Rizou, 1

Maria-Eleni Rizou

Professor Tina Krontiris

Lit 9-490

1 June 2016

Extreme Behavior in Selected Shakespearean Tragedies: The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of

Denmark (1602), The Tragedy of Macbeth (1606), The Tragedy of Othello, The Moor of Venice

(1603).

Shakespeare is known for his creation of complex characters and his ability to eloquently

portray a wide range of human emotions. His characters, especially those partaking in his tragedies,

are not short of emotional depth, communication skills, while some have elaborate background

stories; These contribute to their forming various interpersonal relationships, with whichever

consequences those may entail. This skill of the playwright, allows for realistic dramatic personae,

who echo strongly the morals, values and traditions of a world contemporary to Shakespeare.

Affected by strong emotions or afflicted by significant events in the course of the play, a number of

those personae tend to experience a change of self and resort to extreme behaviors that defy the

social status quo. The aim of this research paper is to closely examine the key personae of the

three aforementioned plays by William Shakespeare and analyze in depth the reasons behind and

the extent of this deviant behavior.

 Rizou, 2

In order for such an analysis to be achieved, each play was examined separately and at

length, so that the personae’s actions and quotes of significance could be marked and analyzed both

in isolation and as a whole. The examined personae’s references to self as well as other characters’

descriptions or evaluations of those were taken into consideration, alongside stage directions,

individual actions and the course of the personae’s interpersonal relationships throughout the play.

The tragedies will be analyzed in alphabetical order, namely the tragedy of Hamlet, Macbeth and

then Othello, and each tragedy will constitute a separate section. A fourth section, which will

include an overview of this paper and my final remarks, will conclude this paper. However, before

the examination of the three tragedies can begin, a very brief historical context in which they were

written ought to be provided.

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

Shakespeare produced all three of the aforementioned tragedies between the years 1602 and 1606,

yet in those he depicted as little as possible the British Elizabethan society in which he lead his life.

With Hamlet set exclusively in Denmark, Macbeth mainly in Scotland, and Othello in Venice and

Cyprus, William Shakespeare avoided both to be restricted by the exact commands of his

contemporary society and to create a habitat for his dramatic personae that could be comparable to

his own. Of his three plays, only Macbeth is relatively close, in terms of history and geography, to

the England he knew. After the death of Queen Elizabeth in 1603, James VI, King of Scotland,

ascended to the English throne, effectively uniting the realms of England and Scotland and

becoming James I, of England. The Chamberlain’s Men, William Shakespeare’s theatrical

company, were taken under the wing of James I and became the King’s Men. King James was far

more interesting in drama than Queen Elizabeth had been and Shakespeare’s company appeared
 Rizou, 3

before him quite frequently. It is no accident that, shortly after the coronation of a Scottish king, a

play about Scottish history appeared. The fact that the King favored short plays and that Macbeth is

one of Shakespeare’s shortest, is no coincidence either. The supernatural element in Macbeth is

also aided by Shakespeare’s contemporary occurrences, as James I was claimed to have descended

from the legendary Banquo, the King was greeted at his visit in Oxford at 1605 by three “fatal

Sisters” who referred to him as such, and he was also supposed to have inherited the “healing

benediction”, the power of the monarch to heal ailments with the help of God.

In the remaining two tragedies the playwright has based his work loosely on historical

facts, legend, and pre-existent literary work, alike. The component that remains the same in all

three tragedies is the chivalric code and the rules of conduct that prominent men and women, to

which most of the examined personae belong, abided by. When breaking those rules and

transgressing the social boundaries with their behavior and words, these personae are presumably

also transgressing certain psychological or mental boundaries, a fact that Shakespeare describes

well.

The playwright, according to Freud (1915), Bloom (1998) and more recently Matthews

M.D. (2003), had a very good understanding of the workings of the human psyche and the motives

that set certain human responses into motion. Indeed, abundant research has been carried out on the

topic of Shakespeare as a psychologist of sorts, in an era when psychology as a discipline was in an

infantile state. Psychology was, in fact a very popular topic in Enlightenment Europe, yet the term

was only coined in 1590 by Goclenius. Hence, very little formal research had been done on the

issue of the workings of the human mind under the term “psychology”, when Shakespeare wrote

his plays. Nevertheless, Shakespeare’s talent in understanding and describing people and their

fancies has seeped through his writing and immortalized absolute love, absolute hatred, and

extreme behavior bordering absolute madness.

 Rizou, 4

The term absolute is, indeed, debatable and not to be taken lightly as, no matter how well

the bard has depicted those emotions and behaviors in his various tragedies, it is noteworthy that

even the same emotional state has different manifestations in each person that experiences it. In the

selected tragedies, the examined characters experience very different emotions and exhibit various

behavioral responses to those emotions. The circumstances under which that happens, follow in my

analysis.

HAMLET

Prince Hamlet, of the homonymous tragedy, is the main character of this play and he is the

main character of interest for this research paper. Unlike the couple Macbeth, Hamlet is

driven by duty, honor and it is in the name of those two that he behaves in an extreme way.

“Hamlet’s character is the prevalence of the abstracting and the generalizing habit over the

natural” (Swisher, p. 101). He lacks neither courage or skills, nor the opportunity or the

desire to act, but every single occurrence causes him to deeply think and ponder, forgetting

his objective. As Wilson claims in his book:

In Hamlet Shakespeare set out to create a hero laboring under the mental infirmity, just as,

later in Macbeth he depicted a hero afflicted by moral infirmity, or in Othello a hero

tortured by an excessive and morbid jealousy. (p. 218)

The extreme behavioral traits exhibited by Hamlet will be observed in a threefold: One, in

his interpersonal relationships; two, in his own observations and comments on his

demeanor and mood; and, three, in the comments on and description of his behavior and

countenance made by other characters.

 Rizou, 5

The play opens with the war achievements and valor of the late king of Denmark

and his son, Hamlet, mentioned by the guards, giving the audience the first impression on

Hamlet’s decorum (I, 1, 80-108). There is also a mention being made to ghosts and

apparitions being the harbingers of disaster, which foreshadows the imminent change of

heart that Hamlet suffers upon seeing the ghost of his father (I, 1, 121). This scene is of

general interest and gives us no further insight into Hamlet’s character. In scene two,

Queen Gertrude, his mother, attempts to cheer Hamlet up, and begs him to mourn no more

so heavily over his father’s death (I, 2, 69-74). We gather that he is depressed, due to this

event, and the Queen appears to be doting on her son. Hamlet continues to say that it is not

the black clothes that show his grief, but he feels it in his soul too, and therefore, he cannot

cease to mourn (I, 2, 78-86). King Claudius, (Hamlet’s uncle, recently wedded to his

mother), tells Hamlet that everyone loses their ancestors, but one must not despair, as to

turn oneself over to grief is an indication of “stubbornness, […] unmanly grief, […] a heart

unfortified, [and] a mind impatient” (I, 2, 87-107). It is yet unclear if Hamlet is inspired by

these words, or if his antic disposition comes about naturally. Hamlet speaks a lengthy

monologue on his grief and on his mother’s betrayal when he married his uncle a month

after his father had died (I, 2, 129-161). It is not clear whether Hamlet is more disturbed by

the fact that his mother’s grief only lasted a month, that she continues to be a sexually

active woman, or that she is exercising he sexual activity with Hamlet’s uncle and her

brother-in-law, a fact that Hamlet sees as almost incestuous. What is clear, on the other

hand, is that the thought of this marriage is haunting him already. He already seems ill-

disposed towards his uncle and his mother. Hamlet continues on to say, bitterly, that the
 Rizou, 6

wedding was so soon after the funeral that the meat they offered there was also used at the

wedding table (I, 2, 180-184). At the very end of the scene, Hamlet suspects foul play in

his father’s death, as ghosts do not stem from natural deaths and he has just had reports

that such a specter is about (I, 2, 254-257).

In the following scene, we see Polonius warn his daughter, Ophelia, not to be too

welcoming to Hamlet’s exhibitions of affection, as she may be used and abused; he advises

her to maintain a distance, to which she complies (I, 3). Later, Hamlet is determined to talk

to and question the ghost of, presumably, his father, and Horatio foresees Hamlet’s lapse of

judgement and sanity, saying the ghost may “deprive [him] of sovereignty of reason and

draw [him] into madness” (I, 4, 69-78). In scene five, Hamlet and the ghost have a lengthy

dialogue, and the ghost reveals he has been murdered, asking that Hamlet take revenge on

his uncle, the perpetrator, but to be patient and merciful with his mother (I, 5, 23-90).

Indeed, Horatio was right, as it is upon the ghost’s orders that Hamlet swears vengeance on

his uncle, effectively inaugurating Hamlet’s aloof period; yet Hamlet disobeys the orders

of the ghost right away, immediately turning against his mother (I, 5, 104-108). Hamlet

feels personally betrayed by her and starts developing a mistrust of women. He proceeds to

make his friends vow that even if he “put[s] an antic disposition on” and however “strange

or odd” he acts, they should not reveal that he saw the ghost or spoke to it (I, 5, 169-179).

Hamlet himself seems to believe that he will be depressed and behave in a weird manner

henceforth. It could be that Hamlet purposefully adopts the behavior of a melancholic man,

so as to not be held accountable for his schemes and actions. “What is feigned may become
 Rizou, 7

real through habituation” and Hamlet could have “pretended madness” which “eventually

[became] a habit” (Murray, p.60).

In Act two, Hamlet seems to have been correct in his prediction (II, 1). Ophelia

appears before the King and Queen to report Hamlet’s visit to her and his look and

countenance of madness and Polonius, her father, seems to believe he has gone mad

because of his love for Ophelia not being returned (II, 1, 75-115). Later, Claudius calls

Hamlet’s friends to ask them to approach Hamlet and investigate the cause of his peculiar

behavior (I, 2, 4-18). Gertrude also refers to Hamlet as “[her] much changed son” (II, 2,

36) and she is quite on point when she expresses her belief that Hamlet’s behavior is the

result of “his father’s death, and [their] o’erhasty marriage” (II, 2, 55-56). The latter would

probably be truer than the first, had Claudius not murdered Hamlet’s father.

Further in the scene, Polonius names Hamlet mad (II, 2, 88-90) and Claudius

agrees, and is determined to find a way to remedy this situation (II, 2, 97-103). Polonius

converses with Hamlet, and Hamlet wittingly and brazenly insults Polonius, half-blaming

his words on his alleged madness. Polonius seems to take these words as evidence of

Hamlet’s madness (II, 2, 185-189). For the time being, though Hamlet is called mad, he

appears to be acting the part, and not actually be in a state of mental disarray. As Polonius

states about Hamlet’s thoughts, “though this be madness, yet there is method in it” (II, 2,

203-204). This could be indicative of chronic madness rather than pretense, as “ person

who does not lose his reason under certain conditions can have no reason to lose” (Barker

& Kamps, p. 112). Hamlet shows a note of depression or of suicidal tendency when he

says there’s nothing he would more happily part from than Polonius, except his life (II, 2,
 Rizou, 8

212-214). As this thought comes in complete contrast with his Christian beliefs, “the

thought of suicide seems mostly a gesture of protest” than anything else (Murray, p. 61).

Hamlet thinks of Denmark as a prison because of his thoughts and says he’d be happy to

live in a nutshell if he were rid of his bad dreams (II, 2, 241-248). However much of his

former behavior was an act, his thoughts and duty are starting to weigh heavy on him.

Hamlet suspects his friends of acting as spies on behalf of Claudius and distrusts them.

This is an indication of persecution mania, perhaps. He speaks of his mood and his

emotions, and it seems as if he is overcome with a sense of nihilism and despair, as if he

has lost all desire to do anything and the earth feels like a barren place to him (II, 2, 285-

302). He feels as if “his life has been stripped of value” (Murray, p. 62). Hamlet claims,

however, that his mother and uncle are “deceived” and he’s not really mad, yet as

mentioned before, habit may become reality (II, 2, 354-355, 357-358). Hamlet continues to

toy with Polonius and confuses him as to his actual mental state (II, 2, 381-390). When a

company of actors comes and one of them speaks a monologue about a wife mourning and

going crazy over her husband’s murder, Polonius notices that Hamlet is emotionally

moved and has tears in his eyes (II, 2, 495-496). It is obvious that the pattern is significant

to Hamlet, due to his mother’s actions: not mourning enough for his father, and having too

soon remarried, unknowingly, to the murderer of her husband. By the end of the scene,

Hamlet speaks a long monologue, which shows that he is in awe at the passion that the

play instilled in the actor, and he plans on using a play to induce the same emotional

passion to his uncle, using a play, so that he may admit his crime (II, 2, 520-579).
 Rizou, 9

In Act three, Hamlet’s friends and Claudius discuss his condition and they seem to

believe that, even though not entirely sane, Hamlet is crafty and manages to elude their

inquiries (III, 1, 1-4, 7-9). Hamlets famous monologue on existential issues follows, where

he wonders on what is preferable, life and its difficulties or opposing those difficulties,

effectively ending them by committing suicide (III, 1, 56-89). Ophelia enters the scene and

he mocks and insults her, telling her he loved her once, then taking it back and then telling

her to go to a brothel (nunnery) and concludes that he would have preferred it if his mother

had not given birth to him (III, 1, 11-130). We see yet again, how Hamlet seems to be

dealing with unresolved issues against his mother, or, perhaps, against women in general.

He accuses all women of making men monsters and orders her again to either become a

nun or marry a foolish man (III, 1, 134-140). Hamlet may think and say that “all women

are frail, because it is less painful […] than to think his own mother is an exceptionally

frail woman” (Murray, p. 62). Ophelia is in disbelief and speaks of “a noble mind [being]

[…] overthrown” (III, 1, 150). King Claudius converses with Polonius and he is certain

that Hamlet is not mad, but obsessed with some idea or plan that his heart is set on and is

heavy on his mind, and which will prove dangerous (III, 1, 163-167, 173-175). Claudius is

not far from the truth, as it is his murder that Hamlet ponders so on.

Hamlet asks of Horatio to observe his uncle while the play he has ordered is acted

out, to note any signs of a confession to the murder of the king. He says that, if he does not

react at all, then it what they saw was merely an illusion and his own wild imagination (III,

1, 78-88). In scene two, when meeting with the rest of the court, Hamlet is cheerful,

affectionate and advancing towards Ophelia, he even makes inappropriate jokes with her
 Rizou, 10

(III, 2, 116-119). Then all of a sudden he refers to this father being dead for what seems

like hours to him and he is again bitter and sarcastic towards women, whom he thinks

disloyal and unworthy in general (III, 2, 123-134). His misogynistic tendencies are on the

rise. His mood swings could be the result of actual depression, yet, his behavior towards

Ophelia is, the least, tormenting. He decides to write a play for the company to trap his

uncle and force him to admit to his crime. When his friends are sent by his mother to seek

him out, Hamlet is ironic and again attacks his mother with his words, proving he is most

dissatisfied with her (III, 2, 314-317, 320-322). Before going to meet his mother, he speaks

to himself trying to maintain his courage. He convinces himself to be cold to his mother,

but not too much, to hurt her with his words, but not to physically harm her (III, 2, 379-

390). The mere fact that he has to talk himself into not harming his mother points to some

very extreme emotions that drive him.

In the following scene, Claudius recognizes that his lunatic behavior will make

Hamlet a liability and a threat, and he arranges to send him to England (III, 3, 1-2, 5-7).

When left alone, Claudius is overcome with passion and admits to his crime, and falls on

his knees to pray for absolution (III,3). Hamlet enters, but even though he contemplates

murdering his uncle there and then, he changes his mind. He decides to kill him when his

soul is unprepared and he has not made his peace with Heaven, just like his father was

murdered in his sleep (III, 3, 73-99). As, Swisher finds in the book of essays, Hamlet’s

melancholy accounts for two things which seem to be explained by nothing else.

The first of these is his apathy or ‘lethargy’. […] The second trait […] is his own inability

to understand why he delays. (p. 107)

 Rizou, 11

These thoughts of his, the fact that he pays attention to detail and to analogy, whilst

planning a murder, point to the fact that this is not merely an act of rage and passion, but of

premeditation and of a sane, if immoral, thought process. It is possible that Hamlet’s

perfect belief in ideas and morals is decaying and not his sanity. In scene four, there is a

long dialogue between the queen and Hamlet, during which, Hamlet accuses his mother of

everything he has been keeping to himself and she is distraught. He hears Polonius who,

for the safety of the queen, has hidden behind the curtain, and he kills him, thinking it was

the king. Hamlet does not seem to feel very sorry for the crime he has committed, as he

calls Polonius a fool and continues to reprimand his mother on her actions and choices like

nothing has happened. He is so wrapped up into his own, personal suffering and grievances

that he completely disregards he has just murdered a man; his moral compass has gone

south. This scene is quotable almost to the word, so I will simply quote the Queen’s take

on Hamlet while he sees the ghost of his father in the room. She describes his appearance

and his speaking to the void, as she sees no ghost, and she is convinced he is mad (III, 3,

113-121). She asks him if he is in ecstasy, to which he replies that his heartbeat is as steady

as hers, and that he is not mad (III, 3, 136-140). He claims the same thing later, stating he

is “mad in craft”, meaning “he only pretends to be man, but he lacks control of this claim

itself” even; therefore, how can he not be perceived as mad? (Murray, p. 69).

After this fateful encounter, the Queen describes Hamlet’s condition to Claudius,

calling him “mad as the sea and wind” and Claudius is assured that Hamlet had meant to

harm one of them (IV, 1, 2-16). Claudius says they should not have let their love blind

them to his madness and Gertrude admits that even though he meant to tear apart the body
 Rizou, 12

of Polonius he was crying at the same time for what he did (IV, 1, 18-27). It is possible

that Hamlet has only just suffered a nervous breakdown, due to extreme emotional stress.

He has just committed an act of great violence and, though he aims to continue on the

same course, his conscience forces him to cry for the crime. Claudius says that: “diseases

desperate grown by desperate appliance are relieved, or not at all” (IV, 3, 9-11). Even in

these instances, however, “Hamlet is more Fool than madman” (Murray, p. 69). Hamlet’s

madness or break from reality, if it exists, will only truly be relieved when he sees Ophelia

dead and he suffers a great shock. Another chance is that he comes around when Claudius

sends him to England and orders that he be murdered.

In scene four, Ophelia’s condition is described. As Ophelia does indeed suffer a

permanent break from reality and is driven clinically mad, finally committing suicide, I

will not refer to her case. Her behavior is extreme, but is completely unconscious and due

to mental illness (IV, 4).

In the rest of the scenes, Laertes, Polonius’ son comes home and asks for revenge

for his father’s death and together with Claudius, they plan Hamlet’s murder. Later,

Hamlet is in the cemetery, watching as Ophelia’s grave is being dug (V, 1). He is guessing

what lives the people to whom the undug skulls belong must have lived. He speaks of the

insignificance of life, and how an important person can turn into clay for the wall of a

house once dead and reduced to dust (V, 1, 195-202). He is obviously thinking of his father

and how such great a man was forgotten by his kingdom and, even by the person closest to

him, his wife, in the brief period of two months. This is a recurrent issue, and it makes the

audience believe that, even if Claudius had not murdered the king, Hamlet would still hate
 Rizou, 13

him regardless, for taking his mother as a wife. When Hamlet realizes it is Ophelia’s

funeral they are preparing for he leaps in her grave and mourns. He admits that even

though not violent by nature, he has “in [him] something dangerous” (V, 1, 246-247) and

then admits to having loved Ophelia dearly (V, 1, 255-257). This makes us think that he

had cast her aside to prove a point, to feign madness, or because his distraught mind left no

room for thought of love in him.

In scene two, Hamlet says to Horatio that Claudius has “kill’d [his] king and

whored [his] mother”, showing that to his father, he felt loyal and he was dutiful, to his

mother is where his true affections lay (V, 2, 65). Yet, the queen has now fallen out of

grace. Laertes, in accordance to their plan, challenges Hamlet in a dwell and Claudius bets

on him. Hamlet admits to having been in a state of madness when killing Polonius and asks

for Laertes’ forgiveness (V, 2, 215-217). He speaks as if he had suffered a split of

personality, one part of him was Hamlet and the other was his madness. (V, 2, 221-224). If

his madness is indeed his enemy, then perhaps Hamlet suffers from split personality

disorder or merely suffered a psychotic break due to immense psychological trauma caused

by his father’s death and his mother’s marriage following suit. During the dwell, the queen

drinks from the cup that Claudius has poisoned for Hamlet and dies. Hamlet is wounded by

a poisoned sword, yet before he dies, he kills Claudius with it. He dies with his final

thoughts being of the queen, his mother; though he calls her “wretched” he could also

mean that she was pitiful for her fate and errors (V, 2, 319). It is evident that the main

person in his life was not his father, but his mother and that was perhaps the stem of all

evil, that his beloved mother was taken away from him by a man who did not deserve her.
 Rizou, 14

As a final comment, it is interesting that, we never once see Hamlet in an honest state of

lunacy.

It is Claudius who tells us of his “turbulent and dangerous lunacy”, Ophelia who depicts

his fit of delirium, or Hamlet himself who speaks introspectively of his “bad dreams” or his

“sore distraction”. (Wilson, p.221)

Hence, however detailed the story or the descriptions, an accurate decision as to whether

Hamlet did, at some point, succumb to madness or if he had been feigning it all along,

remains a mystery.

MACBETH

The tragedy of Macbeth is based on significantly different foundations from Othello. The

two characters that will be analyzed as examples of behavioral deviancy are not victims of

love or jealousy, but of the pursuit for power. Lord and Lady Macbeth are two people who

draw each other out and commit crimes only when together and due to each other. “It is a

huddling together of fierce extremes, a war of opposite natures, which of them shall

destroy the other” (Swisher, p. 173). The power-play between the couple and the effect it

has on their surrounding environment takes on great proportions, as follows.

We are first acquainted with Macbeth, the courageous warrior, in act one, scene

three. His valor and his good nature precede him, as there have been mentions of them in

the previous two scenes. In this, the third scene, the supernatural element is already strong,

though whether the fact that the Wayward Sisters foresee the future of Macbeth plays any

important role in his actions is vague. Spencer maintains that “the confusion in the political

world is not merely depicted in the world of Nature and the individual; it is […] identified
 Rizou, 15

with those worlds” (p. 154). The atrocity of those wars for succession and the political

instability are the reason why the image of nature and of man is so warped and the reason

the malignant supernatural makes its appearance. The Wayward Sisters tell Macbeth that

he shall be king and for the rest of the scene, Macbeth is curious about his future.

Especially when the first of their prophecy comes true, and he becomes Thane of Cawdor,

he wonders about the nature of the powers the Sisters possess, whether they are evil or

good. At the beginning of scene four, Macbeth professes his duty and loyalty to the king,

creating a pattern; he seems to do justice to his reputation as devoted and trustworthy (I, 4,

21-27). By the end of the scene, however, Macbeth has started weighing the situation and

decides to take advantage of the King’s visit to his castle and killing him (I, 4, 48-53). The

change is already starting to happen and was set into motion by the prophecy made by the

Sisters.

In scene five, the love that Lord Macbeth has for his wife is obvious through his

words, as he refers to her as his “dearest partner of greatness” (I, 5, 10-11). Lady

Macbeth’s disappointment and dissatisfaction in her husband’s achievements is obvious (I,

5, 14-17) and she believes that he is not courageous enough and she wishes to guide him (I,

5, 26-30). It appears though, as if the “the mutual passion between her and Macbeth” is a

general and shared dream of grandeur and power, “the promise of which seems to have

been an element in Macbeth’s courtship” as she keeps referring to it when his courage

falters (Bloom, p. 530). Her murderous instincts and her lack of moral barriers are obvious

in her following small monologue. She asks of the spirits to rid her of her sexual identity,

and fill her with cruelty and lack of remorse and that she does not dwell on the wound she
 Rizou, 16

will cause and Heaven will not see her crime (I, 5, 37-53). She continues on to tell

Macbeth that he needs a better poker face if he is to commit murder, since he is “a book

where men may read strange matters” (I, 5, 61-65). At that point, she seems to be a very

unemotional woman and a harsh realist, without any moral inhibitions. In scene six, King

Duncan says that sometimes, the love can be a burden, which follows one, but one still

thinks of it as love (I, 6, 11-12). It is a foreshadowing that Macbeth’s love for his wife is

his trouble, as she urges him on and he follows her command.

In the following scene, the dialogue between Lady Macbeth and Macbeth is of vital

importance, as she attacks her husband’s masculinity and dares him to prove he is a man

by committing murder (I, 7, 27-80). It is “almost as if the manliness of Macbeth can be

restored only by his murder of the sleeping Duncan” (Bloom, p. 528). The dynamics of the

couple are revealed for the first time and the codependence is obvious. Macbeth is afraid

that the evil he is to do will be returned to him, by some force of nature (I, 7, 9-12). Lady

Macbeth is the dominant partner and Macbeth is convinced to stop at nothing to please her

and live up to her preposterous expectations. She is cruelty incarnate, as she says that she

has breastfed her own baby and she knows how tender she loved it, and yet she would not

hesitate to kill it, had she sworn to murder it, like Macbeth has sworn to do with Duncan (I,

7, 54-59). Here, it is important to note that no explanation for the couple’s barren marriage

is provided. One may presume that Macbeth is the Lady’s second husband, as she speaks

of her own child, not of theirs. Her insistence and persuasion is such, that Macbeth says

she should only give birth to male children, as her disposition is appropriate only for

raising sons (I, 7, 73-75).

 Rizou, 17

As Act two opens, Macbeth is seeing visions, he is hallucinating that he is holding

an imaginary knife before he draws his dagger and then he comments on nature seeming

sinister and deadly, much like the murder he is about to commit (II, 1, 34-57). “Illusion

and reality change places with each other” and Macbeth’s “imagery dagger” feels to him as

real as the one he pulls out of his seethe (Spencer, p. 158). He attributes his vision to the

heat but it seems more likely that his guilt and inhibitions are affecting him. The brief

scene closes with him referring to the king and saying that the bell he hears “summons

[him] to Heaven, or to Hell”.

In the second scene, it is Lady Macbeth who notes the grim atmosphere and says

she would have committed the murder, if Duncan had not resembled her father when

asleep. This shows that she still has a glimmer of emotion and ethics in her, but that makes

no difference. She is villainous nonetheless, and for those acts she does not have the soul

to commit herself, she employs her husband. She has prepared everything for his

murderous act, having drugged the guards with wine and laid out their daggers for

Macbeth to use on Duncan. After the deed is done, she urges him not to think of the crime

he has committed, as “it will make [them] mad’, a foreshadowing of her own fate (II, 2,

34-35). Macbeth is beginning to be haunted, whether by ghosts or by a guilty conscience is

unclear (II, 2, 41-43). While he is belatedly afraid of what he has done and is filled with

remorse, she orders the next moves and calls out his “infirm[ity] of purpose”, saying that

the dead and the sleeping are nothing but pictures, and frames the two attendees of the

King for the murder, herself (II, 2, 53-56).

 Rizou, 18

In scene three, the crime is discovered and Macbeth rushes in the chambers to slay

the “murderers”, the attendees who were the only unconscious witnesses to the crime,

claiming his rage and thirst for vengeance led him. (II, 3, 103-115). His ability to feign

emotions and to procure such explanations for his deeds would be admirable, had it not

been disturbing.

Macbeth, in Act three, is starting to get suspicious of his cousin, Banquo, and

wishing him ill before he can act against him. He plans to assassinate Banquo and hires

two paid murderers who were Banquo’s enemies to commit the murder on his behalf. His

inhibitions are beginning to abandon him and he makes decisions without his wife’s

suggestion. In the next scene, Lady Macbeth approaches her husband and tells him that

“things without all remedy should be without regard; what’s done, is done”, showing yet

again that she is remorseless (III, 2, 13-14). Macbeth on the other hand, is tormented by

guilt and his mind is full of “scorpions”, poisonous thoughts about what he has done. He

does, however, realize now, that “his situation demands that he and his wife must make

[their] faces vizards to [their] hearts, disguising what they are” (Spencer, p. 160).

Later, Macbeth is informed of the murder of Banquo, whom he names a “full

grown serpent”, an enemy that was already dangerous, while he considers Banquo’s son,

Fleance, an enemy in the making (III, 4, 28-31). It appears as if he is now seeing enemies

everywhere, much like Iago was in Othello; he is feeling persecuted. The “curse of

childlessness” has been interpreted as “Macbeth’s motivation for murder and usurpation”,

since he does not seem to expect to have heirs of his own, yet he “fiercely seeks to murder

Fleance […], and does destroy Macduff’s children” (Bloom, p. 522). When Macbeth sees
 Rizou, 19

the ghost of Banquo and converses with it, partly due to guilt and partly due to fear, his

wife is quick to find an excuse; namely that Macbeth suffers fits of insanity or of peculiar

mood swings regularly (III, 4, 51-56). She then proceeds to attack his manhood yet again

asking: “are you a man?” (III, 4, 57). She continues to say that what scares him could be a

woman’s scary story, and that if he clears his head, it’s only a stool he is looking at (III, 4,

60-68). She sees the ghost too, but discredits his fear and insults his masculinity by saying

he’s “unmanned in folly” (III, 4, 74). Macbeth claims he would not have any fear before

any being, however terrifying, were it natural and not supernatural (III, 4, 100-107). He

seems to somewhat accept his wife’s judgement, as, after the ghost departs, he exclaims he

is a man again (III, 4, 109). He is, however, also seeing his wife under a different light

now, knowing she can look at the same specters as he and “keep the natural ruby of [her]

cheeks, when [his] is blanched with fear” (III, 4, 112-116). Lady Macbeth is again

unnervingly reasonable, suggesting that her husband lacks sleep and that is why he is

seeing visions, and not his guilty conscience (III, 4, 142). One must consider that it is an

extreme case of viciousness that, which would estrange a murderer from his wife.

As the play progresses, Macbeth meets with the Wayward Sisters and upon hearing

that none born to a woman can harm him, he still decides on murdering, seemingly

harmless, Macduff, to keep his own fear at bay (IV, 1, 82-86). This is further proof of a

quick decay of his morality, honor and valor. In scene three, Macbeth is described by

Malcolm as treacherous and as a fallen angel, one of "the brightest” (IV, 3, 17-22). We can

easily make out why he would describe him as such, since he started out as being praised

for his courage in combat and his devotion to the crown, and is now reduced to a
 Rizou, 20

murderous, fearful man. He has turned from a loyal soldier and a nobleman to the slayer of

women and children, and to a tyrant. On the contrary, Malcolm, the heir to the throne,

“deliberately blackens his own character” so that the “reality of good which shines under

the false appearance may offset and contradict the reality of evil which is Macbeth”

(Spencer, p. 161). These are the two extremes: Macbeth who appeared good and is evil,

and Malcolm, who presented himself as bad and in reality is good.

In Act five, the first scene opens with the discussion of Lady Macbeth’s illness. She

has fallen mentally ill, sleepwalking, washing her hands clean of blood in her sleep, and

involuntarily admitting to the crimes she has committed or instigated, again while asleep.

Since this illness of Lady Macbeth surpasses extreme (conscious) behavior and has forced

her to cross the threshold into madness, I will not elaborate on it.

In Act five, nonetheless, Lady Macbeth’s physician sees ties between hideous crimes being

committed and psychological problems emerging due to the guilty conscience of a patient

(V, 1, 61-65). That can also be applied to Macbeth himself, who sees specters and visions,

a behavior quite extreme, and highly likely due to guilt. Macbeth also recognizes that the

stem of his wife’s “mind diseased” is the “rooted sorrow” and the “written troubles of the

brain”, which the doctor says that the patient must cure themselves (V, 2, 40-47). “He

identifies the sickness of Lady Macbeth with his own remorse” and wants to know if there

may be a cure (Swisher, p. 152). An understanding of how extreme actions, outside the

prism of morality, can lead to involuntary extreme behavior and madness is evident.

Later and while under siege, Macbeth is informed of his wife’s suicide. He speaks

of life as brief and as “a tale told by an idiot […] signifying nothing”, as he feels sadness
 Rizou, 21

for his wife’s demise and, perhaps, he sees no meaning in his own life (V, 5, 23-28). It is

obvious that, obsessed with the prophesies of the witches, “he is living the inner life of

terror and remorse” (Swisher, p. 152). Despite his despair, he is extremely brutal to the

messenger who reports the approach of his enemies, and threatens him with tormented

death, should he be lying (V, 5, 38-40). His thirst for power and his brutality do not even

cease to exist while he’s mourning. Of his behavior in the last 3 Acts, no incidence can be

characterized as even marginally normal.

In the final scene, Macbeth seems to think that suicide is futile and that points to his

either being brave enough to fend off as many enemies as he can before dying, or too

cowardly to take his own life (V, 8). He says he has been avoiding fighting with Macduff,

as he has already spilled enough of his blood, namely, his family’s whom he’s murdered (

V, 8, 4-5). That could point to remorse and guilt or to fear of the divine, as he refers to

souls. It is far more likely that Macbeth, connected as he was with the supernatural, would

fear for his immortal soul, rather than that he may experience guilt at this stage. When

Macduff says he was prematurely born with a C-section of sorts, he is revealed as the

person who can harm Macbeth according to the Wayward Sisters. Upon hearing this,

Macbeth is scared and admits that this news has “cowed the better part of man”, it has

intimidated his manly spirit, his masculine quality. Even in the absence of Lady Macbeth,

Macbeth questions his own masculinity and bravery. Macbeth dies at the sword of

Macduff. The conclusive remarks would be that he was a repressed individual who wore

the façade of the virtuous and loyal when he could not but obey to power, while he turned

into his real, immoral self upon the promise of the supernatural that he could attain power.
 Rizou, 22

After given that certainty, he committed crimes and took risks, only when knowing he

would succeed. These point to a general insecurity, an inferiority complex, or even

cowardice that instigated his immoral actions. Macbeth as a persona is constantly de-

masculinized by his wife and, in the end, he doubts his masculinity, too. However, only

with her encouragement and her constant incitement does he reveal his truly villainous

nature. Lady Macbeth, on the other hand, is of an authoritative and twisted nature, and

shows as much from the beginning of the play. She aims to greatness and he aims to please

her. Together, they are an unstoppable malevolent force that commits extreme acts to

achieve their goals, until they are both ruined by ambition and unlawfulness.

OTHELLO

As Spencer claims in his essay, Othello is, more than any other play, a “tragedy of

character” and the dramatic personae are “placed against the background of a given

society” (p. 124). Othello stars two main characters which are of interest to this paper. The

first, Iago, an ensign under the command of the homonymous hero of the tragedy, the

Moor, Othello, appears from the very first act and scene of the play to be set against his

general.

We are introduced to Roderigo, a nobleman who is in love with the lady

Desdemona, who is supposed to be receiving help from Iago in his suit for her. It is

promptly proven that Desdemona has eloped with Othello, the Moor, and while rousing her

father to go after her, Iago reveals bits of his self and intentions. Iago claims he owes true

allegiance to Roderigo and “follow[s the Moor] to serve [his] turn upon him” because he
 Rizou, 23

has many grievances against him (I, 1, 42). He initially claims that he has been disgraced

and overlooked by Othello, because, although Iago followed him closely in battle and had

more experience, Othello made Michael Cassio “that never set a squadron in the field, nor

the division of a battle knows” his lieutenant instead (I, 1, 22-23). He also says that Cassio

was “almost damned to a fair wife”, suggesting that to have one is a curse (I, 1, 21). This

could be an early sign of Iago’s discontent with wives, or with women in general.

According to Bloom, being passed over for promotion, “the ontological shock of that

rejection […] is the trauma that truly creates Iago”, the ingenious villain, but others

disagree (p. 436). After managing to wake and convince Brabantio, Desdemona’s father,

Iago leaves to attend to Othello, and his character develops further.

In the second scene of the first act, Othello seems oblivious to the fact that Iago is

his sworn enemy, and the latter manages to surprise us with the concern he is able to

exhibit towards a man he hates. Iago warns Othello that Brabantio is coming towards them

with the intent of breaking up his marriage to Desdemona, and claims to be so agitated

with him that he would have liked to have killed him. This clearly shows the deceitfulness

of his character, since he was the one to have informed him. Even when Brabantio and

Roderigo appear, Iago draws his sword stating to Roderigo: “Come sir, I am for you”,

intending to even fight Roderigo to prove his false loyalty to Othello (I, 2, 58).

In scene three Brabantio makes his claim, that Othello has bewitched Desdemona,

in front of the senators where they are gathered. Othello, appears as most loyal and

virtuous, as he asks for Desdemona’s opinion to be heard freely; should he be found guilty

of beguiling her, he says, they should “the office [he does] hold of [them], not only take
 Rizou, 24

away, but let [their] sentence even fall upon [his] life” (I, 3, 16-19). Desdemona is brought

forth and attests to her true love for Othello. At that point, Brabantio issues a warning that

is later used again by Iago, that “she has deceived her father, and may [deceive him]” as

well (I, 3, 293). This statement is of key importance to the development of the tragedy, as

this doubt will be the undoing of Othello himself. Following the departure of Othello and

his wife, Iago and Roderigo converse, and Iago proves he is “an unscrupulous

individualist” (Spencer, p. 132) when he says that virtue is an illusion and that a man

determines what he is going to be like (II, 3, 319-321). He claims that if there is no reason

in a man to counter the sensuality, then there will be no balance and man would fall prey to

his most base nature and commit preposterous acts (II, 3, 325-329), as would appear to

have been Othello’s fate at the end. His last phrase here is that he “[takes] this that [they]

call love to be a sect or scion” (II, 3, 330-331), proving that he knows nothing about it, that

he “is an emotional eunuch” (Spencer, p. 133).

The greatest challenge and the most resentful thing about Iago’s case is that “in

terms of Elizabethan psychology” he is a “thoroughly rational human being” (Spencer, p.

132). He is a man of limited, if any, passion, who has managed to separate himself from

every kind of collective existence, be it society or the order of the universe. When Othello

takes his last chance of belonging, when he overlooks him and makes Cassio lieutenant, it

could be argued that this is when Iago snaps, but it is obvious that Iago is plainly a rational

materialist.

In his long word of advice towards Roderigo, which can be summed up in the

phrase “put money in thy purse”, Iago does not fail to insult Desdemona and suggest that
 Rizou, 25

she is with Othello only because of her curiosity for his savage heritage (II, 3, 333-359).

Claiming that she will eventually get enough of his body and her lust for Othello will be

sated, he urges Roderigo to keep his purse filled with gold, as she will, no doubt, look to

someone more suitable in fortune and descend. In a single monologue, Iago has managed

to both show that money is a god to him, and to debase Desdemona, implying she is

lustful, superficial and materialistic. That is yet another instance where Iago shows his

distorted view of the female gender. Iago clearly manifests his true nature saying that he

“[makes his] fool [his] purse”, meaning he aims to use Roderigo as his personal money

resource (I, 3, 378). Additionally, Iago offers yet another reason as to why he hates

Othello, saying it is widely believed that the Moor has been to bed with his wife, and

though it is but a suspicion, he’ll act upon it as if it were certain (I, 3, 381-385). We are

hereby aware that Iago is “motive-hunting of a motiveless malignity”, as he gives one

explanation after another for his turning against Othello, but none of them are believable

enough (Spencer, p. 133).

Act two is set in Cyprus, where Othello has been stationed, and his married life

with Desdemona commences. In scene one, Cassio offers a lengthy description of

Desdemona’s virtues (II, 1, 75-82), describing her as slightly short of a goddess. It is no

wonder then that Iago chose to use him to make Othello jealous (II, 1, 165-174). Iago

speaks ill of women and of wives, saying they are more liberal than they should in their

beds, hinting yet again at his misogyny (II, 1, 101-113). Iago slanders Desdemona to

Roderigo saying she has only lust for Othello and her mind will reject him soon enough.

Indications of Iago’s misogyny are becoming more frequent. He continues to say again that
 Rizou, 26

he believes Othello has slept with his wife, Emilia, and that’s why he ‘loves’ Desdemona,

as she gives him the chance to either get even or get revenge. Iago continues to insist on

different reasons behind his hate for Othello. That clearly denotes that he doesn’t really

know why he hates him. Iago is evil by nature and very clear-minded during the process

of manipulating people. He harbors an “Ahab-like obsession – Othello is the Moby-Dick”

and for that end, “he works with gusto and mastery of timing, adjusting his plot to

openings as they present themselves” (Bloom, p. 436). The fact that his plan for revenge is

so fluid and flexible exhibits that the goal is to inflict as much damage and on to as many

victims as possible, and not to avenge any wrong-doing. After Iago cause a fall-out

between Othello and Cassio, he appears as a loving consultant to the latter (II, 3), urging

him to talk to Desdemona instead of Othello, as “[their] general’s wife is now the general”

and she will reinstate him (II, 3, 297-299). The notion of honor is introduced through

Cassio, who is grieving his lost reputation (II, 3, 249-252), giving us insight as to what

Othello’s opinions are, as well. Iago pledges his help and love to Cassio, and decides to use

his wife for his devious ends too, and thus, his scheme is set into motion.

In act three, Iago starts planting the seed of doubt in terms of the nature of the

encounters between Cassio and Desdemona, which he has initiated. Othello professes his

love and trust, yet is easily moved to suspicion by Iago. Othello appears as a man who is

not a slave of passion, and who has known only war. Perhaps that is why, unaccustomed to

the workings of love relationships, he falls so easily prey to Iago’s honest façade. The

more Iago claims he has seen nothing and suspected something, the more Othello is keen

to hear him out (III, 3, 35-42). Iago admits that “oft [his] jealousy shapes faults that are
 Rizou, 27

not” (III, 3, 151-152), that is a jealous man that sees indiscretion where there is none. Iago

appears to have persecution mania and find enemies and injustice everywhere. However, as

Spencer has claimed, Iago is unaware of love; therefore he cannot have felt jealousy in the

way in which he describes. To some, a naturally evil man is a man who is “incomplete

[…], who does not contain all the psychological levels that should make up a human

being” (Spencer, p. 135). By that definition, Iago fits perfectly in the category of evil men;

his “reason controls his passions” making him unemotional, and he is “wholly bad”

(Spencer, p. 135).

Othello does not see the villainy in Iago. He is shifting already, telling Iago that

Desdemona is true, yet thinking otherwise when alone. Iago, appears to know the nature of

jealousy (III, 3, 325-328), and uses it well against his general. Othello admits to being

jealous to the point of madness, supporting he was blissful when he was unaware of his

wife cheating, “[he] saw’t not, thought it not; it harmed not [him]” (III, 3, 342). There are

many occasions where, in scene three, Othello shows his growing jealousy and Iago urges

it on, but it would not be economical for the progression of this paper to mention them all.

Othello makes the mistake of being “of free and open nature [and] thinks men honest that

but seem to be so” (Bloom, p. 447).

It is Othello’s love of order and honesty that slowly bring him to the edge of the

abyss. Othello was not afraid of dying in the field of battle, yet his reputation lies at the

hands of Desdemona; “the male equation […] makes the fear of cuckoldry and the fear of

mortality into a single dread”, that of the metaphorical death of his reputation (Bloom, p.

448). Othello becomes impatient and violent, threatening to kill Iago if he has no proof that
 Rizou, 28

Desdemona is being unfaithful and Iago rises to the occasion. His deviousness and

Othello’s naivety and morbid jealousy are exhibited when Iago mentions that Cassio has

had a dream in which he called for Desdemona and Othello thinks of it as evidence of their

affair (III, 3, 419-434). Without any palpable truth, Othello’s jealousy escalates at the end

of the scene, and he asks that Iago murder Cassio on mere suspicion. Iago seems to be

advocating Desdemona’s case, when in fact he is urging Othello to kill her too (III, 3, 470-

482). Iago’s lack of remorse or scruples, and Othello’s impressionable nature and sense of

honor form a lethal combination.

In scene four, Othello confronts Desdemona about her lost handkerchief and gives

signs of his jealousy, while Emilia watches. Emilia speaks to her mistress both of men’s

nature changing after marriage and of their jealousy, showing that her husband has given

her proof of both (III, 4, 101-104). Iago must have always been unable of satisfaction and

Emilia must have witnessed it.

In act four, Iago watches Othello become more jealous and aggressive by the

minute and is perversely content to see his reason fail him (IV, 1, 44-48). Othello is so

agitated that he falls into an epileptic fit. Iago shows him the handkerchief in Cassio’s

hands, and even as Othello is trying to cope with it and reconcile his love for his wife with

the treason he thinks he has witnessed, Iago gnaws at his mind. He forces Othello’s hand to

the murder of Desdemona, and he even chooses the manner (IV, 1, 201-202). Othello, as

mentioned before, is new to love, and has chosen Desdemona as the place “where [he has]

garner’d up [his] heart, where eiher [he] must live or bear no life” (IV, 2, 56). It is no

surprise then, that if he finds Desdemona unfaithful, his delicate equilibrium will crumble.
 Rizou, 29

Othello’s change in nature and disposition is observed by Lodovico, cousin to Desdemona.

He wonders where the “noble Moor whom [the senate] call all-in-all sufficient, […] whom

passion could not shake” is (IV, 2, 259-265). The change in Othello is confirmed when he

strikes Desdemona, without obvious cause. His violent emotions are finally turning to

violent actions, foreshadowing his final act of cruelty, her murder. Othello questions both

Emilia and Desdemona and refuses to believe that the latter is innocent, practically sealing

her fate (IV, 3).

In Act five, Iago reveals himself as completely emotionless and lethal. He arranges

it so that Roderigo attacks Cassio and kills him, convincing him that Cassio is

Desdemona’s object of affection. Should that not succeed, Iago plans on finishing either

man off himself, since they’re now a liability and a danger to his life. As soon as the attack

happens, a mad from jealousy Othello, is pleased by it and seeks Desdemona out. Iago,

showing his true nature yet again, shamelessly attempts to blame Bianca, a prostitute who

is in love with Cassio, for the attack against him. Iago cares not about how many people he

needs to harm, so long as he can preserve himself.

In scene two, Othello stifles Desdemona, not being able to believe in her

innocence. What is left of Othello murders for “the noblest motives” as he sees himself,

falsely, as “the instrument of universal justice” (Spencer, p. 130). A brief monologue after

the deed shows that he is on the verge of madness, driven by jealousy and sorrow (V, 2,

91-102).

Iago is for once proven wrong in his knowledge of human nature, when he cannot

foresee his wife’s devotion to her late mistress. Killing her out of spite, and not to serve
 Rizou, 30

any end, as she has already exposed him, he then refuses to speak another word. This is the

epitome of his malignant nature. Even with nothing to lose, he reveals no purpose, no

reason for his schemes and atrocities; he has none. Finally, in the last lines of the play,

when Othello learns the truth, he abandons self and claims he is good as dead. He later

proceeds to take his own life, the notion of honor going full-circle, as he does not want to

be remembered as a murderer but as a valiant soldier who loved too much. It is interesting

to note that he believes he has committed an atrocious crime in the name of love, and not

because of jealousy, or for matters of honor. His suicide could also be interpreted as, either

a final act of violence against self, due to jealousy and love, or the utmost sacrifice in the

name of honor. As we can conclude, the Moor’s greatest fault and tragedy was that “Iago

should know him better than […] he knows himself” (Bloom, p. 445).

CONCLUSIONS

Reaching the end of this research paper, a conclusion needs to be drawn, in regard with

extreme behavior in the three selected Shakespearean tragedies. As proven during their

examination, the characters were motivated in their extreme, divergent behavior by grief

and vengeance, thirst for power and fear, and hatred and jealousy. As is self-evident, strong

emotions, human passions, are what instigates extreme behavior, in real society, as well as

in the made up society that Shakespeare had created each time. The extreme behavioral

changes and their consequent actions were sometimes aided and instigated, as in Macbeth

and Othello, or, they emerged from the character and desires of the dramatic persona, as in

the case of Hamlet. Though this paper has not introduced a topic that has, altogether, never
 Rizou, 31

been upon, I would like to think that it has provided a detailed and insightful view of the

circumstances that motivated these extreme behavioral patterns and the emotions and

conditions that fostered them later on. A more in depth analysis of the motives and the

reasons behind these would require a deeper knowledge of psychology and behavioral

sciences and, therefore, remains to be conducted in another paper.

Word Count: 9,692

 Rizou, 32

Works Cited

Barker, Deborah, and Ivo Kamps. Shakespeare and Gender: A History. London: Verso, 1995.

Print.

Bloom, Harold. Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human. New York: Riverhead, 1998. Print.

Murray, Peter B. Shakespeare's Imagined Persons: The Psychology of Role-playing and Acting.

Lanham, MD: Barnes & Noble, 1996. Print..

Shakespeare, William. Macbeth. Ed. Cedric Watts. Ware, Hertfordshire: Wordsworth Editions,

2005. Print.

Shakespeare, William. Othello.Ed. Cedric Thomas.Watts.Ware, Wordsworth Editions, 2001. Print.

Shakespeare, William. Hamlet.Ed. Cedric Watts. Ware, Hertfordshire: Wordsworth Classics, 2002.

Print..

Spencer, Theodore. Shakespeare and the Nature of Man. Lowell Lectures, 1942. New York:

Macmillan, 1949. Print.

Swisher, Clarice. Readings on the Tragedies of William Shakespeare. San Diego, CA.:

Greenhaven, 1996. Print.

Wilson, John Dover. What Happens in Hamlet. Cambridge: U Pr., 1970. Print.
 Rizou, 33

Additional Works

Adelman, Janet. “Iago's Alter Ego: Race as Projection in Othello”. Shakespeare Quarterly 48.2

(1997): 125–144. Web. 16 Feb. 2016.

Adelman, Janet. Suffocating Mothers: Fantasies of Maternal Origin in Shakespeare's Plays,

Hamlet to the Tempest. New York: Routledge, 1992. Print.

Armstrong, Philip. Shakespeare in Psychoanalysis. London: Routledge, 2001. Print.

Cefalu, Paul. "The Burdens of Mind Reading in Shakespeare’s Othello: A Cognitive and

Psychoanalytic Approach to Iago’s Theory of Mind."Shakespeare Quarterly 64.3 (2013):

265-94. Muse.jhu.edu. Web. 11 Feb. 2016.

Chedgzoy, Kate. Shakespeare, Feminism and Gender.Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire:

Palgrave, 2001. Print.

Freud, Sigmund, and A. A. Brill. The Basic Writings of Sigmund Freud; Tr. and Ed., with an

Introduction. New York: Modern Library, 1938. Print.

Hallstead, R. N.. “Idolatrous Love: A New Approach to Othello”. Shakespeare Quarterly 19.2

(1968): 107–124. Web. 16 Feb 2016.

Hirschfeld, Heather Anne. "Hamlet's "first Corse": Repetition, Trauma, and the Displacement of

Redemptive Typology." Shakespeare Quarterly54.4 (2003): 424-48. Muse.jhu.edu. Web.

11 Feb. 2016.

Jones, Ernest. Hamlet and Oedipus. New York: Norton, 1976. Print.
 Rizou, 34

Kingham, Michael, and Harvey Gordon."Aspects of Morbid Jealousy."Advances in Psychiatric

Treatment 10.3 (2004): 207-15. BJPsych Advances.The Royal College of Psychiatrists,

2004.Web. 04 Feb. 2016.

Levin, Joanna. "Lady MacBeth and the Daemonologie of Hysteria." Elh 69.1 (2002): 21-

55. Muse.jhu.edu. Web. 11 Feb. 2016.

Mandel, Jerome. “Dream and Imagination in Shakespeare”. Shakespeare Quarterly 24.1 (1973):

61–68. Web. 16 Feb. 2016.

Matthews, Paul M., and Jeff McQuain. The Bard on the Brain: Understanding the Mind through

the Art of Shakespeare and the Science of Brain Imaging. New York: Dana, 2003. Print.

McGinn, Collin. "Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews." The Apologetics of Evil: The Case of Iago

// Reviews // // University of Notre Dame. N.p., 2009. Web. 02 Feb. 2016.

Meron, Theodor. “Crimes and Accountability in Shakespeare”. The American Journal of

International Law 92.1 (1998): 1–40. Web. 13 Feb 2016

Montrose, Louis Adrian. The Purpose of Playing: Shakespeare and the Cultural Politics of the

Elizabethan Theatre. Chicago: U of Chicago, 1996. Print.

Morgenstern, Naomi. "The Oedipus Complex Made Simple." University of Toronto Quarterly 72.4

(2003): 777-88. Muse.jhu.edu. Web. 08 Feb. 2016.

Oatley, Keith. "Simulation of Substance and Shadow: Inner Emotions and Outer Behavior in

Shakespeare's Psychology of Character." College Literature 33.1 (2006): 15-

33. Muse.jhu.edu. Web. 15 Feb. 2016.

 Rizou, 35

Pechter, Edward. "“Iago’s Theory of Mind”: A Response to Paul Cefalu."Shakespeare

Quarterly 64.3 (2013): 295-300. Muse.jhu.edu. Web. 13 Feb. 2016.

Rashkin, Esther. "Reading the Mind, Reading the Text: Reflective Functioning, Trauma Literature,

and the Task of the Psychoanalytic Critic." American Imago 68.1 (2011): 37-

48. Muse.jhu.edu. Web. 09 Feb. 2016.

Reiss, Benjamin. "Bardolatry in Bedlam: Shakespeare, Psychiatry, and Cultural Authority in

Nineteenth-Century America." Elh 72.4 (2005): 769-97. Muse.jhu.edu. Web. 15 Feb. 2016.

Rogers, Robert. “Endopsychic Drama in Othello”. Shakespeare Quarterly 20.2 (1969): 205–215.

Web. 15 Feb. 2016.

Rothberg, C.L. "Abstracts of the Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of

Sigmund Freud. Carrie Lee Rothgeb." The Quarterly Review of Biology 50.2 (1975): 224.

Web. 12 Feb. 2016.

Saunders, Ben. "Iago's Clyster: Purgation, Anality, and the Civilizing Process." Shakespeare

Quarterly 55.2 (2004): 148-76. Muse.jhu.edu. Web. 15 Feb. 2016.

Shapiro, Barbara A. "Psychoanalysis and the Problem of Evil: Debating Othello in the

Classroom." American Imago 60.4 (2003): 481-99.Muse.jhu.edu. Web. 09 Feb. 2016.

Simon, Bennett. "Hamlet and the Trauma Doctors: An Essay at Interpretation." American

Imago 58.3 (2001): 707-22. Muse.jhu.edu. Web. 09 Feb. 2016.

Stirling, Brents. “PSYCHOLOGY IN "OTHELLO"”. The Shakespeare Association Bulletin 19.3

(1944): 135–144. Web. 15 Feb. 2016

 Rizou, 36

Traub, Valerie Jean. Desire & Anxiety: The Circulation of Sexuality in Shakespearean Drama.

N.p.: n.p., 1990. Print.

Vozar, Thomas M. "Body-Mind Aporia in the Seizure of Othello." Philosophy and Literature 36.1

(2012): 183-86. Muse.jhu.edu. Web. 1 Mar. 2016.

West, Fred. “Iago the Psychopath”. South Atlantic Bulletin 43.2 (1978): 27–35. Web 02 Feb. 2016.

White, David M..“Shakespeare and Psychological Warfare”. The Public Opinion Quarterly 12.1

(1948): 68–72. Web. 15 Feb. 2016

Zimmerman, Susan. Shakespeare's Tragedies. New York: St. Martin's, 1998. Print.