Replay

No Deposit Required

No Deposit Required

Play For Free WIN real CASH

Offer valid for 48 hours

*T&C Apply

A Critical Commentary on the "Porter

Episode" in Macbeth
This essay critically evaluates the importance and
dramatic purpose of the"Porter Episode" (Act II, Sc. iii)
in Macbeth by William Shakespeare.

PLAY
FREE
RUMMY
RUMMY
NOW

Go back to the
Shakespeare page for
more texts and other
resources.
Replay

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.

*T&C Apply

NO
Play
DEPOSIT
FOR
NO
DEPOSIT
REQUIRED
REQUIRED
FREE
Offer valid for 48 hours

PLAY
FREE
RUMMY
RUMMY
NOW

In Act II, Scene ii, Lady Macbeth and Macbeth after assassinating Duncan
had heard a knocking at the south entry of their castle. With scarcely a break
the drunken Porter appears in Act II, Scene iii. The scene begins with
repeated knocking which links it up with the previous scene. He has gone to
bed late at gone to bed late at night and is reluctant to get up so early to open
the gate. Imagining himself to be the Porter of Hell he swears at the knocker.
Finally he opens the door and allows Macduff and Lenox to enter.

The ?Porter Scene? provides the much needed dramatic relief in Macbeth. It
follows the breath-taking and awe-inspiring murder scene of Duncan?s
murder which marks the crisis of the play. Though the murder takes play off
stage the horror of the deed is effectively brought to the audience by a
succession of tension bound scenes ? the appearance of the witches, the
report of Macdonald?s execution, the instigations of Lady Macbeth to her
husband and the appearance of the bloody dagger and Macbeth?s intense

soliloquies. So, without the relaxation afforded by the comically sententious

Porter, the audience who have just witnessed the mental agony of the
preparations for Duncan?s murder and Macbeth?s frenzied reaction would
feel jaded by the horror which the discovery of the murder evokes. Moulton,
thus, rightly comments:

?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 Inverness Castle in
which fearful deed was committed by Macbeth arrives the Porter, who
identifies himself with the one of Hell Gate. In the York and Townley plays
the Porter acquires a name; significantly it is Rybald, a word defined by
O.E.D as meaning ?Scurrilous, irrelevant, profane and indecent? and as
derived from the French ribaut, a menial. A more apposite description of
Macbeth?s Porter could hardly be found. In the Townley play Rybald
receives his orders from Belzabub. In Macbeth, the Porter?s first question is,
?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 Hell Gate in mystery plays: so to speak,
destiny arrives at Macbeth. It was Rybald in the Townley ?Deliverance? who
cried out to Belzebub on hearing Christ?s trumpets at the Hell-gate:
"...comene
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.

?TOWNLEY: Alas, for doyll andcare!

I synk into hell pyt?. (L 359-60)

Similarly Scotland is also freed from a Satan named Macbeth, who aspired
for a throne which was not his, committed crime after crime to obtain it and
keep it. Thus, the Hell has been harrowed in Macbeth.
These may be enough to confirm Shakespeare?s intention to draw parallels
between Inverness and Hell. Although the story of Hell Gate and its porter
became unfamiliar to modern audience, Wickham asserted that ?anyone
familiar with medieval religious drama is likely to recognize a
correspondence between? the two. Muir speculated further; the
identification of the Porter with the figure in mystery plays ?transports us
from Inverness to the gate of hell, without violating the unity of place?. The
Porter chillingly increases diabolic atmosphere which dominates the play
from the beginning, so even it could be said that he functions almost as the
third of supernatural existence in the play - the first is the Witches, and the
second is the Ghost of Banquo. Brown remarked ?The clown disappears
without a word; we might almost say that he vanishes, like the witches, when
his many tasks are complete?, and his speculation that the First Witch and
the Porter might be acted by the same actor, Robert Armin, might be worth
considering. Although the impression of the Porter tends to be just comical
for modern audience, these series of religious references which could
visually arouse the picture of mystery cycles in audiences' mind can not be
missed while considering the importance of the ?Porter Scene?.
The words of the drunken Porter are charged with dramatic irony. He
compares himself with the ?Porter of Hell gate? without knowing that the
castle of Macbeth has now been turned into a Hell due to the ghastly
assassination of Duncan. In Macbeth, the Porter?s first question is,
?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 Duncan. The Porter?s
remarks on equivocation are also ironical.
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 England around 1605. About the
tailor, his thieving might imply the parallel to Macbeth's usurp, ?thronethief?, and some sexual connotations in it are pointed out by Rosenberg
interestingly. The tailor also has his place in the scheme of the play, because
of the clothing imagery which is so abundant in Macbeth.
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