Journal of Academic Research for Humanities (JARH) is a double-blind, peer-reviewed, Open Free Access, online Multidisciplinary Research Journal
Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Vol. 6 No. 4 (2026)
International "Journal of Academic Research for Humanities"

Research Articles

Desire, Power, and Self-Disintegration: A Psychoanalytic Comparison of Shakespeare’s Macbeth and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein

https://doi.org/10.67244/jar.bwo-researches.v6i4.a646

Published 10-10-2026

  • Farrukh Hameed
    • ,
  • Shanza Tahir
    • ,
  • Ayiza Tahir

Farrukh Hameed
Assistant Professor, Department of English, The University of Chenab, Gujrat, Pakistan

Shanza Tahir
Lecturer, Department of English, Superior Group of Colleges, Mandi Bahaudin, Pakistan

Ayiza Tahir
Lecturer, Department of English, Superior Group of Colleges, Mandi Bahaudin, Pakistan

Abstract

This paper compares two classics of English literature separated by two hundred years: Macbeth (1623) by William Shakespeare and Frankenstein (1818) by Mary Shelley.  Both follow a remarkably similar trajectory of self-devastation through desire. This study has taken insights from the Freudian concepts of id, ego, and superego, as well as Lacanian paradigms of lack, symbolic order, and objet petit a. It suggests that in both texts, the unchecked desire progressively weakens rational self-control. Macbeth’s ambition for leadership and Victor Frankenstein’s desire to create life are both interpreted as psychological voids the characters can never satisfy. This leads them to increasing guilt, loneliness, and ethical decay. The analysis also treats Lady Macbeth and the Creature as externalized versions of the protagonists’ suppressed desires and fears. Moreover, it situates both works within a broader theoretical context of the tragic hero. The paper also examines the rhetorical devices the protagonists use to justify or mask their desires, as well as the feminine and masculine aspects of ambition and creation that permeate both stories. The paper also reflects on the relevance of these two texts today, as they still speak to issues of scientific responsibility and political authoritarianism; however, it has also highlighted the contemporary relevance of AI and digital platforms, and the responsible use of them. Ultimately, the study shows that although Macbeth’s and Victor’s desires differ, both characters’ trajectories lead to a similar psychological and social breakdown: lonely, self-disintegrated individuals who portray the universal psychological force of desire and its absence.

Keywords

Desire, Self-Disintegration, Contemporary Relevance, Macbeth, Frankenstein

PDF Video Explainer of the Paper

References

  1. Adelman, J. (1992). Suffocating Mothers: Fantasies of Maternal Origin in Shakespeare’s Plays, Hamlet to The Tempest. Routledge.
  2. Baldick, C. (1987). In Frankenstein’s Shadow: Myth, Monstrosity, and Nineteenth-century Writing. Clarendon Press.
  3. Freud, S. (1957). Repression. In J. Strachey (Ed. & Trans.), The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. Hogarth Press.
  4. Freud, S. (1961). The Ego and the Id (J. Riviere, Trans.). W. W. Norton
  5. Freud, S. (2003). The Uncanny (D. McLintock, Trans.). Penguin Books.
  6. Genc, M. (2023). Shakespeare’s Macbeth eserinde kutsal kurban; Paredros. Humanitas – Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(22), 347–362.
  7. Greenblatt, S. (2004). Will in the World: How Shakespeare became Shakespeare. W. W. Norton.
  8. Hameed, F. Latif, Z. (2023). The Interplay between Freedom and Confinement in No Exit by Taimur Kayani. Journal of English Language, Literature and Linguistics. 1(1). 21-35
  9. Jonas, H. (1984). The Imperative of Responsibility: In Search of an Ethics for the Technological Age. University of Chicago Press.
  10. Joseph, A. (2025). Freud, psychoanalysis, and the tragic psyche of Lady Macbeth: A psychoanalytic literary study. International Journal of English Literature and Social Sciences, 10(5), 45–58.
  11. Kristeva, J. (1982). Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection (L. S. Roudiez, Trans.). Columbia University Press.
  12. Kayani, T. Hameed, F. (2021). Socio-Psychological Analysis of Desire in Honor Killing in Sharmeen Obaid Chinoy’s Documentary, A Girl in the River: The Price of Forgiveness. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities. 29 (2). 107–120.
  13. Lacan, J. (1977). Écrits: A Selection (A. Sheridan, Trans.). W. W. Norton.
  14. LaMothe, R. (2023). Male pathological grief in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol: A pastoral psychological perspective. Pastoral Psychology, 72(4), 543–559. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-023-01059-3
  15. Levine, G. (1979). The Ambiguous Heritage of Frankenstein. In G. Levine & U. C. Knoepflmacher (Eds.), The endurance of Frankenstein: Essays on Mary Shelley’s novel. University of California Press.
  16. Mellor, A. K. (1988). Mary Shelley: Her life, her Fiction, her Monsters. Methuen.
  17. Oulam, N. (2024). Scientific heroism and its representations: A psychoanalytical approach to Frankenstein or The Modern Prometheus. International Journal of Literature Studies, 4(3), 1–12.
  18. Shakespeare, W. (1623). Macbeth. In Mr. William Shakespeare’s comedies, histories, & tragedies. Isaac Jaggard & Edward Blount.
  19. Sheikh, F. A. (2017). Subjectivity, desire and theory: Reading Lacan. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 1–12.
  20. Shelley, M. (1818). Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus. Lackington, Hughes, Harding, Mavor & Jones.
  21. Turney, J. (1998). Frankenstein’s Footsteps: Science, Genetics and Popular Culture. Yale University Press.
  22. Winnicott, D. W. (1965). The Maturational Processes and the Facilitating Environment: Studies in the Theory of Emotional Development. International Universities Press.