Again, we have no way of proving this (or knowing that there were witches present, or that Shakespeare got his info from witches, or whatever story one wants to believe. Related is the assumption that witches of the time-in whatever form they did or didn't exist-could actually cast such a curse. Something like this is a proof by tautology: it is because it is. It's the same problem with questions on God or other deities: we can have faith and believe, but there is no scientific, empirical study or experiment that can be done to prove or disprove their existence. We have neither an observable phenomenon here nor a mechanism with which to understand it. To prove something does or doesn't exist, one must be able to point at an observable phenomenon and attribute it to a natural mechanism. There's a big presumption here, and it's that curses exist. It would be a huge time investment to disprove something that there's no scientific evidence of in the first place. And as far as I can tell ( and as far as Skeptoid can tell), it doesn't exist. It could theoretically be backed up statistically, by showing the proportion of Macbeth performances with issues compared to those without, and then by comparing that to the amount of other plays with issues to those without globally, but. but that's because it's not being put forth scientifically. Unfortunately, this can't really be backed up scientifically. Does this then prove that The Curse of Macbeth is true or false? So, my question is, is this document a hoax, or are there any studies or investigations into this that confirms its evidence. Royal Court Theatre, London, 1928 - during the first modern-dress production at the, a large set fell down, injuring some members of the cast seriously, and a fire broke out in the dress circle.1926 - Sybil Thorndike was almost strangled by a burly actor.Fortunately a doctor was in attendance, but the wound was supposedly rather serious. Barnes was engaged in a scene of swordplay with an actor named William Rignold when Barnes accidentally thrust his sword directly into Rignold's chest. 1882 - on the closing night of one production, an actor named J.Within a week, Lincoln himself was dead by a murderer's hand. The president was reading passages, which happened to follow the scene in which Duncan is assassinated, aloud to a party of friends.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |