The one that represent tradition in the face of change would be : Nathan.
Throughout the face of changes, nathan is the one that still held traditional value from all the character above.
He still insist on working hard on the land and really dissapointed when none of his children want to follow his footsteps.
I think that this is a very hard question to answer. I think that many kings, fictional or not, possess both the bad and good traits of being a king.
In regards to Macbeth, he certainly possessed the ambition many would wish for a king. He was brave, as noted by Duncan and the title of the Thane of Cawdor. He was protective, as noted by his murder of Banquo. Macbeth was even proud, as seen by his desire to keep the new title of Thane before taking the crown.
Unfortunately, many of the characteristics one would align with being a good king made Macbeth a bad king as well. Macbeth was too ambitious--as seen by his murdering Duncan. He was too protective--as seen by his inability to interpret the apparitions warnings in the correct way. Lastly, he was too proud--as seen by his refusal to leave the castle as Birnam Wood "moved" against him.
Like anything, one must always have control. Too much of anything normally turns out to be a bad thing. Therefore, depending upon one's individual views, Macbeth could be both a bad king or a good one.
BTW: It's free real estate.
Answer:
<u>(D) In casual conversation, people most readily admit to having a character flaw only when that admission causes them little psychological discomfort</u>.
Explanation:
An assumtion necessary to the argument is that is is possible that a person admit in front of another it's own flaws, when of course that flaw doesn't cause much discomfort in the person admiting it.
Either a or b. I don't know the story though but good luck.
