relinquish the fruits of crime, or to advance from remorse to repentance. What appalls him is always the image of his own guilty heart or bloody deed. His imagination bears witness against him, and shows us that what really holds him back is the hideous vileness of the deed. When the murder is done, his wife heard the owl scream and the crickets cry; however, what he heard was the voice that first cried

"Macbeth doth murder sleep"; 
"Glamis hath murdered sleep, and therefore Cawdor"; 
"Shall sleep no more, Macbeth shall sleep no more." 

Therefore, whenever his imagination stirs, he acts badly, it possesses him, and is so much stronger than his reason, but when it is asleep he is firm, self-controlled and practical.


The development of Macbeth's character after the murder:
That heart-sickness which comes from Macbeth's perception of the futility of his crime, and which never leaves him for long, is not, his habitual state. It could not be so, for two reasons. The first reason, the consciousness of guilt is stronger in him than the consciousness of failure; and it keeps him in a perpetual agony of restlessness. His mind is "full of scorpions"- He cannot sleep- He "keeps alone", moody and savage. The second reason is ambition, the love of power, the instinct of self-assertion, are much too potent in Macbeth to permit him to resign, the "will to live" is mighty in him. He faces the world, and his own conscience, desperate, but never dreaming of acknowledging defeat. He challenges fate into the lists.

The result is frightful:
He speaks no more, as before Duncan's murder, of honor or pity. That sleepless torture, he tells himself, is nothing but the sense of insecurity and the fear of retaliation. The cause of his fear is Banquo. He has become his chief counsellor because the kingdom was promised to Banquo's children. Banquo, then, is waiting to attack him, to make a way for them. This is the fear that will not let him sleep, and it will die with Banquo. There is no hesitation now, and no remorse. So, some strange idea is in his mind that the thought of the dead man will not haunt him, like the memory of Duncan, if the deed is done by other hands. The deed is done, but instead of peace descending on him, his deed confronts him in the apparition of Banquo's Ghost. However, it has less power, and he has more will. Now, Macduff is the one who spoils his sleep. He shall perish. He goes to seek the witches; he has no longer any awe of them. They till him he is right to fear Macduff; they tell him to fear nothing, for none of woman born can harm him. So, he determines not to spare Macduff. The witches have done their work, and after this purposeless butchery his own imagination will trouble him no more. The whole flood of evil in his nature is now let loose. He becomes an open tyrant, dreaded by everyone about him, and a terror to his county.

A.C. Bradley does not agree with those who find in his reception of the news of his wife's death proof of alienation or utter carelessness. "She should have died hereafter; there would have been a time for such a word," he thinks that Macbeth has no time now to feel. Only, as he thinks of the morrow when time to feel will come. In the very depths, a gleam of his native love of goodness, and with it a touch of tragic grandeur, rests upon him. The evil he has desperately embraced continues to madden or to wither his inmost heart.

On the other hand, Lady Macbeth in the first half of the play not only appears more than in the second half but also exerts the ultimate deciding influence on the action. She is distinguished from her husband by her inflexibility of will. She knows her husband's weakness, and how he scruples "to catch the nearest way" to the object he desires, and she sets herself without a trace of doubt or conflict to counteract this weakness. To her there is no separation between will and deed, and as the deed falls in part to her, she is sure it will be done. She takes the superior position and assumes the direction of affairs, appears to assume it even more than she really can. She animates him by picturing the deed as heroic, 'this night', great business, while she ignores its cruelty and faithlessness. She bears down his faint resistance by presenting him with a prepare scheme which may remove from him the terror and danger of deliberation. She rouses him with a taunt no man can bear, and least of all a soldier, - the word "coward". Through the admiration she extorts from him, and through sheer force of will, that she impels him to the deed. Her eyes are fixed upon the crown and the means to it; she does not attend to the consequences. Her plan of laying the guilt upon the chamberlains is invented on the spur of the moment, and simply to satisfy her husband. Her passionate courage sweeps him off his feet. His decision is taken in a moment of enthusiasm. In presence of overwhelming horror and danger, in the murder scene and the banquet scene, her self-control is perfect. She helps him, but never asks his help. She leans on nothing but herself. And from the beginning to the end her will never fails her. We are sure that she never betrayed her husband or herself by a word or even a look, save in sleep. However appalling she may be, she is sublime.

In the earlier scenes of the play she seems inhuman:
- We find no trace of pity for the kind old king.
- No consciousness of the treachery and baseness of the murder.
- No sense of the value of the lives of the wretched men on whom the guilt is to be laid.
- No shrinking even from the condemnation or hatred of the world.

If Lady Macbeth of these scenes were really utterly inhuman, or a "fiend-like queen", as Malcolm calls her, the Lady Macbeth of the sleep-walking scene would be an impossibility. The one woman could never become the other. When she tries to help him by representing their enterprise as heroic, she is deceiving herself as much as him. Also, in these earlier scenes the traces of feminine weakness and human feeling, which account for her later failure, are not absent. Her will was exerted to overpower not only her husband's resistance but some resistance in herself. The greatness of Lady Macbeth lies almost wholly in courage and force of will. It is an error to regard her as remarkable on the intellectual side. To her the blood upon her husband's hands suggests only the taunt.

"My hands are of your color, but I shame to wear a heart so white";
 and the blood to her is merely "this filthy witness".

The literalism of her mind appears fully in two contemptuous speeches where she dismisses his imaginings in the murder scene and in the banquet scene. Even in the awful scene where her imagination breaks loose in sleep, she uses no such images as Macbeth’s. It is the direct appeal of the facts to sense that has fastened on her memory. The ghostly realism:

 "Yet who would have thought the old man to have so much blood in him? or
 "Here's the smell of the blood still" wholly unlike her husband."

Her most poetical words "All the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten these little hands" are unlike his words about great Neptune's ocean.

The development of Lady Macbeth's character after the murder:
The change in her state of mind is both inevitable, and the opposite of the development we traced in Macbeth. When the murder has been done, the discovery of its hideousness, first reflected in the faces of her guests, comes to Lady Macbeth with the shock of a sudden disclosure, and at once her nature begins to sink. The first intimation of the change is given when in the scene of the discovery she faints, and when we see her, Queen of Scotland, the glory of her dream has faded. She enters, disillusioned, and weary with want of sleep. She has thrown away everything and gained nothing. She has no initiative, the stem of her being seems to be cut through. Her husband, physically the stronger, maddened by pangs he had foreseen, but still flaming with life, comes into the foreground, and she retires. Her will remains, and she does her best to help him, but he rarely needs her help. Her chief anxiety appears to be that he should not betray his misery. He plans the murder of Banquo without her knowledge (not to spare her, but because he does not need her now), and even when she is told vaguely of his intention she appears but little interested. In the sudden emergency of the banquet scene, she makes a prodigious and magnificent effort; her strength, and with it her ascendency returns, and she saves her husband at least from an open disclosure. But after this, she takes no part whatever in the action. We only know from her shuddering words in the sleep-walking scene

"The Thane of Fife had a wife: where is she now?" 

that she has even learned of her husband's worst crime, and in all the horrors of his tyranny over Scotland, she has, no part.

Disillusionment and despair prey upon her more and more. That she should seek any relief in speech, or should ask for sympathy, would seem to her mere weakness, and would be to Macbeth's defiant fury an irritation. Thinking of the change in Macbeth, we imagine the bond between them slackened, and Lady Macbeth left much alone. She sinks slowly downward. She cannot bear darkness and has light by her continually: 'tis her command. At last her nature, not her will gives way. The secrets of the past find vent in a disorder of sleep, the beginning perhaps of madness. What the doctor fears is clear. He reports to her husband no great physical mischief, but bids her attendant to remove from her all means by which she could harm herself, and to keep eyes on her constantly. Her death is announced by a cry from her women so sudden and direful that it would thrill her husband with honor if he were any longer capable of fear. Malcolm, in the last words of the play, tells us that it is believed in the hostile army that she died by her own hand. It is in accordance with her character that even in her weakest hour she should cut short by one determined stroke the agony of her life. The sinking of Lady Macbeth's nature, and the marked change in her demeanor to her husband, are most strikingly shown in the conclusion of the banquet scene; and from this point pathos is mingled with awe.

In conclusion, she despises what she thinks the weakness which stands in the way of her husband's ambition, but she does not despise him. Her ambition for her husband and herself proved fatal to him, far more so than the prophecies of the witches; yet even when she pushed him into murder, she believed she was helping him to do what he merely lacked the nerve to attempt. The sleep-walking scene, again, inspires pity, but its main effect is one of awe. Regarding her from the tragic point of view, we may truly say she was too great to repent.

The Theater of Revolt in Modern Drama

The theater of Revolt is not a popular theater, nor are its dramatists much concerned with instructing the middle classes. Quite the contrary, they have apparently determined to be "the terror of the sleek, bald headed bourgeois"-their common enemy becomes middle-class man himself. Many of the rebel dramatists share in the contempt for the soft virtues at christianity and the reasonable, humanitarian values of liberal democracy. Detesting middle ways, scorning middle emotions, defying the middle class, the rebel dramatist begins to celebrate the values at the extreme-excess, instinct, emancipation, ecstasy, revolt, and the spectator himself comes under attack, either assailed from the stage directly, or represented on the stage as a satirical figure.

The theater of Revolt is a cosmopolitan movement nourished by international sources. While the dramatist continues to write of his country, even in exile, he no longer exalts it or advances its cause. Even when the rebel dramatist is not in geographical exile, he feels like an outlander, since he has lost his sense of belonging. A stranger to his family, a leper to society, a heretic to the church, he is also a metaphysical outcast, for he is spiritually destitute as soon as he ceases to believe in God.

When the dramatist declares the death of God, he declares the death of all traditional values as well. Man can create new values only by becoming God: the only alternative to nihilism lay in revolt. Rejecting God, church, community and family-vindicating the rights of the individual against the claims of government, morality, conventions and rules- he adopts the posture of the rebel, chatting against restraints, determined to make all barriers crack.

In the theater of revolt, a play proceeds by dialogue, and the dialogue implies debate and conflict without debate, the drama is a propaganda; without conflict, mere fantasizing. The rebel who wishes to transform the world is also an artist who must accurately represent it. Unable to master his contradictions, he dramatizes them in his plays, grateful for a form in which tensions do not have to be resolved. Thus, while each of the rebel dramatists takes revolt as his central theme, he also criticizes revolt in the name of reality; at the same time that he identifies with his rebel characters, he repudiates them too. The idea of revolt remains pure and absolute, but the act of revolt is usually a source of tension, suffering and despair.

It is this conflict between idea and action-between conception and execution-which forms the central dialectic of the modern drama. For the rebel dramatist is one who dreams and puts his dreams to the test. This may suggest why the conflict of illusion of reality is such an important theme in the modern drama: illusion and reality are the twin poles of the dramatist's imagination. All true rebels hate reality and labor ceaselessly to change it, but no true artist can withdraw entirely from the world of matter. The more rebellious the artist, the more he takes refuge in a sphere of fancies and illusion.

The rebel dramatist emerges as the spirit of denial, the man who says no, pursuing his eyes down the countless avenues of revolt. We can distinguish three main highways into which the avenues run: messianic, social and existential.

The messianic revolt occurs when the dramatist rebels against God and tries to take this place-the priest examines his image in the mirror. The messianic hero is a superman, combining the qualities of malefactor and benefactor of one who kills God and one who builds a church. The messianic drama is designed as an act of revelation.

The social revolt occurs when the dramatist rebels against the conventions, morals, and values of the social organism - the priest turns the mirror on the audience, the social dramatist concentrates on man in society, in conflict with community, government, academy, church, or family. As for characters, the social drama puts contemporary society or the stage and draws the characters from the middle class. The protagonist is subject to the same laws like us, shares the same ambitions, performs the same domestic duties. Social drama represents modern life for the purpose of whipping  and scourging it.

The existential revolt occurs when the dramatist rebels against the conditions of his existence-the priest turns the mirror on the void. The dramatist examines the metaphysical life of man and protests against it. Existence itself becomes the source of his rebellion. The world becomes a vast concentration camp where social intercourse is forbidden. Alone in a terrifying emptiness, the central figure of existential drama is doomed to a life of solitary confinement. It is a revolt of the fatigued and the hopeless, reflecting exhaustion and disillusionment.

If the existential drama is tragic, it is tragic in its perceptions. It lacks a tragic hero, but it evokes a tragic sense of life.