Seven Deadly Sins and Character Arcs: Shakespeare tragedies and Mahabharatha
Author(s): Dr. B. Yasoda Rani
Authors Affiliations:
Lecturer in English, P.S Government Degree College, Penukonda, Sri Sastya Sai Dist.
DOIs:10.2017/IJRCS/202501007     |     Paper ID: IJRCS202501007The Seven Deadly Sins, a classification of vices in Christian moral tradition, offer a fascinating lens for examining human flaws and behavior. These sins—pride, greed, wrath, envy, lust, gluttony, and sloth—are often depicted in literature and drama, influencing both character development and thematic depth. The Seven Deadly Sins appear in various narratives as corrupting forces that ultimately lead to the downfall of the individual or society. Shakespeare’s tragedies are a rich field for exploring these vices. Characters in his plays often embody one or more of these sins, which drive their actions, leading to tragic outcomes. In Macbeth, for example, Macbeth's unchecked ambition (often tied to pride and greed) leads to his moral and physical downfall. Similarly, in King Lear, pride blinds Lear to the loyalty of his true daughter, Cordelia, and he succumbs to the consequences of his hubris. Envy plays a pivotal role in Othello, where Iago’s jealousy and desire for power manipulate the events that lead to Othello’s tragic jealousy and eventual murder of Desdemona. Shakespeare’s tragedies are a profound exploration of human nature and the destructive potential of unchecked flaws, with characters often experiencing hamartia—a tragic flaw—that is directly tied to one or more of the Seven Deadly Sins. The progression of these characters’ arcs often represents the inexorable pull of these vices, leading to their ultimate ruin, which offers a moral lesson on the consequences of excessive indulgence in sinful traits. On the other hand, the Mahabharata, an ancient Indian epic, provides a complex narrative of family, duty, and morality, woven with themes of dharma (righteousness), karma (action), and the yin-yang balance of good and evil. The characters of the Mahabharata, particularly the Pandavas and Kauravas, exemplify various virtues and vices that mirror the Seven Deadly Sins. Duryodhana, the eldest Kaurava, embodies pride, envy, and greed. His desire for power leads to the great Kurukshetra war, a devastating conflict that is, in part, the result of his refusal to act with humility or honour. The Pandavas, especially Yudhishthira, represent idealistic virtues, but even they are not immune to flaws. Arjuna’s internal struggle with wrath and duty in the Bhagavad Gita represents a spiritual crisis that mirrors the tragic nature of Shakespeare's protagonists—caught between conflicting desires and ideals. The Mahabharata's influence on character arcs is profound, with individuals often torn between personal desire (which could be linked to the Seven Deadly Sins) and their overarching duty to society and family. The story is also one of cyclical consequence, where characters face the repercussions of their actions, both immediate and long-term. The Mahabharata, much like Shakespeare’s tragedies, explores the inherent flaws of human nature but offers the hope of redemption and enlightenment, particularly through characters like Bhishma and Krishna, who serve as moral guides. Both the Seven Deadly Sins in the Western tradition and the moral dilemmas in the Mahabharata offer deep insights into the human experience. Shakespeare's tragic figures and the characters of the Mahabharata embody the complexity of human emotions, the tensions between fate and free will, and the destructive power of unchecked desires. Their stories remain timeless, reflecting the universal struggle against moral failings that lead to both personal and collective catastrophe.
Dr. B. Yasoda Rani(2025); Seven Deadly Sins and Character Arcs: Shakespeare tragedies and Mahabharatha, International Journal of Research Culture Society, ISSN(O): 2456-6683, Volume – 9, Issue – 1., Pp.42-49. Available on – https://ijrcs.org/
- Jamieson, Lee. “Shakespearean Tragedies: 10 Plays With Common Features.” ThoughtCo, Aug.2, 2024, thoughtco.com/introducing-shakespeare-tragedies-2985293.
- Mahabharata, by William Buck, University of California Press, 1973.print.
- K. Matilal (ed): Moral Dilemmas in Mahabharata Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, 1989. Print.
- https://www.fusd1.org/cms/lib/AZ01001113/Centricity/Domain/1385/Full%20text%20Oedipus.pdf.
- Exploring Christian Heritage: A Reader in History and Theology: Baylor University Press (1 January,2012)by C. Douglas Weaver (Editor), Rady Roldà n-Figueroa (Editor), Brandon Frick PhD (Editor).
- B. Charlton, Shakespearian Tragedy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1948).
- C. Bradley, Shakespearean Tragedy (London: Macmillan, 1904).
- James L. Calderwood, If It Were Done: “Macbeth” and Tragic Action (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1986).
- Lankey, Julie. Othello, Cambridge City, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2007.Print.
- A Hamlet Bibliography: 1877-1935 (orig. pub. date 1936). Anton Adolph Raven. New York: Russell & Russell, 1966.
- An Annotated Bibliography of Shakespeare Studies, 1604-1998. Mooney, Michael E. Asheville, NC:Pegasus Press, 1999. ISBN 1-889818-21-6.
- Shakespeare W. (1988). The tragedy of Macbeth, in The Complete Works, eds S. Wells and G. Taylor (Oxford: Oxford University Press; ), 975–999. [Google Scholar]
- Munro R. (1887). Lady Macbeth: a psychological sketch. J. Specul. Philosophy 21, 30–36 [Google Scholar]
- Cahn, Victor L. Shakespeare the Playwright: A Companion to the Complete Tragedies, Histories, Comedies, and Romances. Westport, CT: Praeger, 1996. Web. 8 Nov. 2010.
- Rahmah, Desti Maulaini. ‘Antony and Cleopatra by William Shakespeare (A Character analysis of Cleopatra Based on the Existentialist Feminism Theory)’. (A paper submitted to) Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University. 2006.
- Knights, L.C. “King Lear” (1906) Shakespeare Criticism: 1935-1960
- Clemens, Wolfgang. “Appearance and Reality in Shakespeare’s Plays” OUP: New York, 1971.
- Blystone, B. (2012). Extremes of gender and power: Sycorax’s absence in Shakespeare’s The Tempest, Extremes of Gender and Power, 5: 73- 83
- Guerin, W., Labor, E., Morgan, L., Reesman, J. & Willingham, J. (2005). (ed.). A handbook of critical approaches to literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Bloom, H. (2010). William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. USA: Infobase Publishing, pp. 14,93
- Bonjour, Adrien. (1958). The Structure of Julius Caesar. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.
- Bradley, A.C. (1904). Shakespearean Tragedy: Lectures on Hamlet, Othello, King Lear, Macbeth. London: Macmillan and Co.
- [Anonymous], Review of The Picture of Dorian Gray, Daily Chronicle, 30 June 1890, 7, repr. in Beckson (ed.), Critical Heritage, 72. It is worth mentioning that the book was used as a piece of evidence of Oscar Wilde’s “gross indecency” during his trials in 1895.
- Oscar Wilde, “The Critic as Artist”, The Complete Works of Oscar Wilde (London: Collins, 1966), 1048.