Governance In The Tempest

866 Words 4 Pages
After reading John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government and William Shakespeare’s play The Tempest, readers witness two vastly different forms of governing. One of The Tempest’s main characters, Prospero, perceives himself as the only one fit to be the sole bearer of power. This form of thinking may be due to his upbringing where he originally had a copious amount of control. Locke on the other hand, trusts people’s rights to be held in the hands of the people. There are a few examples in Locke’s book where he expresses that a monarchy is not a completely irrational way of governing. When Locke wrote, “Hence it is evident, that absolute monarchy, which by some men is counted the only government in the world, is indeed inconsistent with civil …show more content…
He and his daughter Miranda have been living in exile on a secluded island for about twelve years. He is a very powerful magician, the master of both Ariel and Caliban, and his true passion is his books. Knowledge is power…
During the play, Prospero uses his magic to form an extremely powerful storm. This storm was to torment and bully his servants, to control his enemies, and to help arrange his daughter 's marriage to the Prince of Naples. Prospero is portrayed as an extremely powerful man who does not always use his magic for good. Instead, he uses his ability to take more power and control of people in his life.
Although extremely rare, there are a few cases where readers witness Prospero’s magic used for good. An example of this shown when Prospero stated, “The direful spectacle of the wreck, which touched the very virtue of compassion in thee, I have with such provision in mine art so safely ordered that there is no soul— no, not so much perdition as an hair, Betide to any creature in the vessel” (1.2.33-38) Though it may not seem like Prospero was doing good with his magic, he was actually quite careful to ensure everyone aboard the ship was safe. This example shows that his intentions can be good, even if he does contain absolute
…show more content…
Locke 's ultimate argument is about how people are equal and contain “natural rights” within a “state of nature” in which they can live truly free. In the state of nature, natural law rules behavior, and everyone has the right to execute that law against anyone who wrongs him or her by infringing his or her rights. (Locke) Locke claims, “The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it” (9) and believes it “obliges everyone.” (9) He determines that people will ultimately take only what they truly need from the earth. He imagines people will probably begin to trade any of their additional goods with one another until a common currency is

Related Documents