In both Shakespeare’s Macbeth and George Orwell’s “1984,” the main characters challenge societal norms in pursuit of personal objectives. While Macbeth grapples with this moral dilemma centuries ago, the same conflict is explored in a more contemporary context in “1984.” Winston’s fluctuating trust and mistrust in societal values raises doubts about the authority of society over individual goals, emphasizing the absence of Macbeth’s obligation to conform to society.
The historical background of the novel 1984, set in post WWII era London, greatly influences its underlying principles. The wars during this time period played a significant role in shaping the content of Orwell’s novel. This is particularly evident in the constant warring between nations depicted in the book. In order to justify rationing and harsh living conditions, the war is portrayed as a necessary sacrifice for the individuals within the novel. This parallels Macbeth’s character, as he justifies his immoral actions in pursuit of the crown by fulfilling the prophecy. During both world wars, all countries implemented rationing as a necessary measure to end the war, thus blurring ethical boundaries of sacrifice. Therefore, while killing for personal gain may be considered immoral by many, it can be argued that it is only human to kill in order to fulfill societal expectations influenced by external forces such as the witches’ prophecies.
The witch’s curse in Macbeth represents a true injustice, as it places Macbeth in an undeserved position in society. This curse disrupts the natural structure of the kingdom and sets off a chain of unfortunate events. Similarly, in Orwell’s novel, the unequal class structure created by society serves as the catalyst for Winston’s actions. In both cases, this structure or change in structure is beyond the control of the individual, causing immense pain to the individual involved.
The ethical dilemma of going against society raises numerous inquiries. In the case of Macbeth, his pursuit of becoming and remaining king can be viewed as acting in support of society. I believe that Macbeth’s determination to fulfill and depend on the prophecies given to him highlights his aspiration to align with the system around him. I don’t believe Macbeth truly opposed any force in his quest for power, as he simply adhered to the will of the prophecy. In contrast, Winston consistently opposes his society directly by engaging in secret romantic encounters with Julia and participating in underground resistance movements. However, Macbeth merely follows instructions. He is informed that he will become king, so he becomes one. He is told that he will be safe if specific conditions are met, and he remains safe until those conditions are violated. The distinction between Winston and Macbeth’s characters involves the clash between personal will and prophetic will. While Winston would openly declare that 2 + 2 does not equal 5, Macbeth would rather inquire about the answer from the witch.
The ethical responsibilities of an individual towards society are limited to what they can influence. As a result, Macbeth’s actions, which were beyond his control, can be considered morally justifiable.
