The age of Enlightenment has sparked a long-standing debate regarding the existence of human free will. Some argue that it is merely an optimistic illusion. This discussion has been a central theme in various tragedies, such as Sophocles’ Oedipus Rexes and William Shakespearean Hamlet and Macbeth. These renowned literary works have instilled a sense of recognition and significance to the ongoing conflict between fate and free will, serving as a source of inspiration for numerous dramatic pieces, particularly tragedies, throughout history.
Arthur Miller’s renowned plays Death of a Salesman and The Crucible both explore the paradox of destiny. Despite the passage of time, these plays and others like them refrain from providing a definitive and straightforward analysis of the conflict between fate and free will. Instead, they demonstrate a lack of unity in their approach. Each work presents a tragic situation that forces us to contemplate the question of fate, yet none of them offer a clear-cut solution. The concept of fate is deemed too complex to be neatly resolved.
Oedipus Rex and Macbeth are renowned works that explore the eternal debate between fate and free will. Both plays revolve around tragic heroes who are deeply influenced by prophecies. The introductions of these two heroes share striking similarities, as they both receive praise for their noble deeds that have greatly benefited their respective homelands.
In the opening scene of Oedipus Rex, a priest of Zeus approaches Oedipus during a dreadful plague in the city of Thebes. The priest attributes Oedipus’ triumph over the menacing sphinx to his own intelligence and strength. Similarly, at the start of Macbeth, King Duncan, after emerging victorious from battle, commends Macbeth for his crucial role in safeguarding their country’s integrity.
Duncan is informed that Macbeth executed a traitor in battle in a brutal manner. The king is impressed and praises Macbeth as a valiant and worthy gentleman. This serves to portray both Macbeth and Duncan as heroes who have earned respect and nobility through their own determination and actions for their country. Before they learn about their prophecies, these powerful men are seen as strong, flawless, and admired by everyone. Their greatness is a result of their free will; both of them come from humble backgrounds and through their own strength, intelligence, and bravery, they become acknowledged warriors and heroes.
In Act One, Scene Three of Macbeth, Macbeth and his friend Banana meet three witches who predict Macbeth’s future. The first witch calls Macbeth the “thane of Gleam’s” in regards to his past. The second witch refers to him as the “thane of Castor” in the present, and the third witch foretells that he will become “king hereafter”. Fate and Free Will in Classic Tragedies By Toby-Arguable.
The confirmation that Macbeth has been appointed thane of Castor at the end of the scene verifies the accuracy of the witches’ divinations. It also reveals that Macbeth will one day become king and Banquo will be the father of kings. However, the witches do not provide any information about when or how Macbeth will be appointed thane. They have shown him his ultimate destiny, but not the means to achieve it. Therefore, while Macbeth now knows his fate, he still has the freedom to decide how to handle his wait for the throne. On Page 60, Slavish Translation, Macbeth’s decision is crucial. He can choose to continue with his noble and heroic actions and patiently wait for King Duncan to die naturally or fall in battle, and then take the throne. However, it is strongly suggested that Macbeth immediately considers murdering the king, as he questions why he is tempted by such a horrifying suggestion that sends chills down his spine and makes his heart race uncontrollably.
The witches did not inform him that he would immediately become king or that he would need to use violent and illegal means to gain the throne. However, Machete forms this assumption on his own free will. In the next scene, his inclination towards violence is reinforced when he is reminded of Dunce’s heir Malcolm. Macbeth famously speaks to himself, saying “Stars, hide your fires;/Let not light see my black and deep desires”. Macbeth has a natural inclination towards violence due to his warrior nature, but he does possess a conscience which poses as the only obstacle in his plan to murder his king, friend, and cousin Duncan.
This is hindered by his wife, who is even more ambitiously murderous than Macbeth. She believes that Macbeth is too kind-hearted and convinces, or rather commands, him to kill the king. After Macbeth commits the regicide, there is no turning back. His insatiable ambition, which is a tragic flaw, causes him to become an undeserving king ruling over a sick and depressed Scotland. The witches predict certain aspects of his fate which consistently come true. Despite this, Macbeth tries to alter the negative prophecies that foretell his downfall, as if they were false and meant to undermine him. This is obviously absurd; it is illogical that only the positive parts of the prophecy would prove true while the negative aspects could be avoided. Macbeth’s futile attempts to defy fate demonstrate his desperate and stubborn ambition, which are some of his tragic flaws that cause him to mishandle his actions once his fate is revealed to him. In the Greek tragedy Oedipus Rex, a similar tragic hero faces a conflict between fate and free will.
Oedipus’s fate is more binding than Macbeth’s. Unlike Macbeth, whose life is only affected in the last few months, Oedipus’s prophecy is disclosed to his parents at birth and shapes his entire existence. His pitiable situation arises from an unavoidable destiny determined by the gods since birth. Consequently, it becomes challenging to hold Oedipus accountable for his deeds. As a child, he was abandoned and left to perish but was later adopted by Corinthian royalty unknowingly marrying his own mother and killing his father.
It would have been challenging to envision how Oedipus could fulfill the prophecy if Coast and Alias had raised him as their own son, given that the gods had already declared it at his birth. While he must have fulfilled the prophecy, it would have been inexcusable if Oedipus had intentionally chosen to kill his father and marry his mother while being fully aware of it. However, due to the circumstances that led to his fatal ignorance, he cannot be held responsible for his actions. Oedipus’ tragic flaw, which also signifies his initial act of free will, is his unwavering determination to uncover the absolute truth.
Treaties, the blind prophet, refuses to reveal the dark truth about Oedipus and his wife to the king. His motive is to protect his own sanity and spare Oedipus pain, as he states, “I do not want to give you or myself unnecessary suffering by questioning me in vain”7. Oedipus becomes enraged that the prophet withholds information crucial for saving the kingdom. However, when it is disclosed that Oedipus himself is the murderer of the previous king, his anger intensifies because he cannot accept the truth he had demanded. Calling Treaties out, Oedipus remarks, “You are blind not only in your eyes but in your ears and mind”8. The irony lies in one of the play’s recurring themes: only those who are physically blind can truly perceive reality. Treaties warns Oedipus that “even though you may have sight, you cannot see the trouble you are in”9. Eventually, Oedipus comprehends that everything Treaties said was accurate and chooses to leave a city where he was once hailed as a hero in order to save it yet again.
He chooses to blind himself so that he can truly see, and then spends his remaining days aimlessly wandering the countryside, demonstrating his dignified free will. All of Oedipus’ wrongdoing came about because of his unholy fate, but as scholar Bernard Knox explains, “prophecy, according to Greek beliefs, does not negate free human action but rather requires it”10. If Oedipus had not made the decision to force Treaties to reveal the truth, he would have remained unaware of his regrettable actions and the city would have continued to suffer from the dreadful plague indefinitely.
The downfall of Oedipus occurred before he attained nobility, but it was only when he relentlessly pursued the truth of his actions that he fully realized the extent of his mistakes. This realization caused him to suffer greatly, surpassing the suffering experienced by any other character in dramatic literature. In essence, as Knox states, Oedipus demonstrates the terrifying power of prophecy and its control over free will. In contrast to Macbeth and Oedipus Rex, the tragic hero in Shakespeare’s Hamlet is not influenced by prophecy but rather by a demand from the afterlife. Following the mysterious murder of his father, the King of the Danes, Prince Hamlet should rightfully ascend the throne. However, as Hamlet was studying abroad at the time of his father’s death, his uncle Claudia assumes the throne and promptly marries Hamlet’s mother, who is the queen.
Hamlet and Macbeth have contrasting natures. While Macbeth is naturally inclined towards violence and quick decision-making, Hamlet tends to overthink and analyze situations. In my opinion, if their roles were reversed, both would have achieved better outcomes. However, when Hamlet encounters the ghost of his father and discovers that his uncle Claudius murdered him, he realizes that it is his duty to seek vengeance and reclaim his rightful position as king. This choice goes against his usual temperament and preferred approach.
Hamlet, unlike the other mentioned tragic heroes, is the least constrained. He is not compelled by a prophecy to a specific course of action but rather has the freedom to choose. He has the power to decide how to carry out his plan for revenge and even the choice to abandon it altogether. However, this would be seen as cowardly and dishonorable and is never seriously contemplated by the prince. He adopts a meticulous approach, going so far as to write and stage a play that portrays regicide in order to observe Claudius’ reaction. This is done to ensure the validity of the accusation made by the ghost of King Hamlet.
In a pivotal moment, Hamlet finds himself in a situation where he could easily murder Claudia who is unaware of his presence. However, the important detail is that the treacherous king is praying, and Hamlet is hesitant to take action that could result in Claudia’s soul ascending to heaven. Subsequently, there is a noticeable transformation in Hamlet’s conduct described on page 43 of Knox’s book, as it becomes increasingly reminiscent of Macbeth’s behavior. Hamlet begins to act impulsively and without careful consideration, leading to him needlessly killing Polonium and ultimately causing his lover Aphelia to take her own life.
He vows to murder Claudia when he gets the chance, stating “my thoughts be bloody, or be nothing worth!”12. At the play’s conclusion, all the main characters except for Horopito have died. If Hamlet, faced with the unavoidable duty of avenging his father by killing his uncle, had chosen a more decisive approach, perhaps all those lives could have been spared. However, due to Hamlet’s decision to contemplate and hesitate, several royal deaths occurred and ultimately Denmark’s throne was taken over by Fortifiers, the young king of Norway.
The opposition between fate and free will is a common theme in tragedies. This form of drama was originated by Sophocles in his Thebes cycle and perfected by Shakespeare in his series of tragic plays. It was not until Arthur Miller that we had a playwright who could be considered equal to these two literary greats. Miller’s famous plays, Death of a Salesman and The Crucible, also express the dramatic idea of fate versus free will. In Death of a Salesman, Willie Loman does everything he can to provide for his family and gain the approval of others.
Despite experiencing a decline in his social status and sales, the protagonist is stuck because of his age and has no opportunity for progress or promotion. In order to protect his family, he sees no other choice but to end his own life. Similarly, in The Crucible, John Proctor emerges as a rational voice in Salem amidst the witch trials. Even though he faces a death sentence, he is presented with a chance to survive if he signs a document admitting to being possessed by a witch. However, Proctor refuses to compromise his reputation and instead opts for hanging himself, demonstrating how one’s autonomy can be completely undermined.
