Significant connection question between Ozymandias and Macbeth.

Between Ozymandias and Macbeth, there is a similarity in the way they both tell the tale of a king who believes they are great, only to fall into nothing. They both can be described as “hubris.” They can explain why even the greatest of us are in fact worth nothing at all in the long run.
Ozymandias was a great king, he even described himself as “king of kings”, as if he believed himself to be greater than every other king alive, or dead. But then after a short few hundred years, his entire empire was a desert. “Round the decay Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare The lone and level sands stretch far away.” Ozymandias believed himself to be so great, but in the end everything he had built just disappeared. Clear proof as to why even the “king of kings” will become nothing in the end.
The connection between them both is how stupid hubris is; that everything you do will dissolve into nothing in the end.
Macbeth from the play “Macbeth” was a thane who decided he would be king. And after becoming king, he decided he would be immortal. And after he believed he was immortal, he went out into the middle of a siege on his own impenetrable castle and died. For all his talk about immortality, and all his arrogance about how he can’t die, it all came to nothing. After he was killed, a full 8 more kings came in before even a play was written about him, and that play was a work of fiction. That is all that is left of him. The only thing he can be proud of is that he did a better job of staying recognised than Ozymandias. Here is a quote to show the reason why he has this hubris:”For none of woman born Shall harm Macbeth.” He believes, based on this quote that he can’t die. Or at least, no one can kill him. This came to nothing however, as he ends up being killed by Macduff, who under a technicality can bypass the rule. This is yet more proof that having hubris is a bad idea, and that his entire life came to an end after achieving nothing in the long run. Well, except being the main character in a play written by one of the most famous playwrights to have ever existed. But even that will disappear soon enough.
In conclusion, the idea of hubris is illogical, and these 2 people show how that is so.

Respond now!