Importance of Nothing in William Shakespeare's King Lear
The Tragedy of King Lear has many important themes. One major theme concerns "nothing." The main focus around the discussion of "nothing" is that "nothing" is a many things. Nothing is what binds everything.
The first mention of "nothing" is when King Lear asks his daughters to profess how much they love him. The eldest daughters shower compliments upon him tickling his ears. Yet the Lear's favorite daughter Cordelia will only speak the truth. When asked what she can say to gain her a portion of land better than her sisters, she replies, "Nothing, my Lord" (1.1. ) He exclaims, "Nothing!" (1.1. ) and she responds, "Nothing" (1.1. ). Lear's answers, "Nothing will come of nothing" (1.1. ) As he voices this, he has made something of nothing. Lear takes offense in a true and honest answer. Cordelia's "nothing" will blossom into something tremendous. This is the cause of Kent's banishment and her hasty marriage to the Prince of France.
In 1.4, the Fool rattles off a teaching to Lear. Kent (in disguise) says his spee...
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...
Lear's dialogue with Cordelia on "nothing" introduces yet another theme in the play's imagery, echoing, among other scenes, some of his later conversations with the Fool (I.iv.130 "Can you make no use of nothing, nuncle?") and others. Indeed, King Lear is, in many ways, about "nothing." Regan and Goneril seem to offer much in the beginning, but after whittling down the number of Lear's knights, they leave him with nothing, and in the end their "natural" affection comes to nothing as well. Lear is progressively brought to nothing, stripped of everything -- kingdom, knights, dignity, sanity, clothes, his last loving daughter, and finally life itself.
Shakespeare, William. "King Lear: A Conflated Text." The Norton Shakespeare. Ed. Stephen Greenblatt. New York:
The play of "King Lear" is about a search for personal identity. In the historical period in which this play is set, the social structure was set in order of things closest to Heaven. Therefore, on Earth, the king was at the top, followed by his noblemen and going all the way down to the basest of objects such as rocks and dirt. This structure was set up by the people, and by going by the premise that anything that is man made is imperfect, this system cannot exist for long without conflict.
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.
In The Tragedy of King Lear, particularly in the first half of the play, Lear continually swears to the gods. He invokes them for mercies and begs them for destruction; he binds both his oaths and his curses with their names. The older characters—Lear and Gloucester—tend view their world as strictly within the moral framework of the pagan religion. As Lear expresses it, the central core of his religion lies in the idea of earthly justice. In II.4.14-15, Lear expresses his disbelief that Regan and Albany would have put the disguised Kent, his messenger, in stocks. He at first attempts to deny the rather obvious fact in front of him, objecting “No” twice before swearing it. By the time Lear invokes the king of the pagan gods, his refusal to believe has become willful and almost absurd. Kent replies, not without sarcasm, by affixing the name of the queen of the gods to a contradictory statement. The formula is turned into nonsense by its repetition. In contradicting Lear’s oath as well as the assertion with which it is coupled, Kent is subtly challenging Lear’s conception of the universe as controlled by just gods. He is also and perhaps more importantly, challenging Lear’s relationship with the gods. It is Kent who most lucidly and repeatedly opposes the ideas put forth by Lear; his actions as well as his statements undermine Lear’s hypotheses about divine order. Lear does not find his foil in youth but in middle age; not in the opposite excess of his own—Edmund’s calculation, say—but in Kent’s comparative moderation. Likewise the viable alternative to his relationship to divine justice is not shown by Edmund with his ...
King Lear is a perfect demonstration of the great consequences one man's actions can cause. While there are certainly religious Christian elements to the story, the story is not one of morality or hope. King Lear is a lesson, making an example of what can come of a single, foolish, egotistical action. King Lear's action is the surrendering of his throne to his daughters.
When Lear tells Gloucester “A man may see how this world /goes with no eyes” (4.6.146-47) he displays both of their misfortunes, but it is too late to prevent ultimate tragedy. Shakespeare proposes that their tragic saga is a mere game to the heavens. “As flies to wanton boys, are we to th’ gods,/They kill us for their sport” (4.1.37-38). This line generalizes the overall simplicity behind the tragedy of King Lear. Even though Gloucester and Lear made terrible, fatal errors the reader feels at the end as if it is intended to be their destiny.
After Kent delightfully brings the two together and Lear realizes who he is talking to, he begs for forgiveness: “Pray, do not mock me. / I am a very foolish fond old man, / Fourscore and upward, not an hour more nor less /....Do not laugh at me, / For as I am a man, I think this lady / To be my child Cordelia.“ (IV.vii.68-79). Lear has finally achieved self-awareness regarding his mistaken banishment of Cordelia, and proclaims to her in a surprising display of humility that he is just a “foolish fond old man.” Shocking the audience, Lear does not hold back his newfound sense of shame. He goes on: “Be your tears wet? Yes, faith. I pray, weep not. If you have poison for me, I will drink it. I know you do not love me, for your sisters Have, as I do remember, done me wrong. You have some cause; they have not.” (IV.vii.81-85). In another case of both humility and misjudgment, Lear believes that Cordelia no longer loves him due to his mistakes. Lear could not be more wrong because Cordelia 's love for her father is unconditional and still lives. Cordelia virtuously accepts his apology and assures him “No, sir, you must not kneel,” (IV.vii.67). Although the two do not live much longer, Lear intends to live out the rest of their lives being the best a father can
Quite literally, the term “nothing” tends to not hold any value to us. But Shakespeare’s King Lear, offers a contrasting interpretation of the concept of “nothingness.” Shakespeare uses the imagery of emptiness to represent the inherent value of absolutely nothing, as characters are reduced to destitution and great loss to realize the true meaning of humanity. The use of the term “nothing” in the play, often refers to or prefaces a character’s complete loss of everything in their life, diminishing them to absolutely nothing. Ironically, this occurs when characters are so insecure about losing something, like wealth or power, that they reject the value of nothingness and, in doing so, end up losing everything. In Lear’s case, he loses not only
As mentioned earlier, there are certain requirements which must be met for a contract to be valid; requirements needed include agreement, consideration, contractual capacity and legality. For an agreement to be valid there must be an offer and acceptance present. In other words, there must be an intent known and understood for the contact to have an agreement. With that being said, there is no
Tragedies are dominated by contrasts and conflicts between various entities such as, good and evil, legitimate and illegitimate, appearance and reality and so on. Another contrast is between wisdom and foolishness. If one associates foolishness with madmen and fools one will be surprised to find that in a tragedy such as King Lear this is not the case. Shakespeare portrays, the sane characters such as Kent and Cordelia as fools by virtue of loyalty, love and their willingness to speak the truth. On the otherhand, the Madman, Tom o’Bedlam and the fool are depicted as the true figures of wisdom. Moreover mirroring all this is King Lear’s transition from foolish behaviour through madness achieving wisdom.
King Lear is a Shakespearian tragedy revolving largely around one central theme, personal transformation. Shakespeare shows in King Lear that the main characters of the play experience a transformative phase, where they are greatly changed through their suffering. Through the course of the play Lear is the most transformed of all the characters. He goes through seven major stages of transformation on his way to becoming an omniscient character: resentment, regret, recognition, acceptance and admittance, guilt, redemption, and optimism. Shakespeare identifies King Lear as a contemptuous human being who is purified through his suffering into some sort of god.
King Lear is a tragic playwritten by William Shakespeare. It is a play about the suffering of two families that are caught in a struggle of greed, lust, and cruelty which eventually results in extreme amounts of pain and destruction for all the characters. In King Lear, there is a circular relationship between the characters' behavior and nature. That is, the destruction of the two families results from human behavior breaking accepted laws of nature, and the disturbances in nature result from the disturbances in human behavior. Shakespeare portrays this theme by demonstrating the damage Lear and Edmund create when they break the laws of nature, and of course, nature itself in the form of the storm in King Lear.
The reader discovers Kent's willingness to protect his King in the first scene. After Lear has had his daughter's display their love in a pubic competition Kent tries to persuade him that Cordelia "does not love him least" and that Lear should think about banishing her. Kent is trying to protect the King from his emotions and the decision that they have led him to. But Lear does not listen and instead banishes Kent from the Kingdom. His banishment is a result of another emotional outburst on the part of the King. If Lear were to look rationally at his actions and what his daughters have said he would realize his folly. Instead he is enraged by Kent and thinks that he is challenging his authority.