Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The analysis of character in king lear
An essay on the tragedy of king lear
The importance of nothing in king lear
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The analysis of character in king lear
In our world, there are people like the woman who yells at her children and disciplines them with physical punishment, but also the boy who talks to the student that always sits alone at the lunch table and is socially different than others. Some people may lead a life based upon universally established morals, while others tend to let out a side of their being that is more beastly than human. Humans have the ability to make choices based on reason, while the animals of the earth have only the capacity to choose the best option for their own survival. Human reasoning, both gracious and grave is witnessed in the words of William Shakespeare’s play, The Tragedy of King Lear. Through both provocative and seemingly angelic characters, Shakespeare communicates to the audience that humans are born with the capacity to emerge from their simple selfish instincts based on survival and grow in both moral and social conduct. A pattern of references to ‘nothing’, to foolishness versus wisdom, and to animal imagery explore this message along with the characters exhibiting virtue or debauchery.
Unaccomadation to most is the idea of the absence of physical possession, but throughout the play, its true meaning can be interpreted as the void of strong benevolence in character and a more savage personality. King Lear demonstrates his ignorance to what the concept of nothing is when twice he mentions that nothing will come of nothing in terms of a person’s wealth and status. Subsequently, Lear learns through testing situations that his growth of substance does not come from selfish indulgences like keeping the company of one hundred knights, but from the honour and faith
that he manifests through his actions. Pertaining to substance, Lear desc...
... middle of paper ...
...as to animals. Accordingly, all of humanity is called to look upon their own lives to determine whether or not animal instinctiveness has swayed the course of their existence. It is apparent that the promotion of enhancing the self appears in western society through the media presented. The challenge of living in this part of the world is to notice that fully accepting the lifestyle that appears appealing, but can be exceedingly empty, is just another way of giving in to the instincts of the scavenger within. As the scavenger hunts to sustain itself rather than collaborating, the world that could have looked much brighter has now crumbled to its base. The missing component in this formula for goodness is genuine human love for all of creation.
Works Cited
Shakespeare, William, and Kenneth Roy. King Lear. Toronto: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Canada, 1990.
Gonorill. Regan. Cordelia. Those names should ring a bell if you have ever read or seen “The Tragedy of King Lear.” The plot behind this play revolves around King Lear’s relationships with each of these three characters; his daughters. King Lear has a different relationship with each of them. Gonorill, Regan and Cordelia all have very distinct personalities. In this play, King Lear decided it was time to give up and divide his kingdom amongst Gonorill, Regan and Cordelia. He determined who got what based off of their love for him. Each daughter was asked to express their love for their father but, only Gonorill and Regan end up with portions of King Lear’s kingdom.
In Chapter 4 of a book titled Escape from Freedom, the famous American psychologist Erich Fromm wrote that "Greed is a bottomless pit which exhausts the person in an endless effort to satisfy the need without ever reaching satisfaction" (Fromm 98). Fromm realized that avarice is one of the most powerful emotions that a person can feel, but, by its very nature, is an emotion or driving force that can never be satisfied. For, once someone obtains a certain goal, that person is not satisfied and continues to strive for more and more until that quest leads to their ultimate destruction. For this reason, authors have embraced the idea of greed in the creation of hundreds of characters in thousands of novels. Almost every author has written a work centered around a character full of avarice. Ian Fleming's Mr. Goldfinger, Charles Dickens' Scrooge, and Thomas Hardy's John D'Urberville are only a few examples of this attraction. But, perhaps one of the best examples of this is found in William Shakespeare's King Lear. Edmund, through his speech, actions, and relationships with other characters, becomes a character consumed with greed to the point that nothing else matters except for the never-ending quest for status and material possessions.
In Shakespeare story King Lear, two of the women were portrayed as emasculating and disloyal while the third was honest and truthful. Showing, that most women who have power can’t be trusted. The story told of a king named Lear who had three daughters named Goneril, Regan, and Cordelia. Lear had given his two oldest daughters Goneril, and Regan a piece of land even though they had lied to their father telling him feelings that they didn’t really have. Then there was his youngest daughter she was as honest and truthful as any other child could be.
King Lear is often regarded as one of Shakespeare’s finest pieces of literature. One reason this is true is because Shakespeare singlehandedly shows the reader what the human condition looks like as the play unfolds. Shakespeare lets the reader watch this develop in Lear’s own decisions and search for the purpose of life while unable to escape his solitude and ultimately his own death. Examining the philosophies Shakespeare embeds into the language and actions of King Lear allows the reader a better understanding of the play and why the play is important to life today.
Shakespeare’s treatment of illegitimacy in the play King Lear can be interpreted in many ways depending on the audience. The situation of illegitimacy is portrayed through the relationships of the characters the Earl Of Gloucester and his two sons Edgar and Edmund. Edmund is the illegitimate son while Edgar was born within the law. We learn of Edmund’s illegitimacy in the opening scene in the first act where The Earl of Gloucester is holding a conversation with Kent while Edmund is nearby. Gloucester speaks flippantly and lightly of the way his illegitimate son came into the world while introducing him to Kent saying, “ Though this knave came something saucily into the world before he was sent for, yet his mother was fair, there was good sport at his making, and the whoreson must be acknowledged” (Act I, Scene I, Lines 19-24). There are several peculiar things about this dialogue. One of the interesting aspects of Gloucester and Kent’s discussion is the readiness of Gloucester to admit he has fathered a child out of wedlock. This may be influenced by the fact that Edmund had obviously grown into a son that a father would be proud to have. At first meeting he seems polite, courteous, and loyal. Perhaps these admirable character traits are cause for Gloucester’s willingness to publicly claim Edmund as his own. Another unusual occurrence in the opening dialogue is that Gloucester calls Edmund a whoreson and a knave while he is close by and probably in hearing distance. This seems odd because Gloucester professes to feel only love for his son and no shame but he seems to almost mock him in this situation. One explanation for this behavior may be that deep down Gloucester still harbors some discomfort about the relationship between himself and his son despite his verbal proclamations of shamelessness. This could be inferred from Gloucester’s statement, “ His breeding, sir, hath been at my charge. I have so often blushed to acknowledge him that now I am brazed to ‘t.” (Act I, Scene I, Line 9). Again, depending on the audience the attitudes displayed in the play by the characters and Shakespeare himself by his writing can be interpreted in a variety of ways depending on the observer.
The human condition is the scrutiny of art, Prince Hamlet notes the purpose of art is to hold the mirror against nature. King Lear is a masterful inquiry into the human condition. King Lear is confronted with existence in its barest sense and is forced to adapt to that existence. His adaptation to the absurd provides an invaluable insight for all into the universal problem of existence. Lear is forced into an existential progression that will be traced with the phenomenon of consciousness; the result of this progression is seen ironically in that Lear finds satisfaction in despair.
In "East Coker," T. S. Eliot pleads "Do not let me hear / Of the wisdom of old men, but rather of their folly…." (Eliot 185) The folly of old men must surely be a central trope in any discussion of Shakespeare's imposing tragic accomplishment, King Lear. Traditional interpretations of the play, drawing on the classical Aristotelian theory of tragedy, have tended to view Lear's act of blind folly as hamartia, precipitating the disintegration of human society. In the ensuing crisis, "the basic ties of nature fall apart to reveal a chaos where humanity 'must prey on itself like monsters of the deep.'" and "evil is immanent and overflows from the smallest breach of nature." (Mercer 252) Modernist interpretations have given this scenario an existential spin, treating Lear as a representative of Man, lost in a nihilistic universe. Thus Joyce Carol Oats writes that "the drama's few survivors experience [the conclusion] as in 'image' of the horror of the Apocalypse, that is, an anticipation of the end of the world." She concludes that "we are left with no more than a minimal stoicism…. For what purpose?--to turn the wheel full circle, it would seem, back to the primary zero, the nothing that is an underlying horror or promise throughout." (Oats 215)
In King Lear by William Shakespeare, Shakespeare recounts the tragedy of King Lear as he fails to acknowledge his tragic flaw and thus falls into tragedy and unintentionally brings others with him. Throughout the play, tragedy befalls undeserving people and they suffer greatly even though they have not done anything to deserve their suffering. Although Gloucester, Edgar, and Cordelia all live happy lives at the beginning of the play, they experience great suffering despite their inner goodness, a fact that highlights Shakespeare’s belief about the blindness of a justice that does not necessarily strike only the wicked.
Through Lear, Shakespeare expertly portrays the inevitability of human suffering. The “little nothings,” seemingly insignificant choices that Lear makes over the course of the play, inevitably evolve into unstoppable forces that change Lear’s life for the worse. He falls for Goneril’s and Regan’s flattery and his pride turns him away from Cordelia’s unembellished affection. He is constantly advised by Kent and the Fool to avoid such choices, but his stubborn hubris prevents him from seeing the wisdom hidden in the Fool’s words: “Prithee, tell him, so much the rent of his land comes to: he will not believe a fool” (Shakespeare 21). This leads to Lear’s eventual “unburdening,” as foreshadowed in Act I. This unburdening is exacerbated by his failure to recognize and learn from his initial mistakes until it is too late. Lear’s lack of recognition is, in part, explained by his belief in a predestined life controlled completely by the gods: “It is the stars, the stars above us govern our conditions” (Shakespeare 101). The elder characters in King Lear pin their various sufferings on the will of...
Perhaps deep-seeded in the flesh that is humankind, lies a poison, villous and infected, whose venom devastates that which is humanity. Indeed, it is a serpent, reducing its victim’s soul to a pathetic shamble of indignity and wrath. Gently caressing its prey’s bones, it slithers here and there, clenching and compressing, ignoring any pleas for mercy. Gradually, it tightens, smothering and slaughtering the purity of human. Indecency plays no mind for the serpent, for it does not act from courage, but rather for authority. Truly, evil has taken the body that once was. Corruption of the mind and soul, however, does not stand unchallenged. Indeed, and quite possibly the miracle that is as equally a part of humankind, stands a fender of evil: There stands conscience. A concrete state of the mind that demands attention; conscience makes room for a moral compass, fighting the powers of inner-barbarity. Conscience may in fact be the humanizing factor, as it makes room for choice. Quite evidently, human would crumble without the freewill that is choice. It tempts us with morality and the freedom of benevolence, while reminding us of the serpent, praying patiently, waiting to strike. This curious balance of wickedness and conscience is no new concept to humankind. As creatures infatuated by our own existence, humans crave knowledge of our own reality. Consequently, countless magnificent literary pieces have been devoted to the study of actuality; most recognizably Shakespeare’s sixteenth century play Hamlet. The play cements itself as a fundamental and relevant piece of literary work in modern study because of its enticing themes, strong entertainment value and intricate characterization. At large, the play draws insight into the depths of...
King Lear is a play about a tragic hero, by the name of King Lear, whose flaws get the best of him. A tragic hero must possess three qualities. The first is they must have power, in other words, a leader. King Lear has the highest rank of any leader. He is a king. The next quality is they must have a tragic flaw, and King Lear has several of those. Finally, they must experience a downfall. Lear's realization of his mistakes is more than a downfall. It is a tragedy. Lear is a tragic hero because he has those three qualities. His flaws are his arrogance, his ignorance, and his misjudgments, each contributing to the other.
Through the assistance of nature, Shakespeare tells of how humans are neither good, nor evil. Elements of the natural world, such as Mother Nature and the animal kingdom, are petitioned in the characters’ speech, as they use their different ideals of what nature is in order to rationalize their actions. In example, Lear sees himself as controller of t...
Absolute in every child’s mind is the belief that they are right, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Until children grow up to raise children own their own, a parent’s disputation only inflates that desire to prove. Part and parcel to this, as one may find out through personal experience or by extension, cruelty towards parents is a reflection of a child’s own inadequacy (whether in large or small scale). In this sense, King Lear is a story of children with a desire to break past their hierarchal status. Whether it is the belief that a woman shall take a husband, and with that guard her inherited land, or what role bastards truly deserves in a society that preemptively condemns them. Cruelty at the hands of children accounts for almost
Shakespeare's King Lear is a play which shows the consequences of one man's decisions. The audience follows the main character, Lear, as he makes decisions that disrupt order in his Kingdom. When Lear surrenders all his power and land to his daughters as a reward for their demonstration of love towards him, the breakdown on order in evident. Lear's first mistake is to divide his Kingdom into three parts. A Kingdom is run best under one ruler as only one decision is made without contradiction. Another indication that order is disrupted is the separation of Lear's family. Lear's inability to control his anger causes him to banish his youngest daughter, Cordelia, and loyal servant, Kent. This foolish act causes Lear to become vulnerable to his other two daughters as they conspire against him. Lastly, the transfer of power from Lear to his eldest and middle daughter, Goneril and Regan, reveals disorder as a result of the division of the Kingdom. A Kingdom without order is a Kingdom in chaos. When order is disrupted in King Lear, the audience witnesses chaotic events that Lear endures, eventually learning who truly loves him.
King Lear, by William Shakespeare, is a tragic tale of filial conflict, personal transformation, and loss. The story revolves around the King who foolishly alienates his only truly devoted daughter and realizes too late the true nature of his other two daughters. A major subplot involves the illegitimate son of Gloucester, Edmund, who plans to discredit his brother Edgar and betray their father. With these and other major characters in the play, Shakespeare clearly asserts that human nature is either entirely good, or entirely evil. Some characters experience a transformative phase, where, by some trial or ordeal, their nature is profoundly changed. We shall examine Shakespeare's stand on human nature in King Lear by looking at specific characters in the play, Cordelia who is wholly good, Edmund who is wholly evil, and Lear whose nature is transformed by the realization of his folly and his descent into madness.