Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Shakespeares use of disguise in twelfth night
Shakespeares use of disguise in twelfth night
Madness as a theme in King Lear
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Shakespeares use of disguise in twelfth night
Edgar first assumes the disguise of Poor Tom as Lear and the Earl of Gloucester enter the cave in which Edgar is hiding. Since Edgar was banished, similar to Kent, who is also present later in this act, he must conjure up a disguise. Why does Edgar chose the repulsive beggar that Poor Tom is? Well, remember that Poor Tom represents the popular belief of the insane during the Elizabethan era. Therefore, he is the perfect disguise. No one would ever suspect Poor Tom of being Edgar, because Edgar is a very pleasant man, while Tom is completely repulsive. Furthermore, the reason Edgar chose this disguise is contained within his soliloquy as he is becoming Poor Tom:
Whiles I may 'scape,
I will preserve myself; and am bethought
To take the basest and most poorest shape
That ever penury, in contempt of man,
Brought near to beast; my face I'll grime with filth,
And with presented nakedness outface
The winds and persecutions of the sky.
The country gives me proof and precedent
Of Bedlam Beggars, who, with roaring voices,
Strike in their numb'd and mortified bare arms
Pins, wooden pricks, nails, sprigs of rosemary;
And with this horrible object, from low farms,
Poor pelting villages, sheep-cotes, ad mills,
Sometime with lunatic bans, sometime with prayers,
Engorece their charity. Poor Turlygod! poor Tom!
That's something yet: Edgar I nothing am.
(2,3,5-21)
According to William C. Carroll (1987), "Edgar's self-description follows the tradition closely, as he takes on the part with all it's theatrical implications-grimed face, presented nakedness, roaring voice- and disappears into 'nothing,' into Tom's body." Edgar chose this disguise with the intention of being someone so commonly known by the people that they would never suspect that the ...
... middle of paper ...
...LEAR. Retrieved March 30, 2014, from http://www.stjohns-chs.org/english/shakespeare/STUDENTPAPERS/JESS.html
Harvard University Library. (04, 23 09). Humoral theory. Retrieved from http://ocp.hul.harvard.edu/contagion/humoraltheory.html
Lewis, J. (2007, April 16). The Madness of Lear and Edgar. Chicago Literary Club. Retrieved March 30, 2014, from http://www.chilit.org/Papers%20by%20author/Lewis%20--%20Madness.htm
Moore, M. (1997, March 27). Selene.Selene. Retrieved March 30, 2014, from http://www.pantheon.org/articles/s/selene.html
Ottilingam, S. (1927, June 5). Tom O'Bedlam. National Center for Biotechnology Information. Retrieved March 29, 2014, from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2900000/
Pulido, E. (2010). The Transformation of the Protagonist’s Personality in the Tragedy of King Lear. Revista Electrónica Matices en Lenguas Extranjeras, 4, 22.
At the start of the novel, he was able to conclude that Clithero was the possible murderer of Waldegrave after eliminating the other servants. After all, Clithero "was an exception to the rule" by his level of education and emigrant status (Brown 14). However, Edgar 's reasoning abilities declined in the second half of the novel. When Edgar is fighting the Native Americans, he comes to the erroneous conclusion that his uncle and family were killed by the Native Americans. Sarsefield even asks Edgar, "what has filled you with these hideous prepossessions?" because his family are safe and alive (Brown 235). Edgar was unable to think clearly and come up with a better idea of what might have actually happened. His reasoning skills are no longer
- - -. "Protagonist in King Lear." Shmoop.com. Shmoop University, Inc, n.d. Web. 19 Jan. 2014. .
Harbage, Alfred. " King Lear: An Introduction." Shakespeare: The Tragedies: A Collection of Critical Essays.
Lear’s lack of personal identity becomes painfully clear when he criticizes Goneril and asks, “Does any here know me?” (I.iv. 231). Lear relies on external sources to tell him who he is. It is Lear’s inability to separate himself from the crown that led to his undeveloped personal identity. In answer to his question, the fool provides the answer: “Lear’s shadow” (I.iv. 234). Lear’s identity as king is all he has ever known. Without the title he is nothing but an empty shell with no internal substance. Lear forgot to form an identity for not just Lear the king, but Lear the man. Lear is only able to find his personal identity when he meets Cordelia and says, “I am a very foolish fond old man” (IV.vii.69). Lear has given himself an identity beyond that of a king and it is not a description of vanity, but of truth and experience. Lear has gained an identity for
Bradley, A.C.. Shakespearean Tragedy: Lectures on Hamlet, Othello, King Lear and Macbeth. New York: Penguin Books, 1991.
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.
Despite its undeniable greatness, throughout the last four centuries King Lear has left audiences, readers and critics alike emotionally exhausted and mentally unsatisfied by its conclusion. Shakespeare seems to have created a world too cruel and unmerciful to be true to life and too filled with horror and unrelieved suffering to be true to the art of tragedy. These divergent impressions arise from the fact that of all Shakespeare's works, King Lear expresses human existence in its most universal aspect and in its profoundest depths. A psychological analysis of the characters such as Bradley undertook cannot by itself resolve or place in proper perspective all the elements which contribute to these impressions because there is much here beyond the normal scope of psychology and the conscious or unconscious motivations in men.
King Lear as a Tragedy Caused by Arrogance, Rash Decisions and Poor Judgement of Character
Edmund, the bastard son of Gloucester is not pleased with his status as a bastard. Edgar the legitimate son of Gloucester stands to obtain the lands, wealth and power of his father. Edmund thinks this is unfair and begins a plot to banish his brother and obtain the lands of his father. He begins by writing a fake letter from Edgar saying that he wants to murder his father and wishes to take power by force. Edmund uses his deceiving abilities to make the letter seem genuine. He lies to his father about how he came into possession of the letter: “It was not brought me, my Lord; t...
Bradley, A.C. "King Lear." 20Lh Century Interpretations of King Lear. Ed. Jane Adelman. New Jersev; Prentice-Hall, 1978.
Bengtsson, Frederick. “King Lear by William Shakespeare.” Columbia College. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Apr. 2015.
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.
Peter Brook’s film production of King Lear was followed by diverse critical opinion. W. Chaplin (1973) deemed the production as a dramatic failure due to its violent nature; however, W. Johnson (1972) conversely praises the “bursts of exaggerated violence” which he claims, leads successfully to the establishment of the production’s atmosphere. Through both these views we see violence as being central to interpreting Brook’s King Lear. In a similar fashion, Anne Bradby (2004) described Shakespeare’s Lear as having an “atmosphere of unparalleled rapine, cruelty, and bodily pain” as central to its plots and themes (a theme also touched on by other critics such as G. Orwell (1947), and W. Knight (1949)). From this, we see that interpreta-tions of King Lear benefit from an examination of violence. In order to show how Brook estab-lishes his distinguishing atmosphere of violence, I am going to explore the presentation of vio-lence, the destruction of compassion, and the reactions to both of these key aspects of the pro-duction.
To understand why the Duke has this desire to disguise himself one can look at the beginning of the play in act 1 scene 3 where the Duke is at the monastery asking Friar Thomas to hide him there. He tells the friar that he has good reasons for hiding, and that he has lied to Angelo about his destination. The Duke explains that for the past fourteen years the laws have been flagrantly disobeyed, with little reproach from the government. As the Duke explains it, when the law only serves to threaten, because lawmakers do not carry out the punishments dictated, the government loses its authority. Since he gave the people liberties, he does not feel comfortable punishing them for now, yet he worries about the safe affairs of Vienna. He asked Angelo to take over in order to act more strictly without reproach or hypocrisy. He wants to observe Angelo at work, so he asks the friar to provide him with a disguise which will make him look like a visiting Friar himself: