Multimodal Representation of Blood Imagery in Shakespeare’s Macbeth

Abstract

In the majority of cases, stylistic studies of imagery in a play seem to

concentrate on the analysis of the text per se. Yet performances of one certain play

admittedly incorporate multimodal elements which, acting in the same way as

linguistic elements, can condition our interpretation(s) of the original text.

Adopting a multimodal approach, this paper examines the dramatic text, including

its stage directions and verbal representation of blood, in Shakespeare's Macbeth. It

also explores the verbal and presentational aspects of blood imagery in Roman

Polanski’s adaptation of the same work. Polanski’s highly acclaimed adaptation,

directed in 1971, employs both verbal and visual elements to do justice to one of

the bloodiest of Shakespeare’s tragedies. In an attempt to show how these direct

references and presentational manifestations of blood have contributed to both the

play and this adaptation, a multimodal stylistic analysis is carried out regarding the

emphasis on multifarious representation of blood imagery.

Keywords: Multimodal stylistics, blood imagery, Macbeth, Roman

Polanski’s adaptation

Introduction

Circumstances at times collaborate to create a special mode of expression.

Emblems, symbols and imagery, throughout the Renaissance, formed the soul of

many a work of art. In literature, like other branches of art, this way of expression

illuminated and enriched poetic concepts. This was mainly the result of

coalescence of numerous intellectual trends ushered in during the medieval period;

one of them being a sort of emphasis upon the didactic function of poetry so much

so that the writers developed a passionate desire to seek cryptic expression of

thought to voice their otherwise straightforward dictums in a valid turn of phrase.

Shakespeare, like many of his contemporaries, naturally found delight and

satisfaction in employing such devices, but his originality mainly lies in his

characteristic use of imagery which was, like the popular emblems of his time, a

roundabout way of expression. Shakespeare’s pictures unlike emblematic

engravings and woodcuts are for the most part verbal and their significance is

determined by the dramatic context of the play.

Norman Friedman in his article on imagery in Princeton Encyclopedia of

Poetry and Poetics examines the term under three categories “mental imagery”,

imagery as “figures of speech” and “imagery and image patterns as the

embodiment of ‘symbolic vision’ or ‘nondiscursive truth’” (363). Of these three, it

is particularly the third one that has claimed much of the attention of the recent

critics especially after 1935 and the publication of Spurgeon’s invaluable book on

Shakespeare’s image clusters and their significance.

Caroline Spurgeon’s Shakespeare’s Imagery and What It Tells Us triggered

a series of reactions (both favorable and unfavorable) and set in, much more

seriously, a trend in Shakespearean criticism that can be traced back to the late

eighteenth century and Walter Whiter’s A Specimen of a Commentary on

Shakespeare.

Our procedure here, unlike Spurgeon’s, is far from a merely statistical one

and the image will not be cut off from its dramatic context for non-dramatic

purposes. Spurgeon tries to show how “the poet unwittingly lays bare his own

innermost likes and dislikes, observations and interests … in and through image”

(4). This also would not be our main source of interest since we admit that the text

can rarely tell us, with any degree of certainty, anything about the playwright

himself.

Spurgeon, in her studies, mainly focuses on only one of the elements

comprising a metaphor: the vehicle or subject-matter of the metaphor (material

illustrating the idea underlying the image); while the tenor might be of much

greater importance. For instance in discussing the following line from Macbeth

“Sleep, that knits up the ravell’d sleave of care” (2.2.37), she maintains that this is

a “wonderful picture of knitting up the loose fluffy all-pervading substance of

frayed-out floss silk” (5), whereas, in view of the symbolic pattern of the play, the

tenor is of much greater significance.

Wolfgang H. Clemen argues that “every investigation of an individual

development carries with it the danger of overlooking the connection of this

element with the play as an organic whole” (2). He considers an image which is cut

off its context as “only half the image” and says that its “full life” is only furnished

by the context where it occurs (ibid.). It is the situation, character, theme, desired

effect, mood, and many other factors that occasion the exclusive function of a

special image. So any study of imagery outside the closely-knit web seems to be of

little significance and any discussion about imagery should examine the forces

determining that special kind of imagery.

R. A. Foaks in his article entitled “Suggestions for a New Approach to

Shakespeare’s Imagery” represents a new conscious attention to the significance of

imagery especially in dramatic arts:

While it is possible for a poem to be a metaphor, to exist only in an

image or images, this cannot properly be said for a Shakespearean

play. The poetic image in a play is set in a context not of words alone,

but of words, dramatic situation, interplay of character, stage-effect,

and is also placed in a time sequence. (85-6)

There is a marked difference between drama and other forms of literary

production. While other forms are heavily dependent upon their verbal medium for

communication, drama has the potentiality of being conveyed through a variety of

means. A play, which is primarily written to be acted out on stage, has something

more to be taken into consideration than its mere verbal text. What can be seen and

heard while a play is staged attach added significance to the language and verbal

imagery of the play. So, an efficient study of imagery should not lose sight of what

these non-verbal aspects have to tell us. R .A. Foaks in the same article argues that

“poetic imagery should be considered together with other facts in the play which

shares its functions, and together this constitutes dramatic imagery” (89). Stage

directions, colors, duration of certain features and imagery presented on stage,

costumes and props could contribute to our understanding of special symbols and

emblems.

In dealing with symbolism, Eco employs the Gricean maxims. By using this

pragmatic approach, he attempts to point out that symbolism forms part of the

normal communicative resources we use in interaction. As mentioned in Elizabeth

Black's Pragmatic Stylistics, Eco is of the opinion that “the potential for a

symbolic interpretation is triggered by an apparent violation of one or more of the

maxims-- particularly those of quantity, manner or relation” (qtd. in Black 125).

Repeating and emphasizing the same image for instance, providing this repetition

falls outside the norm of the text, may be embedded with certain reasons or

messages. . Such violations result in an “over-encoding” of meanings (ibid.). Thus,

symbolism resulting from repetition of an image can be viewed as a violation of

the maxim of quantity which in turn results in an implicature and the possibility of

further significance.

Our study here mainly concerns the study of blood imagery within the

context of the paly. To show the significance of the media of representation, an

analogy will be drawn between the text and the excessively violent film version

directed by Roman Polanski in 1971. The verbal and visual presentations of blood

are incorporated into the movie to intensify the mindless cruelty and barbarism of

Macbeth.

Methodology

Multimodality and Multimodal StylisticsGibbons asserts that in everyday

life we experience “multimodal terms through sight, sound, movement” (8). Every

conversation includes language, intonation, and gesture and so on. Multimodal

aspect is therefore a significant issue in text linguistics and semiotics. The idea of

developing a theory of multimodal communication was first generated by Kress

and Leeuwen who defined mode as “semiotic resources which allow simultaneous

realization of discourses and types of interaction” (qtd. in Kaindl 258). In the

words of Kaindl “[i]n contrast to single semiotic analyses, which regard visual or

musical signs in an isolated way, a multimodal perspective implies the awareness

that modes exist in combination” (ibid.).He remarks that Kress and Leeuwen

regarded multimodality as a “principle of text design where individual modes are

not limited to certain functions, but worked in combination” (ibid.). The function

of a mode in a text and the type of mode used in designing a text depends on

“pragmatic as well as culture-specific factors” (ibid.).If we are to understand

meaning making completely, modes other than linguistic mode have to be studied.

Multimodality theory assumes that language is only one signifying mode amongst

many. Meaning therefore is constructed also by other non-linguistic modes in a

text. This is inspired by Kress and van Leeuwen who suggested that “like

linguistic structures, visual structures point to particular interpretations of

experience and forms of social interaction” ( qtd. in Majstorovic 200).

In fields such as Media Studies, Film Studies and Psychology, linguists have

begun to turn their attention more to the visual kind of communication especially

after the introduction of the works of Kress and Van Leeuwen. As Machin points

out “ Kress and Van Leeuwen were interested in developing a set of tools that

could bring some of the rigor of analysis characteristic of Halliday's work that had

been able to show what kinds of resources were available to communicators in

language, to provide a more systematic approach to visual design” (30).

As opposed to the formal theories of syntax which are commonly associated

with linguistics, “new literacies integrate multiple meaning-making system such as

language, image, sound and movement” (Unworth 379). These modes could

conceivably fulfill the three metafunctions introduced by Halliday and therefore

communicate meaning accordingly.

According to Gibbons “[t]he development of the academic study of

multimodality was catalyzed by the rise of digital technologies, provoking increase

in multimodal products, which can now be created cheaply and easily” (8).The

concept of modality then can be fully applicable to moving images. Kress believes

that a film is “a temporal mode, structured by intricate semantic and rhythmic

patterns of editing and it is also characteristically multimodal, involving not just

the visual, but also speech, sound and music” (265).

Multimodal analyses of texts coupled with other disciplines could be

employed to help improve the understanding of any literary work. One such

discipline is stylistics. Therefore, “multimodal stylistics aims to combine

multimodal theory and methodology with that of literary stylistics in an attempt to

systematically take into consideration all modes involved in literary meaning-

making” (Nørgaard et al.159). Nørgaard believes multimodal stylistics to be a very

recent development:

By bringing together literary studies , linguistics and multimodal

semiotics, multimodal stylisticians wish to develop a framework for

the analysis of modes like typography, layout, color and visual

images-and of the interaction of these modes-which matches and

combines with the systematic detailed analysis that characterizes more

traditional stylistic approaches to wording .( qtd. in Montoro 19)

In the words of Montero , embracing linguistic frameworks used in stylistic

analyses on the one hand, and the study of semiotics resources on the other, can

give multimodal stylistics an encompassing outlook (19).

Applying multimodal stylistics would be the celebration of a new collaboration

between a new and a traditional approaches:

Altogether, the multimodal take on stylistics would seem a

promising approach for analysts who acknowledge that texts,

including literary ones, are multimodal, and who wish to

employ and further develop tools for the description of

multimodal meaning-making which are as delicate and

systematic as those traditionally employed in stylistics for

analysis of verbal forms. (Nørgaard et al. 34)

Stylisticians typically tend to focus on dramatic texts assuming that “the text

is more stable object of analysis than a performance” (Mclntyre 309) As Short

believes, the reason is that “meanings and values will change not from one

production to another but also from one performance of a particular production to

another” ( qtd. in Mclntyre 310).

Given the stage productions of plays where there are various performances,

this criticism seems to be well-founded. Yet Mclntyre believes that being

“methodologically rigorous” will produce an incomplete analysis while avoiding

this rigor will result in “an analysis which is fuller in the sense of considering

performance and production elements” (311). A solution appears to be applicable

to the case of those plays which have been dramatized into movies. Mclntyre

proposes that “analyzing a filmed version of a play would seem, therefore, one way

to avoid the methodological issue that Short raises, thereby allowing for a stylistic

analysis of the play that takes account of multimodal elements of performance and

production.” (ibid.)

By combining aspects of visual grammar with a more traditional stylistic

analysis of the blood imagery in Polanski's 1971 film version of Macbeth, this

paper attempts to define how the visual and the verbal can be both described

systematically, how they can interact and finally how a multimodal approach will

grant a more comprehensive analysis of this filmed play, compared to the one

achieved by a stylistic analysis of the verbal text only.

Blood Imagery in Macbeth

Macbeth is one of Shakespeare’s bloodiest plays; in every act we have blood

in torrents. Msgr.F.C. Kolbe argues that the word “‘blood’ is mentioned over one

hundred times in the course of the play” (paraphrased in Muir’s edition of Macbeth

5). In a research employing the Shakespeare Corpus at the University of

Birmingham Sonia Zyngier has produced a frequency list of all the word-forms

both in Macbeth and in the Shakespeare Tragedy Corpus . Thus she proposes that

the frequency of the word “blood” in Macbeth is 2.08 times more than it is in the

tragedy corpus. Whereas in the other plays, blood is mostly used in a metaphorical

way, a concordance of blood in Macbeth indicates that it deviates from

Shakespeare’s use of the word since there are 15 literal uses and 11 metaphorical

ones, thus adding to the visual impact and the violence of the play (537).

The symbolic significance of the image invests it with a high degree of

potentiality which points to a variety of implications. The second scene of the play

opens with the Captain’s account of Macbeth’s “bloody execution” (1.12.18). His

story is replete with “reeking wounds” (1.2.40) and bleeding “gashes” (1.2.43). It

has a primitive violence which associates Macbeth from the very beginning with

murder and bloodshed. The tale of Macbeth’s heroic deeds is rendered all the more

emphatic by the visible blood as a sort of backdrop for the Captain’s story. The

passage probably represents the most overpowering picture that blood imagery

evokes: the image of slaughter and violence.

The particular context in which the image is employed here establishes

Macbeth as a heroic character, “Valour’s minion” (1.2.19) and “Bellona’s

bridegroom” (1.2.54). But as we shall see later on, Macbeth is gradually giving

himself up to the evil soliciting of the Witches and turns into a blood-sucking

vampire.

Macbeth’s dagger soliloquy shows him preparing himself for the “bloody

business” (2.1.48). It is a highly dramatic part of the play in which we are urged to

see, through Macbeth’s extended descriptions, the vision of an “air-drawn dagger”

(3.4.61). The “gouts of blood” (2.1.46) on the hallucinatory dagger, pointing to

Duncan’s room, forebode Macbeth’s fatal undertaking and the horrible murder at

hand. After the murder, Macbeth enters holding two bloody daggers in his hands.

The bloody daggers which remain for nearly forty lines on stage bear testimony to

the horror of the crime. These silent witnesses become all the while the tormentors

of the guilty conscience of the murderer until they are taken back to the king’s

chamber by Lady Macbeth.

In some other contexts, blood can be considered as symbolizing vitality and

life. “Blood as the seat of life,” Ad de Vries argues, “is sacred to Yahweh;

therefore sacred and taboo” (52) . This sacred aspect of blood imagery points to its

positive and sacred implications in the play. Macduff calls Duncan’s body “The

Lord anointed Temple” (2.3.67) ; the temple in which divine authority resides on

earth and hence it is sacred. Lady Macbeth on the other hand, in the sleep-walking

scene, while reliving the horrifying memories of the past, surprisingly asks “who

should have thought the old/ man to have so much blood in him?” (5.1.37-8).

Given the divine character of the king, the quoted lines implicitly attest to the

sacred nature of blood in his context.

This aspect of blood symbolism, by an extension of meaning, can include

love and compassion as well. Lady Macbeth, while praying to the spirit of cruelty

to “make thick my blood/stop up th’ access and passage to remorse” (1.5.43-4)

implicitly suggests this aspect of blood imagery. Bradley considers blood as a

vehicle carrying pity along the vein (335). So blood, when not “thickened” can

give way to “remorse” which is defined by K. Muir as “compassion” and

“tenderness” (30).

Joan M. Byles notices that the imagery of the play continually emphasizes

“the unnatural and destructive tendencies in both Lady Macbeth and Macbeth’s

willingness to empty the life-giving and life-sustaining body fluids of milk and

blood […]” (153).Closely connected with blood in its spiritual implications is gold.

Duncan’s “golden blood” (2.3.110) and its divine connotations are further revealed

when viewed in the relevant context:

Here lay Duncan,

His silver skin lac’d with his golden blood;

And his gash’d stabs look’d like a breach in nature

For ruin’s wasteful entrance:(2.3.109-12)

The given picture is in keeping with Macduff’s description of the king’s body as

“[t]he Lord’s anointed Temple” (2.3.67). Duncan is being transformed into a

saintly relic.

After the murder of the king, Macbeth’s cry that “[t]he wine of life is drawn,

and the mere lees/ Is left this vault to brag of” (2.3.93-4) recalls the Last Supper

and Christ’s divine blood. Considering the interchangeable quality of blood and

wine symbolism on one hand (Cooper 193) and its association with the sacred

implications of gold symbolism on the other (Ad de Vries 219) , we can see an

elaborate network of intertwined images pointing to the same direction: Duncan’s

divine character.

Lady Macbeth uses Duncan’s “golden blood” to “gild the faces of the

grooms withal/ For it must seem their guilt” (2.2.55-6). Cleanth Brooks has shown

that the pun is very expressive and that Lady Macbeth considers the guilt as a stain

that can be painted on and washed off (40). The quoted passage also delineates

how succinctly Shakespeare manages to connect two significant symbolic

implications of blood imagery. In the sleep-walking scene Lady Macbeth shows

that the “damned spot” (5.1.33) is indelible and reveals how her attempt to remove

the stain, symbolizing their guilt, comes to nothing. The image is also implied in

Angus’s speech, when toward the end of the play he declares that Macbeth’s

“secret murthers sticking on his hand”(5.2.17). This guilt can only be atoned for by

the death of Macbeth and his wife.

Blood imagery in Roman Polanski’s Macbeth

The Polish literary critic Jan Kott is quoted as saying that “blood in Macbeth

is not just a metaphor, for it stains the hands and faces of characters as well as their

daggers and swords. Therefore, a production of Macbeth that doesn’t evoke a

bloody world would be false” ( qtd. in Bird 55).

Polanski’s Macbeth was made and released at a painful moment in its

director's life and at a precarious one in his career. Few films have such a graphic

depiction of the obscenity of savagery and barbarism. “Bodies are knifed, speared,

decapitated, mutilated and hanged” (ibid).

Blood is the dominant visual metaphor of the film. In an attempt to amplify

Shakespeare’s description, Polanski explicitly portrays the homicide of Duncan,

the execution of the Thane of Cawdor, the rape and slaughter of Macduff’s family

and the decapitation of Macbeth. Given this latter scene , while Shakespeare

merely has Macduff return to the stage with Macbeth’s head on a pole ,Polanski’s

Macbeth is being beheaded , his body collapses down the staircase and the

sequence closes with a shot of the decapitated head on a pole. He also attempted to

add an extra dose of violence by incorporating scenes such as the baiting of the

bear or smashing the wounded on the beach into the movie. Crowl argues that “the

interconnections between power, appetite, revolt and violence are reinforced by

Polanski's handling of two crucial scenes: the murder of Duncan and Banquo's

banquet” (228).

The homicide of Duncan is depicted by Polanski in a superfluously

barbarous manner. Some would argue that the amount of gratuitous violence,

mainly in the abovementioned scene, may have been influenced by Polanski’s wife

heinous murder which occurred a year prior to the production of the movie.

Though Polanski himself denied such influence, one could not fail to notice that

the strikingly flagitious slaughter of the King serves to provide the audience with

an insight into Macbeth’s murderous ambition. According to Deats “[e]xcept for

the savage hacking of the opening scene, the screen does not bleed red until after

Macbeth's violent ripping apart of the natural order in his murder of Duncan; this

action opens flooding arteries of gore and the spectator, like Macbeth, sinks deeper

and deeper into blood” (87).

Macbeth enters Duncan’s chamber and finds the king’s servants in a deep

sleep with their wine spilled everywhere which in the first place creates the illusion

of blood and murder. When Macbeth places his dagger on Duncan’s bare chest, the

momentary hesitation he experiences makes the audience reevaluate their

judgments about his depravity but as Duncan suddenly wakes, Macbeth’s savage

and constant attacks quickly disillusion them. For the next few minutes, while the

very last seconds of Duncan’s struggle to survive is pictured, blood is everywhere.

Duncan’s chest and face is covered in blood. The final stab in Duncan’s neck

makes blood squirt all over Macbeth’s hands and garment. His encounter with

Lady Macbeth, who has been waiting for her in the yard, is also the depiction of a

sequence of bloody scenes. Lady Macbeth reaches for the daggers, takes them to

the king’s chamber and when back, she too has both hands drenched in blood.

During this period the camera focuses on their hands and while they both hastily

try to cleanse them, blood is still evidently all over their gowns.

Blood continues to be a prominent element throughout the movie. The bear-

baiting sequence which follows the murder of Banquo also ends in blood when the

carcasses of the bear and two dogs are dragged across a corridor and the trace of

blood left is soon covered by servants and maids. The banquet scene in Polanski’s

movie has also its fair share of blood. When Banquo’s ghost first appears he is

portrayed in a quite pale and unearthly way. The second time though, his face and

garment is excessively soaked in blood while he moves towards Macbeth. The

consistency of blood’s presence in the majority of sequences, has equipped this

naturalistic adaptation of Shakespeare’s most nihilistic tragedy with the same

chaos and bestiality as evident in the maniacal and diabolic Macbeth himself.

Conclusion

Dramatic potentials in Macbeth provides Polanski with ample leeway to

present his own idiosyncratic version (or reading) of the tragedy. The scope and

divers presentational modes of expression in the stage production and film version

of the play can further accentuate its imaginative aspect and show how these

potentials are realized in practice.

The recent revival of interest in Shakespeare’s style and language has

opened doors to versatile researches and new findings. For instance, in an attempt

to “bridge the gap between Shakespeare and language studies” Ravassat and

Culpeper edited a series of trans-disciplinary studies employing new approaches

such as computational, corpus based and cognitive stylistic studies with the aim of

offering a holistic vision of Shakespeare’s use of language (2). Such innovative

studies and approaches could enhance our understanding of the significance of

certain features and elements in works of Shakespeare.

Works Cited Bird, Daniel. Roman Polanski. Herts: Pocket Essentials,2002. Print.

Black, Elizabeth. Pragmatic Stylistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press

Ltd., 2006. Print.

Bradley ,A.C. Shakespearean Tragedy.2nd ed. London : Macmillan Press Ltd.,

1905. Print.

Brooks, Cleanth. The Well-Wrought Urn: Studies in the Structure of Poetry.

London: Dobson Book Ltd., 1947. Print.

Byles, Joan M. “Macbeth: Imagery of Destruction.” American Imago: A

Psychoanalytic Journal for Culture, Science, and the Arts. 39.2.(Summer

1983) : 149-164. Print.

Clemen, Wolfgang H. Introduction. The Development of Shakespeare's Imagery.

London : Methuen & Co. Ltd., 1951.Print.

Cooper, J. C. An Illustrated Encyclopedia of Traditional Symbols. London:

Thames and Hudson Ltd.,1978. Print.

Crowl, Samuel. “Chain Reaction: A Study of Roman Polanski's ‘Macbeth’.”

Soundings: An Interdisciplinary Journal.59.2. ( Summer 1976) : 226-33.

Print.

Deats, Sarah. “Polanski's Macbeth: A Contemporary Tragedy.” Studies in Popular

Culture. 9.1.(1986):84-93. Print.

Foaks, R.A. “Suggestions for a New Approach to Shakespeare's Imagery.”

Shakespeare Survey. Ed. Allardyce Nicoll. Cambridge: Cambridge UP,

1952. 5: 81-92. Print.

Friedman, Norman. “Imagery.” Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics. Ed.

Alex Preminger. USA: Princeton UP, 1974. Print.

Gibbons, Alison. Multimodality, Cognition and Experimental Literature. New

York : Routledge, 2012. Print.

Kaindl, Klaus. “Multimodality and Translation.” The Routledge Handbook of

Translation Studies. Ed, Carmen Millan and Francesca Bartrina. Oxon:

Routledge. 2013. 257-71. Print.

Kress , Gunther and Theo van Leeuwen. Reading Images, The Grammar of Visual

Design. Oxon: Routledge, 1996. Print.

Machin, David and Gill Abousnnouga. The Language of War Monuments. London:

Bloomsbury Publishing plc., 2013. Print.

Majstorovic , Danijela and Inger Lassen, ed. Living with Patriarchy: Discursive

Construction of Gendered Subjects Across Cultures. Amsterdam: John

Publishing Co.,2011. Print.

Mclntyre, Dan. “Integrating Multimodal Analysis and the Stylistics of Drama: A

Multimodal Perspective on Iam McKellen's Richard III.” Language and

Literature. 17.4.(2008):309-334. Print.

Montoro, Rocio. Chick Lit: The Stylistics of Cappuccino Fiction. London:

Continuum International Publishing Group, 2012. Print.

Muir, Kenneth, ed. Macbeth. London: Methuen & Co.Ltd., 1962. Print.

Nørgaard, Nina, et al. Key Terms in Stylistics. London: Continuum International

Publishing Group, 2010. Print.

---. “The Semiotics of Typography in Literary Texts, A Multimodal Approach.”

Orbis Litterarum. 64.2.(2009) : 141-160. Print.

Ravassat, Mireille and Johnathan Culpeper. Introduction. Stylistics and

Shakespeare’s Language. By Ravassat, et al.Ed. London: Continuum. 2011.

Print.

Shakespeare, William. Macbeth. Ed. Kenneth Muir. London: Methuen &

Co.Ltd.,1962.Print.

Spurgeon, Caroline F. E. Shakespeare's Imagery and What It Tells Us. Cambridge:

Cambridge UP, 1935. Print.

Unworth, Len. “Multiliteracies and Metalanguage: Describing Image/Text

Relations as a Resource for Negotiating Multimodal Texts.” Handbook of

Research on New Literacies. Ed Julie Coiro, et al. New York : Routledge .

2008.377-407. Print.

Vries, Ad de. Dictionary of Symbols and Imagery. London : North-Holland

Publishing Co.Ltd., 1947. Print.

Zyngier, Sonia. “‘ Smudges on Canvas’? A Corpus Stylistics Approach to

Macbeth.” Poetics and Linguistics Association. PALA.N.p.n.d.Web. 2

Sep.2014.