Of all the moments in Shakespeare where nihilism finds its most concentrated expression, few rival Macbeth’s soliloquy upon hearing of his wife’s death. “Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow,” he intones, “creeps in this petty pace from day to day, / To the last syllable of recorded time.” The repetition is not rhetorical flourish — it is the sound of meaning draining out of the world.
Where Hamlet’s nihilism is interrogative — a mind ceaselessly questioning whether existence justifies itself — Macbeth’s is conclusive. By Act V, he has moved beyond doubt into a kind of terrible clarity. Life is “a walking shadow,” a “poor player / That struts and frets his hour upon the stage / And then is heard no more.” The theatrical metaphor is devastating: we are not even real participants in existence, but performers in a play that has no audience and no meaning.
The Collapse of Futurity
What distinguishes Macbeth’s nihilism from Hamlet’s is its relationship to time. Hamlet, in his “To be, or not to be” meditation, is paralysed by the present — by the unbearable weight of existing now, in a corrupt world, with no certainty of what lies beyond. Macbeth, by contrast, has destroyed his own future. Every tomorrow is merely another day of meaningless continuation. Time does not redeem; it only accumulates.
This is a distinctly Shakespearean form of despair. The future, which ought to provide purpose and direction, becomes instead a corridor of identical, empty days. “Recorded time” — the very idea of history, of human achievement persisting — is reduced to its “last syllable,” as if all of civilization were merely the final, fading word of a story no one wanted to hear.
“A Tale Told by an Idiot”
The soliloquy’s closing image — life as “a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, / Signifying nothing” — is perhaps the most explicit statement of nihilism in the entire Shakespearean canon. The word “signifying” is crucial. It is not merely that life is painful or unjust; it is that it carries no meaning, points to nothing beyond itself, refers to no larger order or purpose.
Compare this to the Ghost’s injunction in Hamlet — “Remember me” — which at least presupposes that memory matters, that the past has weight and moral claim. Macbeth has arrived somewhere beyond even that consolation. There is nothing to remember, because nothing has meant anything. The idiot’s tale is not a failure of narration; it is the condition of all narration.
Ambition as the Engine of Meaninglessness
It is worth noting that Macbeth’s nihilism is not merely discovered but earned — through action, through the systematic destruction of every value he once held. Unlike Hamlet, who inherits a corrupt world and struggles to act within it, Macbeth has actively unmade his own world. He has murdered the king, his friend, and the innocent, and in doing so has found that each act of will produces not satisfaction but further emptiness.
This is Shakespeare’s most searching critique of ambition: not that it leads to punishment (the moralistic reading), but that it reveals the void at the centre of all striving. To want, to act, to achieve — and to find that achievement signifies nothing. Macbeth does not arrive at nihilism through philosophical reflection, as Hamlet does, but through lived experience. He has tested the world’s promises and found them hollow.
In this sense, Macbeth and Hamlet represent two paths to the same destination. One thinks his way into the abyss; the other acts his way there. Shakespeare, characteristically, refuses to privilege either route — or to offer any way back.
Leave a Reply