Before diving too deep into the choice of words and connotations in this statement, it's important to recognize the historical context. This play takes place during the 1600's in Scotland, where the king was in charge of the various clans. If one of the clan leaders decided they wanted to be king, they could try to stage a rebellion and become king themselves. In order to avoid this, it was extremely important for the king to make sure his subjects were very loyal to him. This desire to maintain loyalty is apparent in the language used. By telling the wounded captain that he has honor, he is also saying that the captain is honorable and rewarded in spirit for defending the king. Imagine if Duncan had instead said, "Good lord, you look horrible! I hope you don't die." I don't know about him, but if I were the captain I might not be following the same king.
The first interesting choice of words is in his saying that "thy words become thee as thy wounds". Usually when we say that something becomes someone, we are talking about clothes or an attitude. For example, "that shirt really becomes you" or "anger really doesn't become you". Saying that words become someone takes an abstract concept, words, and changes them into a figurative kind of medal to be worn. Similarly, saying that wounds become someone is odd to say because you usually don't want someone to be wounded; however, in this context the statement is implying that they also represent a figurative medal that shows their strength and endurance.
Next, there is the decision to say that "they smack of honor both". A Modern English translation would be that "they taste of honor both". This isn't to say that the king can actually taste the captain's words and wounds; only synesthetes (people with combined senses, i.e. sound and taste) can taste words, and it would be an extreme case of social awkwardness if the king started tasting the captain's wounds. So why say that they taste of honor, rather than that they look or sound of honor? Using the sense of taste represents the strength of the honor, and the pride that the king has in being able to retell it. In other words, it is repeatable by mouth; he's proud to recount it.
While every type of language attempts to convince people of something, the language of war is especially manipulative in its luring nature. Not only does it seek to glorify horrifying events, but it works to manipulate the subject into connecting to a certain side and to stay loyal; it builds up pride. It's a good thing it does too, or else there might have been a lot more rebellions.
No comments:
Post a Comment