Comparison Of Macbeth And Irving's Third Murderer

740 Words2 Pages

The writing of Shakespeare is often known for being efficient with characters and objects. Particularly, in Macbeth, Shakespeare uses a great deal of symbolism and imagery, which is a demonstration of this efficiency. However, he does not make the identity of the Third Murderer clear to the audience. Two academic authors, Irving and Saenger, offered varying interpretations. Irving is a proponent of the Third Murderer being the Attendant, which may make sense to a logical audience. On the other hand, Saenger claims the Third Murderer is Seyton, which would yield a more dramatic effect. Irving believes that the Attendant is the Third Murderer because of how Macbeth addresses him, while Saenger suggests Seyton is the Third Murderer due to the …show more content…

The tone Macbeth uses alludes to the idea that Macbeth is confident that the Attendant will do as he commands no matter how demeaning the task. This arrogance demonstrated by Macbeth shows how little he cares about what the Attendant tells others. Irving also believes the Attendant “was ordered to watch [the other two murderers]” (148). Irving’s point is an example of the practical application for the Attendant being the Third Murderer. Since Macbeth has control over the Attendant, Irving’s argument makes sense that Macbeth “secures himself a check upon the two murderers in the person of this attendant who is made as an accomplice, and whose lips are sealed” (148). In addition to Macbeth’s control over the Attendant, Irving also mentions that the Third Murderer is said to have been highly familiar with the palace grounds (149). This description of the Third Murderer makes it even more likely that the Attendant, who is well versed in the palace grounds, is the Third Murderer. Therefore, from a logical standpoint, the Attendant fits the role of the Third …show more content…

This “superstition” comes from Marlow’s Doctor Faustus, from which Saegner believes Shakespeare took inspiration. Saegner also mentions that there were two accounts of a visible apparition of the devil appearing on the stage during a performance of Doctor Faustus (134). Furthermore, Saenger, quoting Nosworthy, writes that the Third Murderer is described as having a “satanic aura” (134). Saegner also believes, “[an audience of Shakespeare’s time] could have recognized in the Third Murderer a suggestion of the popular Faustus story” (134). He continues to say that since the Third Murderer was left up to the audience’s imagination the people of the time would have assumed that the Third Murderer was Seyton because of how neatly the Faustus story fits. Saenger’s perspective coupled with the offbeat name of Seyton may have led audiences of Shakespeare’s plays to believe the Third Murderer was

Open Document