KING LEAR - Who was to blame for his downfall?
marfa
grade. Perhaps somebody would be interested in my opinions on this
topic.... Please let me know what you think.
Are Lear's daughters solely to blame for his downfall and to what extent is
it his own fault?
At the beginning King Lear, approaching old age, decides to divide his
kingdom between his three daughters, Goneril, Regan and Cordelia, to relieve
him of the responsibilities of a ruler. He is furious when his youngest and
favourite daughter, Cordelia, refuses to take part in his 'love-test'. She
is banished, leaving Goneril and Regan in charge of the kingdom. They plot
to rid themselves of Lear, and as time progresses his powers diminish, and
he is driven into a storm. With only three followers, Kent, the Fool and
Poor Tom, Lear gradually goes mad. Despite Cordelia's later attempts to
restore his position on the throne, they are both imprisoned, Cordelia is
hanged, and Lear dies a broken man. Some might argue that Lear has distinct
flaws in his character, such as poor judgement and pride that are the key
factors in his downfall. Others may claim that the vindictiveness and lust
for power displayed by Goneril and Regan would inevitably weaken his
position. It is also possible that fate and the questioning of the
patriarchal system played a significant role.
Firstly we must assess the extent of Lear's own responsibility for his
downfall, through his actions and character weaknesses. A theme prominent
in the play is that of 'judgement of character', and it is in the 'love-test
' of the opening scene that Lear's judgement of his daughters is tested.
The two elder, Goneril and Regan, are sycophantic towards their father,
claiming 'I love you.Dearer than eyesight space and liberty', and 'In my
true heart I find she names my very deed of love. Only she comes too short.
' Cordelia merely says 'I love your majesty/ According to my bond, no more
no less'. Lear fails to realise that this expression is more honest and
simple than those of Goneril and Regan. His actions in the first scene cause
a shift of power between Lear and his two remaining daughters and seem to
form the foundation for his imminent downfall. By banishing Cordelia he
weakens rather than strengthens his control over his daughters, as Goneril
and Regan are now well-placed for their struggle for supreme power.
Lear's extreme vanity and pride could be flaws marring his judgement and
preventing him from taking opposition seriously. As a patriarchal monarch
he is used to unquestioning obedience and despite official retirement he
still wishes to retain 'Pre-eminence, and all the large effects/ That troop
with majesty.' In Act 3 Scene 2 Lear even tries to command the elements -
'Blow winds, and crack your cheeks!' We learn that Lear favoured Cordelia
over her sisters, as he says 'I loved her most, and thought to set my rest/
On her kind nursery,' but his love for her appears conditional on her
obedience. Although possibly fully aware of Goneril and Regan's lust for
personal power, he is prepared to give his less favoured daughters the whole
kingdom in exchange for their 'glib and oily art'.
Lear's lack of self-knowledge and understanding is often presented through
'sight' and 'blindness' imagery. Moments before his banishment in Act 1,
Kent urges the King to reconsider his rash actions, 'See better, Lear.' and
then adds 'let me still remain/the true blank of thine eye' - that Lear will
begin to see things accurately by looking through Kent. Whenever wronged or
challenged, Lear dismisses them with 'Out of my sight', marking his refusal
to look on those who have questioned his judgement.
The serious portrayal of madness as a theme in the play is most evident in
Lear himself. Some argue that madness, or senility, are discernible in Lear
even in the opening scene, as his abdication and division of the kingdom
could make it politically unstable, and making the daughters' dowry
dependent on a 'love-test' seems somewhat bizarre. It is therefore possible
that Lear's actions from the beginning are influenced by his mental state.
His mental state deteriorates further during Act 2 Scene 4 with his
obsession with 'filial ingratitude'. Unable to believe the impertinence of
Goneril and Regan, he curses them repeatedly - 'Those wicked creatures yet
do look well-favoured/When others are more wicked.' Act 3 presents Lear's
madness at its most violent - the raging storm reflects his mental
destruction. His recent experiences with his daughters and loss of power
provoke further madness, reducing him to the role of victim - 'I am a man
more sinned against than sinning.'
The actions of Lear's daughters are a major cause of his decline. Goneril
and Regan are revealed as deceitful and ambitious from the beginning, as
Cordelia states 'Time shall unfold what plighted cunning hides; Who covers
faults, at last with shame derides.' Furthermore they are fully aware of
Lear's weaknesses, such as 'He always loved our sister most, and with what
poor judgement he hath now cast her off.' and 'the imperfections of
long-engraffed condition.' After taking the symbol of their father's power,
the dowry, they are instrumental in Lear's downfall in terms of loss of
power. One example is decreasing his train of servants knowing his power to
oppose is weak -'What need one?'. Lear is incensed when they put Kent in
the stocks, saying 'They could not, would not do't. 'Tis worse than murder.'
He describes his daughters as 'a disease that's in my flesh.a boil/ A
plague-sore, or embossed carbuncle, / In my corrupted blood', giving the
impression that they are slowly 'eating away' at his person. Lear's actual
death results from Cordelia's hanging. Driven mad by the injustice, he
cries - 'why a dog, a horse, a rat have life / And thou no breath at all?'
Although the acts of unkindness committed by Goneril and Regan impact more
directly on Lear's downfall, we must also consider the role of Cordelia who
ironically cares most for her father's welfare. A possible criticism of
Cordelia is her unwillingness to indulge her aging father's weakness for
flattery, which ultimately leads the way for Goneril and Regans' rebellion.
However it appears at the end of Act 1 Scene 1 that she and Kent are trying
to help her father gain self-knowledge, and the King of France takes her for
her virtues alone. Despite suffering through Lear's actions, she remains
loving towards her father in Act 4 Scene 6 on their reunion - '.let this
kiss/ Repair those violent harms that my two sisters / Have in thy reverence
made.' One conclusion would be that she hoped her challenge to his authority
would be of benefit to Lear. All three daughters seek self-gratification
and try to subvert the traditional patriarchal system, both in the opening
scene and throughout the play. The difference lies in Cordelia's honesty
attitude whereas Goneril and Regan dispose of their father's power in a
conniving and cruel way.
With the absence of a mother figure in the Lear family, the daughters are
wholly a product of Lear, possessing many elements of his character.
Arguably therefore, the faults of Goneril, Regan, and Cordelia that
contribute to his downfall are primarily the weaknesses present in himself.
Goneril and Regan, authoritarian and autocratic, treat Lear almost
identically to his treatment of Cordelia when power is challenged. Their
behaviour can impress as masculine, particularly the act of violence towards
Gloucester by Regan. Goneril undermines the position of her husband Albany
saying 'The laws are mine, not thine.' Characters such as Lear and
Gloucester refer to these sisters as vicious beasts with the use of animal
imagery. Lear describes Goneril as 'sharp-toothed, like a vulture', and
tells Regan she 'looked black.most serpent like' upon him. Even Albany
views the pair as 'Tigers, not daughters'. This imagery helps the portrayal
of them as inhumane predators, suggesting they act largely upon animal
instinct. Rebecca Warren has comments that this imagery contrasts Lear's
hopes that when he and Cordelia are imprisoned they will 'sing like birds in
a cage'. Cordelia's stubbornness and personal pride equal her father's, as
demonstrated by her refusal to flatter him during the 'love-test'.
Perhaps the nature of Shakespearian tragedy is important in determining the
nature of Lear's downfall. We recognise his weaknesses of stubbornness,
vanity, and poor judgement, but then observe how his attitudes alter as a
result of tragic events. George Steiner in "The Death of Tragedy"
comments -
'Tragedies such as 'Lear' do show a kind of progress towards self-knowledge.
But it is achieved at the price of ruin. Tragic personalities are educated
by calamity and they reach their fulfilment in death.'
Lear adjusts his opinion of his daughters during the play: he realises the
falsity of Goneril and Regan in Act 4 Scene 5, stating 'They flattered me
like a dog..To say 'ay and 'no to everything that I said 'ay' and 'no' to
was no good divinity,' and says of Cordelia - 'I did her wrong'. Although
Lear and Cordelia die unnecessarily, there is partial consolation in Lear's
better understanding of the world through tragic events.
Characters such as Lear and Edmund appeal to the gods frequently for
assistance in times of crisis, or to fathom the seemingly unruly nature of
fortune and justice. Steiner (ibid) commented in respect of traditional
tragedy -
'Tragic drama tells us that.... a hidden or malevolent God, blind fate, the
solicitations of hell, or the brute fury of our animal blood.waits for us,
mocks us and destroys us.'
Lear expects the gods to punish his ungrateful daughters, but later fears
they are antagonistic, wondering if they 'stir these daughters' hearts/
Against their father.' The danger is that over-dependence on fate and the
gods decreases personal responsibility.
I believe the changing nature of Shakespearian tragedy contributes greatly
to the downfall of Lear, and other 'innocent' characters. We are presented
with factors outside Lear's control, such as fate and nature, which he
believes determine his destiny. Fate was a stronger force in earlier
Shakespeare works, but the overemphasis on fate by characters such as Lear
and Edmund may present as an excuse for injudicious behaviour, suggesting
that the play is moving away from the traditional 'Greek Tragedy'. Lear
repeatedly asks the Gods and nature for aid, but dies driven half-mad over
Cordelia's body. I am reminded of a quote from Macbeth - 'Therein the
patient must minister for himself'. Written in 1606, shortly after Macbeth,
it is possible 'King Lear' follows the same philosophy, that ultimately we
all control our own destinies.
Word count - 1704
Notes
Bibliography
john_baker
I like what Bloom says about Lear, that he's the last Dead European
White Male and Bloom also notes its placed in the time of Solomon.
So as with all of these plays, the Author seems to think the fall is
justified be defects in their own pysche.
I'm looking forward to reading your paper later.
John Baker
Visit my Webpage:
http://www2.localaccess.com/marlowe
"Chance favors the prepared mind." Louis Pasteur
Franklin Cacciutto
Lear is not "half-mad." He dies happily.
Many of Shakespeare's tragedies end with a suggestion of the spirit
transcending death. The sense that the spirits of Lear and Cordelia are
reunited in death, which the Olivier Lear best dramatizes, leads beyond
tragedy to miracle. The next play Shakespeare wrote was The Winter's Tale,
which ends with the miracle of a statue returning to life.
marfa
the end of the play is not inadequate. The serious portrayal of madness in
Lear would suggest that he was in some stage of madness at the end would it
not? Indeed he is happy, as he believes Cordelia to live. I had also been
led to believe that Lear was written in Macbeth and Othello, which move away
from traditional greek tragedy (where an individual's flaws lead to their
downfall) and towards the notion of everyone controlling their own fate.
Have you nothing positive to say about my essay? Who are you anyway? I'm
16 years old and live in the UK, studying English lang + lit.
Franklin Cacciutto <shad...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3A85FC68...@earthlink.net...
John W. Kennedy
>
> Your eighteenth-century understanding of the ending of the play is inadequate.
>
> Lear is not "half-mad." He dies happily.
That is not unequivocally determined in the text.
For that matter the two statements are not exclusive.
--
John W. Kennedy
(Working from my laptop)
marfa
knowledge of Shakespeare's tragedies, but to analyse the text in order to
provide an individual response, and to develop a mature and sophisticated
essay style. A level English is not an easy course, and my teacher, having
studied at Oxford, would mark my essay accordingly to criteria given by my
examining bodies. As it is I acheived a high A.
As you will notice, I did not extensively argue the 'insanity defence' in my
assignment, as it could be used to explain too much.
Re this comment:
Do you not think that Lear, having brought up
> his daughters, should have been able to foresee how they would act,
> once they had the reins of power?
One feature of Lear throughout the play is his distinct lack of
self-knowledge, and poor judgement. If he were aware of how his daughters
would react, then why proceed giving them sole power? And why banish
Cordelia who is the only one capable of resolving the situation? You are
assuming Lear has a great deal of self-awareness and insight - the very
nature of greek tragedy is that the individual posesses certain flaws.
I am led to believe that Shakespeare, is and always will be open to
speculation, so therefore I dont find your dogmatic comments at all
insightful. I did consider many different angles when tackling this
question, and part of my assessment was my ability to argue a 'personal
point of view'.
Could you perhaps provide alternative ways of tackling this question without
sounding so patronising?
What do you mean a 'decent set of castles'? Or 'whatever it was Goneril
stuck him into'? Get to know the basic plot.
marfa
> You misunderstood what I wrote; maybe it was garbled. I was saying
> that Lear was an old fool, and had been a young one, and couldn't see
> what should have been obvious: Goneril and Regan were not nice women
> (I'd be afraid that if I went to bed with either one of them, I'd end
> up like that poor fellow Bobbit) and Lear should have known that,
> being their dad.
Surely there's more to it than 'Lear is an old fool' and 'Goneril and Regan
not nice women'. You seem very quick to criticise my work, and despite
reading the text before I was born, dont seem to be able to offer anything
that is not blatantly obvious or written elsewhere.
> I don't think you are saying much of anything there; I mean, almost
> any piece of writing can be interepreted 10 ways from Sunday - it's
> not so much a matter of how interpetation-laden the writing is, as how
> inventive the interpreter is; I'd put down money that more than one
> Phd thesis has been written on the Mother Goose rhymes; and Grimm's
> fairy tales? Come on: I'll bet whole careers have been built on those;
> nay, whole colleges.
Possibly, But how does this relate to my assignment? I wouldnt consider
'Lear is an old fool' more inventive than anything written in my assingment.
> Sorry, I lost my insight years ago. 'so therefore' is redundant, by
> the way.
>
> Does that mean they wanted you to think for yourself instead of
> parrotting somebody else? Whey don't they just say that? I can't
> stand academic jargon.
Doesnt sound like the whole literary criticism thing is familiar either.
> You want to know who gets how much blame for Lear's treatment? Lear
> gets all of it. Goneril and Regan are a couple of psychopaths - you
> can't blame them anymore than you can blame a mad dog; but Lear was
> the head of the household and didn't do his job properly, or the two
> kids wouldn't have turned out the way they did; or if their genes were
> bad and there was no way to turn them into normal women, then he
> should have had the sense to put them into a convent.
Well where I come from, we dont pass English at college level saying
'Goneril and Regan are a couple of psychopaths' or 'Lear didnt do his job
properly'. A bit more literary insight is needed, sweeping statements like
this are no use to me unfortunately. You also criticised me for blaming the
characters' actions on madness, yet you are doing so here.
> >What do you mean a 'decent set of castles'? Or 'whatever it was Goneril
> >stuck him into'? Get to know the basic plot.
> I read the thing several times before you were born, but forget the
> little details. You know what I mean though: he wasn't treated as
> befits a retired King: the girls took away most of his servants - I
> forget what else, but their treatment of him wasn't very respectful to
> the old fellow.
>
I'm currently studying Lear, so presumably would be better equipped to
answer the question, knowing all the details.
What do make of Steiner's comments from 'The Death of Tragedy' by the way?
Do you consider them relevant to the changing nature of Shakespearian
Tragedy?
euand...@gmail.com
No chill
John W Kennedy
were still standing.
--
John W Kennedy
"You can, if you wish, class all science-fiction together; but it is
about as perceptive as classing the works of Ballantyne, Conrad and W.
W. Jacobs together as the 'sea-story' and then criticizing _that_."
-- C. S. Lewis. "An Experiment in Criticism"
