One vital characteristic of a leader, according to Shakespeare, is a sense of duty to others. Despite the fact that Shakespeare employs tactics which are “truly Machiavellian” (Roe 2), the events of Shakespeare’s plays are evidence of his belief that caring for others is a requisite of a prosperous ruler. This philosophy is almost a complete antithesis of Machiavelli’s observation that, “it is much safer to be feared than loved, if one of the two has to be wanting.” (Machiavelli 81). Nevertheless, it is clear that self-centered leaders in Shakespearean plays typically do not last long. Obviously, such a sense of duty is not common among leaders in Shakespeare’s plays, which is why the vast majority of them fare so poorly. For example, Iago, …show more content…
The reason Shakespeare often conveys this belief in his plays is likely due to his relationship with Queen Elizabeth I. Shakespeare is known as a major supporter of the queen, so it is likely that he used this recurring theme to deter people from attempting to rise up and take Queen Elizabeth’s throne because “in England, as elsewhere in Europe, there remained a widespread conviction that women were unsuited to wield power over men” (Greenblatt & Logan 359). Whatever the reason, no character who attempts to seize power despite being unworthy of it prospers. For instance, Edmund, Gloucester’s bastard son from King Lear, is not the rightful heir to Gloucester’s fortune and name. However, he claims that he is just as deserving as Edgar because “my dimensions are as well compact/My mind as generous, my shape as true/As honest madam’s issue” (1.2.7-9). Therefore, he concocts a plan to take everything from his father and half-brother. Despite Edmund’s arguments against his unfair treatment, he is not the true heir, so from Shakespeare’s standpoint, he is doomed to fail from the beginning. From a modern perspective, it may be easy to sympathize with Edmund and perceive his treatment as unjust. However, it is necessary to look at Edmund from the perspective of Shakespeare’s goal: to discourage people from rebelling against the queen. The conflict between a rightful heir and a rebel can also …show more content…
Each play presents the audience with a unique story, but throughout every play, Shakespeare appears to maintain the belief that a successful leader must have ambition, the ability to see beyond emotions, an awareness of limitations upon their power, a sense of duty to others, loyal friends, and a right to power. Lacking any of these things, a leader may fail; but lacking more than one, failure is nearly certain. Shakespeare seemed to have extremely high standards for leaders, and rightfully so. He recognized that, despite the fact that many aspire to be leaders, very few actually have what it takes. It is likely that he used his plays to communicate this point with the political figures who came to watch them. After all, Shakespeare’s works can be interpreted as cautionary tales, not only for those who wish to gain power, but for those who already possess
Shakespeare's plays beginning with Richard II and concluding with Henry V presents an interesting look at the role of a king. England's search for "the mirror of all Christian kings" provided the opportunity to explore the many facets of kingship showing the strengths and weaknesses of both the position and the men who filled that position. Through careful examination, Shakespeare develops the "king" as a physical, emotional, and psychological being. By presenting the strengths and weaknesses of these characteristics, Shakespeare presents a unified look at the concept of "kingship" and demonstrates that failure to achieve proper balance in "the king versus the man" struggle, leads to the ongoing bloodshed examined in this tetralogy and the next.
This is Shakespeare's point. Society has created a hierarchy for a reason, and it is within no person's rights to try to break out of his mold, except for the King, who is the figurehead of England. Shakespeare doesn't let Macbeth or Malvolio off the hook as Malvolio is completely humiliated and overwhelmed with and humorously vows to revenge and Macbeth is ultimately killed, defamed, and stripped of his crown after death. Breaking the social hierarchy is placed in a bad light and discouraged for anyone as unpleasant things may happen in consequence.
Shakespeare writes with purpose in this play, he is showing that our ideals are not always what they seem. That in the end the truth wins. As in the case of his main characters in the play they needed to think about their ideals and see what the truth would be before they moved forward with their plans. These characters needed guidance and should have allowed life to happen instead of forcing situations; maybe then they would have survived.
There are various displays of leadership and role modeling in the Shakespearean play 'Romeo and Juliet'. When one hears the term leader, there may be some confusion around what qualities a leader may or may not possess. One should also avoid confusing a good leader with a good role model, because although a good role model may possess similar qualities, there are a few qualities that are required in order to be a strong leader. Two very good examples of the contrasts between a good leader and a good role model are the characters Friar Lawrence and the Prince of Verona, in Romeo and Juliet. The Friar may very well be a good role model, however many would likely hesitate to classify him as a good leader. Just the same, the Prince of Verona would be classified by many as a strong leader.
“A leader or a man of action in a crisis almost always acts subconsciously and then thinks of the reasons for his action.” (Jawaharlal Nehru) Leaders throughout history have been idolized as the magnificent humans with the ability to sway the heart of man with both silent and thunderous footsteps. One such man being Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Shakespeare dictates that a leader is cunning, sharp minded, and a caring person who is prepared to dedicate their life to a goal and to the people they care for; the reason be “right” or “wrong”.
When discussing any of Shakespeare’s pivotal works, it is nearly impossible to somehow relate them to Hamlet. Whether it is stark differences in character, plot similarities, or simply through literary devices, Shakespeare created a masterpiece through Hamlet. Nicolo Machiavelli also coined a treasure with The Prince. Through the lens of Hamlet and The Prince, one is able to dissect Shakespeare’s Macbeth with a greater understanding of Machiavellian beliefs. By placing Macbeth against Hamlet’s incredibly high standards, it becomes clear that the character of Macbeth is not a Machiavellian prince for one simple reason: he is not smart enough and lacks the foresight that Machiavelli preached.
Much of the conflict within Hamlet is the interaction between Hamlet and his uncle and king, Claudius. Throughout the play, much of the insight into their relationship is given through Hamlet’s soliloquies which reveal Hamlet’s distaste for Claudius. Because of the nature of these two characters, Claudius reveals very little about his personal opinion on Hamlet which leads the audience to generally side with Hamlet. Hamlet’s long speeches about the infidelity of his mother and the conniving nature of his uncle lead the audience to develop sympathy for Hamlet’s position and portray Claudius in an unfavourable manner. This bias may also cause readers to criticize Claudius and his leadership, but in order to evaluate Claudius fairly he should be viewed from a completely pragmatic perspective. The value of his leadership must be evaluated based on effectiveness, from a relatively objective perspective. In this context, effectiveness should be defined as a result which benefits the most people and, as a result, promotes peace and prosperity within the domain of the leader’s jurisdiction. In order for a leader to be effective, he must deal with national matters with sagacity and promptness and not involve personal matters where they would impede his judgement. A leader must also discern the best course of action for the whole population which he is leading and not favour certain people over others. Based on these guidelines, an effective leader should generally have the following attributes. A leader should have refined political skills and be able to have the population’s approval while maintaining the skill to negotiate with enemies to avert conflict. A leader should also be persuasive in his speech and actions. This not only fortifi...
Identifying the particular view that Shakespeare held when he wrote his plays requires delving into the plays themselves and understanding both the characters and challenges that surround the concept of kingship. Furthermore, we may examine two of his plays that are fundamentally different in nature, but are yet inex...
William Shakespeare, poet and playwright, utilized humor and irony as he developed specific language for his plays, thereby influencing literature forever. “Shakespeare became popular in the eighteenth century” (Epstein 8). He was the best all around. “Shakespeare was a classic” (8). William Shakespeare is a very known and popular man that has many works, techniques and ways. Shakespeare is the writer of many famous works of literature. His comedies include humor while his plays and poems include irony. Shakespeare sets himself apart by using his own language and word choice. Shakespeare uses certain types of allusions that people always remember, as in the phrase from Romeo and Juliet, “star-crossed lovers”.
Two powerful leaders, one power hungry whose ambitious ideas lead to his downfall, the other mindful of people who deserve their higher positions. A true leader is someone who has a vision, a drive and commitment to achieve what's best. In the play written by William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Brutus and Caesar are one of the main characters. They demonstrate leadership qualities that are still relevant to today. They are both very ambitious characters; however, they do so for different reasons and differ in their openness to others. There are many similarities and differences that lie between them. Both are noble and great men with loyal followers and neither man questions the rightness of his own path. Both made crucial mistakes that resulted in their death. However, Caesar acts out of love for for himself, his country, and to retain his power as ruler of Rome. Brutus on the other hand acts out of love for freedom of Rome. This essay will discuss and compare their qualities as leaders as well as their styles and how they are effective/ineffective in the play.
We live in a world where money, expensive clothes, nice cars and a big house, defines happiness and wealth which is all appearance vs reality. People do not understand that luxury is not everything, we have to make sacrifices to get to where we want in life and it is harder to get to the luxury life than what people think, people usually do not face the reality of how to get to the top or even look at the work it takes to get there, they all just expect to be rich and wealthy when they are older. Throughout history, love has been human nature. We all have our different views regarding what love truly is but we have all experienced love and it blinds people and creates a bond between couples, which can be hard to break but when it does, it leads to a broken heart which makes them suffer. Suffering can be caused by losing someone
William Shakespeare wrote Macbeth with the influence of Machiavellian principles in accordance with his characters. This statement can be supported by the characteristics he carefully coordinated within their actions and decisions. Certain principles from Machiavelli are presented in character descriptions included in criticism novels. The principles that connect with Shakespeare's characters presented by Machiavelli can predict how a prince's reign will be spent.
In writing his history plays, Shakespeare was actually commenting on what he thought about the notion of kingship. Through his plays, he questions the divine right of kings, which the kings and the aristocracy used heavily in their favour to win the people's love. In Macbeth, King Richard II and King Henry IV part 1, Shakespeare shows us his opinion of kingship in general.
Enshrouded by manipulation, filled with deceit, and laced with ominous intentions, William Shakespeare's Hamlet, is a compelling and renowned tragic tale of the competition for control. The main characters, most notably Prince Hamlet and Claudius, King of Denmark, provide quintessential examples of the struggle to attaining and maintaining power, and the disparity between appearances versus reality. Provided within the context of Machiavelli's controversial The Prince, their characteristics make them worthy of comparison to Machiavelli's ideas to the ideal Prince. The mind of Machiavelli's Prince is calculating and cunning, in all actions concerned foremost with the ends rather than means. Therefore, as compared to Machiavelli's ideas for successful ruling, it is Claudius who meets these standards to the fullest.
the law he brought back for the sake of lust. Angelo is an immoral and