William Shakespeare’s King Lear is a tragedy in which all principles of ethics and morality are attacked: the loyal are exiled, children betray their parents, the elderly are tortured, and sibling murders sibling. The play details the stories of two fathers, Lear and Gloucester, who foolishly banish their loyal children in favor of their ruthless and treacherous offspring, who in turn exploit their fathers’ fallibilities. The chaos that ensues ravages the lives of Lear and Gloucester. Their stories arc together and ultimately meet tragic ends, however, not without hints of redemption. Shakespeare intentionally structures narrative parallels between the stories of Lear and Gloucester, as well as their children, to complement each other and strengthen …show more content…
Goneril professes she loves her father “more than words can wield,” and Regan declares she “alone is felicitate/ [i]n your dear Highness’ love” (I.i.57,77-78). Cordelia refuses to flatter her father with such empty words and ridiculous exaggerations. Instead, she states that she loves him “according to [her] bond, no more nor less” and that she will “obey [him], love [him], and most honor [him]” as is fitting of a daughter (I.i.95,99-100). Unfortunately, Lear mistakes Cordelia’s modesty for disloyalty. Unappeased and furious, Lear orders Cordelia to get “hence, and avoid [his] sight” (I.i.126). Kent, however, recognizes authenticity of Cordelia’s love and the hypocrisy of her sisters. He functions as a voice of reason in this moment and counsels Lear to “[s]ee better,” imploring him to look past his pride (I.i.160). Lear responds as a petulant child might, by exiling Kent as well. Lear’s ego renders him incapable of acknowledging the wisdom of Kent’s advice and from discerning the genuine love his daughter Cordelia has for him from the blatant insincerity of her two devious sisters, Regan and Goneril. Lear casts reason aside to satiate his ego, revealing his human frailty. Without reason as a guide, Lear unsurprisingly lacks the foresight to predict what will inevitably come next, …show more content…
With only a fake letter and a bit of acting, Edmund manipulates Gloucester into believing Edgar is plotting to kill him. By nature, Gloucester “is so far from doing harms/ [t]hat he suspects none,” so he is unable to recognize Edmund’s deceit (I.ii.162-163). However, without any concrete proof of Edgar’s treachery, Gloucester rashly declares him to be an “unnatural, detested, brutish villain” (I.ii.74). Like Lear, Gloucester pays far too much attention to the superficial aspects of appearances. It is perhaps because of this flaw that soon after condemning Edgar, he fails to recognize him as the beggar, Poor Tom. Gloucester’s naïveté is truly astounding. He does not even question Edmund’s loyalty after learning that his other trusted son had supposedly betrayed him. If Gloucester truly trusted Edgar, surely he would have given him the benefit of the doubt before declaring him a villain. However, he does not. Gloucester’s gullibility makes him a slave to his emotions, particularly fear and anger. These emotions clouds Gloucester’s judgement and reveal another human frailty, the common inability to perceive the truth when emotionally involved in a
As Edgar takes the role of a "spirit" (3.4.39), he reveals: (1) Edmund's moral condition, by prescribing moral laws that he will break (3.4.80-83); and (2) that Gloucester will be blinded by Edmund (3.4.117). This essay will begin by examining how Edgar's role, as an outcast feigning madness, resembles the life and fate of King Lear, and then will show how his role as a spirit, reveals future events that will come to pass. Edgar's role, as an outcast and madman, corresponds to King Lear in four ways: (1) they both are deceived by family. Edgar is deceived by his half brother, and King Lear is deceived by two of his daughters. Edgar babbles about how Edmund deceived him: "Who gives anything to Poor Tom?"
Edmund’s discontent with the notion of bastardy is brought up furthermore in his soliloquy at the beginning of scene two: “Thou, nature, art my goddess. To thy law/ My services are bound. Wherefore should I/ Stand in the plague of custom…” (II.1-3). The notion of bastardy in Lear pushes Edmund to place his faith in his born traits as opposed to the system that has labeled him an outsider his whole life. He believes he is equal to his brother in every way—his mind and shape as true—and the only reason he is not aloud to prosper is because of a preconceived idea of the ideal child. Inevitably, Edmund wants to rebel against the system that has stifled him for so long. Gloucester is primarily responsible for Edmund’s actions because he in no way raised him equal to Edgar. Edmund’s goal to usurp his brother and earn the power he believes he deserves is due to the notion of bastardy in the play; Edmund questions “why brand they us with ‘base, base bastardy’” in his first soliloquy (II.10) . After all, even Kent attested to his fine demeanour. But, the steadfast notion of bastardy at the time drove Edmund to the point of betrayal because there was no hope for him in playing by the rules as they are fundamentally opposed to a bastard’s prosperity. With this soliloquy, Edmund positions himself as the more disserving
Two powerful characters in the play, aging King Lear and the gullible Earl of Gloucester, both betrayed their children unintentionally. Firstly, characters are betrayed due to family assumption. Lear banished his youngest daughter Cordelia because he over estimated how much she loved him. When questioned by her father, she responds with, "I love your Majesty / According to my bond, no more nor less." (I,i, 94-95) Lear assumed that since Cordelia was his daughter, she had to love him in a certain way, but he took this new knowledge and banished her without further thought. Secondly, characters were betrayed because of class. Edmund, the first-born son in the Gloucester family, should have been his father's next of kin. He would have been able to take over the position of Earl upon his father's death if he did not hold the title of a legitimate bastard. In his first soliloquy he says, "Why Bastard? Wherefore base? / When my dimensions are as well compact/ my mind as generous, and my shape as true " (I,ii, 6-8) Edmund believes he is at least equal, if not more, to his father in body and in mind, but the title that his father regrettably gave to him still lingers. Lastly, characters were betrayed because of family trust. Gloucester trusted his son Edmund when he was told that his other son was trying to kill him. Upon reading the forged letter written by Edmund, he responded with, "O villain, villain! His very opinion in the letter! Go, sirrah, seek him." (I,ii,75-77) Gloucester inadvertently betrayed Edgar because he held so much trust in his one son that he was easily persuaded to lose all trust in his other one. These blind characters were unfortunately betrayed there children, but they did it unintentionally and will eventually see there wrong doings.
Gloucester and Lear, create their eventual downfalls due to their inability to read deceit. Though these characters share the same tragic flaw, the means by which they make their errors is completely different. Gloucester remains a poor reader because he is quick to believe his sense of sight. When his illegitimate son, Edmund, reveals a deceitful letter designed to incriminate Edgar, Gloucester is quick to believe him. “Abominable villain”(1.2.74) he cries out before he even examines the letter with his reading glasses. Edmund’s trickery is conducted cleverly, but Gloucester’s lack of disbelief is unexplainable.
The tragedy King Lear by William Shakespeare ought to be seen as a lesson on what not to do as a parent. By picking favorites, King Lear and the Earl of Gloucester leave a lasting impact on their children 's psyche, ultimately leading to them committing horrible crimes. The rash judgments, violent reactions, and blindness of both Lear and Gloucester lead to both their and their children 's demise. As a result, all of the father-child relationships in the play begin to collapse.
It is noteworthy that none of the truly evil characters in the drama have yet taken a conscious initiative. Up to this point everything centers around the interaction of Lear, Cordelia and Kent and all the terrible sufferings which follow have their source in this encounter. To rightly comprehend King Lear, we must see the true significance of the court and the direct relationship between it and the tragedy that follows. We must discover the source of the great intensity and direction which finds expression in the action of the drama, and carries it to its inexorable conclusion.
These classic tropes are inverted in King Lear, producing a situation in which those with healthy eyes are ignorant of what is going on around them, and those without vision appear to "see" the clearest. While Lear's "blindness" is one which is metaphorical, the blindness of Gloucester, who carries the parallel plot of the play, is literal. Nevertheless, both characters suffer from an inability to see the true nature of their children, an ability only gained once the two patriarchs have plummeted to the utter depths of depravity. Through a close reading of the text, I will argue that Shakespeare employs the plot of Gloucester to explicate Lear's plot, and, in effect, contextualizes Lear's metaphorical blindness with Gloucester's physical loss of vision.
In Shakespeare's “King Lear”, the tragic hero is brought down, like all tragic heroes, by one fatal flaw; in this case it is pride, as well as foolishness. It is the King's arrogant demand for absolute love and, what's more, protestations of such from the daughter who truly loves him the most, that sets the stage for his downfall. Cordelia, can be seen as Lear’s one true love, and her love and loyalty go not only beyond that of her sisters but beyond words, thus enraging the proud King Lear whose response is: "Let pride, which she calls plainness, marry her". Here, Lear's pride is emphasized as he indulges in the common trend of despising in others what one is most embarrassed of oneself.
Therefore, if the sane characters commit foolish actions, obeying the same paradox, the implications are that Tom o’Bedlam and the fool have to be wise. The role of the fool in the play is to remind Lear of his foolish behaviour in giving everything to his two daughters and in banishing Cordelia. The audience can get much insight in the words of the fool. This was not new to the Elizabethan audience as it was a theatrical convention that the fool would speak the truth. Likewise is poor Tom o’Bedlam (Edgar in disguise). In him Lear finds reason and calls him philosopher.
Thus, then leading Gloucester to the loss of parental knowledge and understanding towards his own two sons. Alike King Lear, Gloucester too struggles with the identification of his children. Through his lack of communication between both Edmund and Edgar, Gloucester is unable to personify who and what his sons stand for as a person. This then disables him to realize that Edmund is the true cold-hearted son, while Edgar is the good son who has stood by his side till death. Further on, when too late, once losing his vey two eyes Gloucester begins to realize that when having sight, he was mentally blind. Gloucester was unable to see the truth behind his own sons, but now, not having sight he is able to see the truth that Edgar is the innocent child. This is proven when Gloucester speaks “I have no way, and therefore want no eyes;/ I stumbled when I saw. Full oft’tis seen/ Prove our commodities. O dear son Edgar,/ The food of thy abused father’s wrath;/ Might I but live to see thee in my touch,/ I’d say I had eyes again!”
In the first part of the play Gloucester receives a letter from Edmond, his bastard son, as the first plot towards the down fall of his father, Gloucester. In the BBC version Gloucester seems to be somewhere in his seventies, where in the PBS version Gloucester seems to be in his sixties a much younger man. This letter makes Gloucester believe that his ligament son has betrayed him, which makes Gloucester very angry and hurt because he loved his son. This just seems to take a lot out of him. As the play continues, Gloucester serves the King with everything he has in him. When the King goes mad, due to his daughters betraying him, Gloucester shows his loyalty to the King by taking him to safety. Oswald is the one who conveyed the message, that Gloucester hid the King from his daughters. Due to this Reagan and the Duke of Cornwall (her husband) declares Gloucester a traitor. Reagan sends for Gloucester and they bring him in to face his accusers. Gloucester faces Reagan and the Duke when he is charged with treason. Gloucester says I would rather be blind rather than to see how his daughters are treating their father. Of course I am paraphrasing the exact statement. The exact statement goes like this “Because I would not see thy cruel nails Pluck out hi...
He is the rejected illegitimate son of Gloucester, who only cares for his own blood-son Edgar. Edmund, in the beginning of Act 1, casts an illusion that his stepbrother Edgar is trying to kill their father. “If our father would sleep till I waked him, you should enjoy half his revenue for ever, and live the beloved of your brother.” (1.2.52-4) Edmund writes a letter to himself forging his brother 's signature to make it seem like it came from Edger. Edmund reveals the letter to their father Gloucester causing him to get angry at Edgar. Edmund also convinces Edgar to flee the kingdom because their father is angry at him “My father watches. O sir, fly this place! / Intelligence is given where you are hid”(2.1.20-1). Edmund is trying to cast an illusion of being the good loyal son, while in reality he is trying to take over their father 's wealth. Edmund is the evil son. In addition, Edmund shows his true form of evil madness when he betrays his own father and tells Cornwall about the letter Gloucester gave him to hide, the letter that proves Gloucester 's allegiance to King Lear and the invasion of the French army. “How malicious is my fortune that I must represent / to be just! This is the letter he spoke of, which approves him an intelligent party to the advantages of France.” (3.5.7-10) Edmund is power hungry and will do anything to get the power he thinks he deserves, even if
...not truly be seen with the eye, but with the heart. The physical world that the eye can detect can accordingly hide its evils with physical attributes, and thus clear vision cannot result from the eye alone. Lear's downfall was a result of his failure to comprehend that appearances do not always represent reality. Gloucester avoided a similar demise by learning the relationship between appearance and reality. If Lear had learned to look with more than just his eyes before the end, he might have avoided this tragedy. These two tragic stories unfolding at the same time gave the play a great eminence.
Literature often provides an avenue for instruction on the human condition, and King Lear is no different. Perhaps the most important take away from King Lear, is the concept of recognizing true loyalty. The downfall of the play’s protagonists stems from the inability of leaders to recognize loyalty, and to be fooled by flattery. King Lear’s sin of preferring sweet lies is one that begins the entire play, with his inability to reconcile his favorite daughter’s refusal to flatter him. It is made clear that Cordelia does indeed love her father, but she refuses to exaggerate that love: “Unhappy that I am, I cannot heave/my heart into my mouth. I love your Majesty/ according to my bond, no more nor less” (2.2.100-102). Cordelia’s declaration is an honest one, but doesn’t venture into the realm of exaggeration. However, it is made clear that King Lear desires flattery not truth, as demonstrated by his demand that Cordelia “mend her speech a little” (1.1.103). Gloucester parallels King Lear in placing his faith in the wrong child. Thus, a common motif of blindness to truth emerges. The truth is something one should seek for themselves, and to recklessly doubt those who are loved without hearing them out is foolish. This idea expressed in King Lear is timeless, and thus is relevant even in the modern
King Lear and Gloucester are the two older characters that endure the most in the play King Lear by William Shakespeare. Throughout the play their stories foreshadow the events that will occur in the other’s life. However, while Gloucester goes blind, Lear goes mad. In doing this Shakespeare is indicating congruence between the two conditions. Only after they lose their faculties can Lear and Gloucester recognize that their blindness to honesty had cost them dearly.