Skip to main content

‘Too absolute’: Macbeth, Coriolanus, Timon of Athens

  • Chapter
Shakespeare and the Solitary Man
  • 19 Accesses

Abstract

These late tragedies even more than the rest of Shakespeare’s work acknowledge the divided response to the solitary characteristic of Shakespeare’s age. They present the solitary man as villain-hero, simultaneously noble in his isolation yet morally condemned for voluntarily seeking it out. The audience must condemn these men for their studied rejection of the social bonds which should define their humanity and yet pity them for their very isolation, perhaps even admire them for the defiance with which they face up to the solitary way they have chosen, a way which necessarily leads to sterility, inhumanity, insignificance and death. Willard Farnham, in Shakespeares Tragic Frontier, has pointed out that, by contrast with Shakespeare’s earlier tragedies, there are no villains in these plays.1 Instead, the central protagonist is inextricably hero and villain at once, even in the same characteristics: ‘There is nobility to be found in Timon, Macbeth, Antony, and Coriolanus, but in the main it seems inseparable from their flaws, and an admirer of that nobility may wonder whether he is not admiring the flaws themselves even while he sees that they are flaws.’2 Primary among the sources of nobility and moral condemnation together is the solitude of these characters, a solitude which is first of all voluntary, but gradually intensifies to a point beyond the individual’s control until it destroys him.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. The word ‘state’ was changing in meaning in Shakespeare’s time, its political sense only just emerging. See the brief discussions of this semantic development in J. H. Hexter, The Vision of Politics on the Eve of the Reformation (1973), p. 152ff.

    Google Scholar 

  2. W. G. Zeeveld, The Temper of Shakespeare’s Thought, (1974), pp. 82–3.

    Google Scholar 

  3. M. W. MacCallum, in Shakespeare’s Roman Plays and Their Background (1910), interprets the incident favourably for Coriolanus (p. 581).

    Google Scholar 

  4. It has been studied in detail by F. N. Lees, ‘Coriolanus, Aristotle, and Bacon’, RES, n.s., 1 (1950), 114–25.

    Google Scholar 

  5. T. W[alkington], The Opticke Glasse of Humors (1607), p. 68.

    Google Scholar 

  6. J. W. Draper lists some of these in ‘The Theme of Timon of Athens’, MLR, 29 (1934), 20–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. See G. Bullough (ed.), Narrative and Dramatic Sources of Shakespeare, 8 vols. (1966–75), vol. VI.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Copyright information

© 1981 Janette Dillon

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dillon, J. (1981). ‘Too absolute’: Macbeth, Coriolanus, Timon of Athens. In: Shakespeare and the Solitary Man. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-04996-7_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics