That's a Wrap, People

It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

So Macbeth ends with Malcolm blabbering on about things that will happen in the future. We really don't know much about Malcolm... so why would Shakespeare end the play with Malcolm talking? And how come Macbeth didn't get a more dramatic death scene?

I suppose Macbeth had some noble last words: "Let him be damned who first cries, 'Hold, enough!'" ... but all that it said in the stage directions was "Macbeth slain." I think Shakespeare wanted us to see that in the end, Macbeth WAS only human. And he got what he deserved for putting his trust in evil things; he put his hopes in people who told him what he wanted to hear, regardless of whether or not it would actually come true. So his death should not have been "special" in any way - he was killed at another's sword, just like he killed so many others with his own.

And to come back to Malcolm... Shakespeare always has to have some kind of clean conclusion, I think. He never ends with just a death or just a marriage; he needs to have someone stand there and give a short speech that wraps things up for good and shows the reader that all the loose ends have been tied up neatly. In this case, he puts that job in the hands of Malcolm, in whose speech we can see that Scotland is on the right track to becoming the land it was before this whole murdering spree fiasco. His speech thus not only provides a typical Shakespearean conclusion to a story full of conflict, but it presents a contrast in its predictions of what will come, which show a once-again pure Scotland - but I wonder how long that will last?

A final something of note - the father-son relationships of the play stood out as quite significant, and especially the lead character's LACK of one. Banquo was evidently close to his son, Fleance, who presumably set out to avenge his father after he escaped Tweedledum and Tweedledee (and Tweedlethree). Young Siward nobly dies while fighting for/with his father. And Malcolm sets out to get the crown back into his father's line, although admittedly neither he nor his brother show any signs of having had any affection for their father after his death. But still, all these father-son relationships juxtaposed against Macbeth's nonexistent children and fatherhood tell me that maybe things would have been different if Macbeth had had a son too, for whom he could have been an example and because of whom he could have been a better person... oh well.