This essay critically evaluates the importance and dramatic purpose of the"Porter Episode" (Act II, Sc. iii) in Macbeth by William Shakespeare.
Few scenes in Shakespeare can provoke more laughter in the theatre than the ?Porter Scene? in Macbeth (II, iii). At the centre of this paradox lies the character of the Porter, and in particular the obscenities which punctuate his remarks. Some critics like Pope, Coleridge, Clark and Wright consider this scene to be an interpolation yet the dramatic importance of this scene can not be denied.
In Act II, Scene ii, Lady Macbeth and Macbeth after assassinating
The ?Porter Scene? provides the much needed dramatic relief in Macbeth. It follows the breath-taking and awe-inspiring murder scene of
?One of the best examples of the introduction of the jolly Porter who keeps the important nobles outside in the storm till his jest is comfortably finished, making each furious knock fit into the elaborate concept of Hell-gate. This tone of broad farce, with nothing else like it in the whole play, comes as a single ray of common daylight to separate the agony of the dark night?s murder from the agony of the struggle of concealment?.
Thus it can be said that the ?Porter Episode? adds variety to the action of the play by providing emotional relief to the spectators. It also, by way of contrast, adds to the intensity of impression of events before and after it. Some critics like Muir opined that instead of providing comic-relief to the audience it increases the audience?s feelings of horror.
The ?Porter Episode? is a necessity for the stage. To examine the Porter's theatrical necessity and effectiveness, it might be better to start off with Capell's comment on the scene. The first point Capell remarked is rather matter-of-fact, but strong, ?without this scene Macbeth's dress cannot be shifted nor his hands washed?. The arrival of the Porter follows immediately after the murder of Duncan, so something must be inserted here to delay the discovery of the deed to buy time for changing clothes. Secondly, Capell pointed out that the scene functions to give ?a rational space for the discharge of these actions?. Macbeth is short and relentless play rushing to the tragic ending at a breathless speed, but appropriate space between two horrific scenes - the murder and the discovery of it - may work effectively to heighten the tension and produce an image of horror. Thus, it could be said that Capell provided an adequate amount of explanation for the scene's existence.
The opinions of the critics are sharply divided on the authenticity of this scene. Both the camps are not without their stalwarts. Critics like Pope, Coleridge, Clark and Wright consider the scene as spurious. Coleridge considers only ?the primrose path to the everlasting bonfire? as truly Shakespearean. The Porter?s speeches were omitted by Davenant, Garrick, Kemble aned others. The German critic Schiller rejected the scene and inserted a Song of a Morning Lark for it.
On the other hand Professor Hales defended the scene and gave reasons for justifying its genuineness. Bradley pointed out resemblances between Pompey?s soliloquy on the inhabitants of the prison in Measure for Measure (Act IV, Scene iii. L 1-18) and the Porter?s soliloquy, and between the dialogue of Pompey with Abhorson (Act IV, Scene ii) and the dialogue that follows the Porter?s soliloquy. In ancient comic fashion like Launcelot Gobbo of The Merchant of Venice (Act II, Scene ii. L 1-32), the Porter speaks in a series of imaginary dialogues with ?some of all professions? (L 15) as they arrive in hell. Thus the style of the scene is truly Shakespearean. De Quincey and Dr. Sengupta also spoke for the originality of this scene.
There is a striking resemblance between the vocabularies of the Porter?s speeches with that of a similar playlet within the English Miracle Cycles, ?The Harrowing of Hell?. The first and foremost important allusive image which the Porter possesses is ?Porter of Hell Gate?, the model of which can be found in medieval mystery plays. According to Glynne Wickham, ?on the medieval stage hell was represented as a castle? and ?Its gate was guarded by a janitor or porter?, and the arrival of Christ who demands the release of the souls captured by Lucifer ?was signalled by a tremendous knocking at this gate and a blast of trumpet?. Here, in Macbeth, at
?Who?s there, i?th? name of Belzebub?? (L 4)
He should have said ?in the name of my master? or possibly ?in the name of Macbeth?; but since Macbeth has murdered Duncan, ?in the name of Belzebub? or ?in the devil?s name? is just as appropriate. In the Townley ?Deliverance? it is Rybald who first answers Christ?s knocking:
"Rybald ....what devill is he
That calls hym kyng over us all?
hark belzabub, come ne,
ffor hedusly I hard hym call." (E. E. T. S. L 116-119)
In the cyclic plays of the Harrowing of Hell it is the strange noises in the air which alert the devils of impending disaster. Lady Macbeth first heard the knocking at the south gate, describes its sound as ?a hideous trumpet?. This word ?trumpet? ?completes the picture?, because the sound of trumpet signifies the arrival of Christ at
"...come ne
ffor hedusly I hard hym call? (L 118-19)
In the cyclic plays of the Harrowing of Hell, Satan or Lucifer is physically overthrown; bound and either cast into hell pit or sinks into it.
Similarly
These may be enough to confirm Shakespeare?s intention to draw parallels between
The words of the drunken Porter are charged with dramatic irony. He compares himself with the ?Porter of Hell gate? without knowing that the
?Who?s there, i?th? name of Belzebub?? (L 4)
He should have said ?in the name of my master? or possibly ?in the name of Macbeth?. Unknowingly he compares Macbeth with Belzebub and Macbeth has now, indeed, become a devil after murdering
The three professions which the Porter has said about, has topical allusion. The images are all well knitted in the theme of the play. The commentary by Hunter suggested that the Porter?s word-play ?based on the tradition of ?Estates-Satire?, in which ?some of all professions? were surveyed and condemned?. Plus, Harcourt?s remarked that ?the Porter's three examples were chosen, not at random, but precisely because of their relevance to the dramatic situation?.
Among those three, the equivocator, the second one, may be the most important figure in terms of dramatic image. The reason why the equivocator is so important is that it can be understood as a reference to Father Garnet, the principal culprit of the Gunpowder plot of 1605. The reference to the Gunpowder plot is not only useful as a main resource to decide the date of the text, but also dramatically relevant because it might work upon audience's mind with strongly suggestive images. For the audience in Shakespeare's time, the Gunpowder plot was contemporary event which definitely remained in their memory. Father Garnet, after equivocating so much in the trial, was hanged as plotter of regicide. Equivocation, hanging and regicide - these three words can directly apply to Macbeth with great exactness and equivocation is also a major theme in the play. The motif of equivocation runs through the play. Macbeth himself used equivocation in Act II Scene iii, when he re-enters with Lenox;
Had I but died an hour before this chance,
I had liv'd a blessed time; for, from this instant,
There's nothing serious in mortality;
All is but toys: renown, and grace, is dead;
The wine of life is drawn, and the mere lees
Is left this vault to brag of.
Along with Macbeth's equivocation, the Witch's equivocations should not be forgotten. The speech of the Porter remind us of this important concept of equivocation and existing equivocator Father Garnet, and the fact that Farther Garnet was hanged for plotting regicide probably let audience predict the tragic end of Macbeth.
The other two professions, farmer and tailor, are less significant, but still have considerable meaning. According to Wills, the farmer ?has been often connected with Henry Garnet because his widely publicized indictment included Farmer among his pseudonym?. Added to this, this can be taken as a reference to the steep drop of price in
The Porter?s words on lechery are written in a series of antitheses: provokes?unprovokes; provokes?takes away; desire?performance; makes?mars; sets on?takes off; persuades?disheartens; stand to?not stand to. Thus the ?Porter episode? is a heightened personification of the antithesis of the entire play, for the play is constantly developing in contrasting entities.
Thus, the Porter scene has wide range of functions from buying time for changing clothes to comic-relief to allusion to mystery plays to the major themes of the play, but there is no need to discuss the necessity of the scene if we once hear the sound of knocking and see obscure figure staggering from darkness in actual performance. It comes immediately after the murder scene in which all of us - including Macbeth and his wife - are afraid of the revelation of the crime, and the tension filling auditorium is at its height, and suddenly comes the knocking. Theatrically, the effect of this sound is immense. The knocking comes at the time when heart beats are increased and the stage is filled with hashed silence. In this situation, it is extremely difficult to invent a sort of bridge-character not violating its diabolic mood and integrity of the play. Shakespeare had done it. In terms of style and content, better character than the Porter can not be thought of, and thus it is impossible to regard this scene as being interpolated. On the contrary, this scene is one of the finest examples to verify Shakespeare's genius as dramatist.
Bibliography:
1. Shakespearean Tragedy by A.C. Bradley
2. Shakespeare and His Predecessors by F. S. Boas
3. Tragedy by Clifford Leech
4. Helps to the Study of English Honours by Profs. Roy and Chakraborty.
5. Macbeth Edited by A.R. Braunmuller
6. William Shakespeare Macbeth by Dr. S. Sen
7.