The Theme of Disguise in King Lear

Disguise is a key thread in the patchwork of Shakespeare's beautifully woven play, King Lear. The importance to the plot and deeper understanding of the play that can be found in disguise should not be overlooked when analysing this play.

The main characters in the play that use some form of disguise are: Kent disguised as a serving man and Edgar disguised as the mentally deranged 'Poor Tom'. The need for these characters to disguise themselves is pivotal to their own survival. This fuels dramatic irony in the play where Kent and Edgar, in their disguised forms, protect the people whom are of greatest threat to their existence when they are undisguised.

Kent was required to shroud himself with the disguise of a serving man in order to protect Lear from ultimately Lear himself. This shows the true loyalty of Kent towards his monarch. Kent stood up to Lear's decision to disown Cordeila (Act 1:1) and is banished for this act of treason, with the threat of death if still found in the country within 10 days. Therefore Kents loyalty and endeavour to protect Lear are highlighted through his disguise. This serves as a strong parallel to the disloyalty shown to Lear by his daughters (Goneril and Regan) and there husbands (Albany and Cornwall ; noblemen just like Kent). Without Shakespeare's use of disguise this parallel could not have been made.

Shakespeare's use of disguise in the case of Edgar and Gloucester serves the same purpose. Edgar is forced to disguise himself as the mentally unstable and social outcast that is Poor Tom. This disguise was needed due to the lies that Edmund had fed to Gloucester. These lies concerned a false plan of Edgar's to murder Gloucester. However, despite being accused of patricide Edgar bravely helped Gloucester when Gloucester was at his lowest point. Edgar helped him die a happy man by convincing him he was absolved of his sins (adultery) and gave him a brighter outlook on life after he convinced him he had survived and in survivable fall off the cliffs of Dover. This loyalty and forgiving shown by Edgar contrasts Edmund. Edmund cannot forgive Gloucester for his open outbursts of displeasure at the conception of his illegitimate son and shows great disloyalty by giving his father over to the cruel and sadistic couple that is Cornwall and Regan.

These two parallels (sub-plots) are evident in King Lear and could not be incorporated into the play without the use of disguise.

The disguises of these two characters also lower their social position by a huge amount resulting in a social swoop for two well respected nobles. This sees a disguise in personality also. The disguise in the personalities of Kent and especially Edgar bring out sympathy from Lear and show a shift in his nature and spirit. Lear offers Poor Tom clothes and compassion. This highlights the change in character of Lear throughout the play. This progression of Lear's social conscience is a guiding light in a bleak and tragic play and its inclusion is necessary to partially distract from the doom and gloom of the plays other social themes (Civil War) and existential ideas. It can only be included due to the disguises of characters and their personalities. The social swoop attached to these disguises can also be compared to the social swoop associated with Lear that concludes in a dramatic fashion in the Storm Scene.

Religion in King Lear

Religion in King Lear

The world of Lear is not a christian world, it is far from it. In a story where faith is summed up by ancient deities and superstition, where a King is betrayed by his two daughters and another man turned against his own son in a cruel plan for power, Christianity seems nonexistent. But in the midst of the violence and tragedy of this play, there is a spark of christian idealism, of death, rebirth and redemption. And it all stems from a character whose resemblance to Christ himself is uncanny.

There is no doubt that the world of Lear is lacking religious practice. In the very first scene, Gloucester’s openness about his extramarital affairs with Edmund’s mother makes it clear that Christian morals are not withheld in the society of Lear’s England. People seem to do as they please without any fear of divine condemnation. In fact, if anything, human blame is removed entirely from all manner of sins by the their own superstition. Gloucester confirms this when he expresses that the “late eclipses in the sun and moon” are responsible for the wrongdoing of his son. There are, however, many instances where Lear calls upon Ancient Greek gods, demonstrating that people did believe in some deities. Not only did they believe in the existence of gods, but Lear expects to hold some authority over them. While he was King, he was believed to possess divine power, and may even have been considered a sort of god himself. It is clear that if there is any form of religion in the world of this play, it resembles nothing of modern world faiths.

Nonetheless, there is an underlying realisation of christian philosophy in Gloucester’s story. When Edgar wakes him from his attempted suicide, Gloucester experiences a sort of rebirth. After suffering and attempting to take his own life, he is given a second chance, resembling the forgiveness and new life of christianity. Similarly, as Kent and Edgar take on disguises to hide their identity, they are also given new life and a chance to redeem their past selves. The similarity is undeniable and a case could be made that King Lear is in fact christian play, highlighting the ideas that form the heart of christian faith.

Edgar himself uncannily resembles Christ. Even though he did nothing to deserve his hardship and lost everything, he sees his blinded father and has only compassion for him. He holds no resentment towards him and instead literally carries him to his new life. He even says “why I do trifle thus with his despair is done to cure it”. When Edgar takes on another new identity to awake his father he shows that he has truly forgiven him and is willing to do anything to save his life.

The relationships between fathers and their children in 'King Lear'

The relationships between fathers and their children is the driving force of the story in King Lear. Favouritism and neglect of Lear’s and Gloucester’s children ultimately lead to the death of both men through their lesser children’s spite and thirst for revenge. While neither man deserved death for his crimes, it certainly brings to light the fact that not all children- and particularly illegitimate ones- were equals in their fathers eyes.

Exploring the relationship between Lear and his three daughters we immediately see that he loves Cordelia far more than Goneril and Regan, which instantly sets a conflict in the play. Cordelia loves him truly, but will not play his game, with the others faking love to play the game and get their land. While Cordelia loves her father she is also as stubborn as he is, refusing to put her love for him into words, leading to them falling out and her leaving to marry the King of France. This leaves Lear vulnerable to his other two daughters, who take advantage of the opportunity to strip the king of everything, leaving him without even his wits. The contrast in their treatment of Lear versus that of Cordelia, who tries to keep him sane, show the contrast in how they were treated by Lear. Only then is it when Lear realises that his favourite was the one who loved him all along, the one who came to save him. Goneril and Regan got their revenge, their father and Cordelia ended up dead, but at the price of both their lives and so many others.

The relationship between Gloucester and his two sons- the legitimate Edgar and the illegitimate Edmund- is much the same. Because of Edmund’s illegitimacy, he is looked upon with shame by his father, and sent away to fight while Edgar is the one who will inherit all the lands and titles, with Edmund getting nothing. While this is a product of society, Gloucester says in front of Edmund that he has been ashamed to admit he was his son so many times that he is immune to it. It is not Edmund’s fault who his mother is, and he seeks revenge for his unfair treatment. He sends his truehearted brother into exile, and has his father blinded out of spite. This ultimately leads to Gloucester’s death at the shock of hearing Edgar is alive and saved his life, but also Edmund’s at the hand of his brother for all the pain he has caused their family. Again, Edmund got his revenge, but at the cost of his own life.

The similarities between these two families are uncanny. Two fathers favour one child over the others, leaving the others scorned and hungry for revenge, which is the driving force in the play. While this revenge did lead to the deaths of all the characters majorly involved in exacting it, it also resulted in the deaths of the two men who favoured one child over the others. This says something powerful. It is very possible the neglect of their families led them to exacting this extreme form of revenge, and the fathers who possibly drove them two it are killed also. Supposedly, the moral of the story is, don’t pick favourites, because karma will come back and bite you. And while you’re at it, don’t kill off your entire family either.

Treatment of old people in King Lear

Treatment of old people in King Lear

The treatment of old people is a major theme in William Shakespeare’s play “King Lear”. Our first

encounter of poor treatment of old people is when Lear decides to divide up his land and give away his

powers.

“and 'tis our fast intent

To shake all cares and business from our age;

Conferring them on younger strengths, while we

Unburthen'd crawl toward death”.

Lear wants to retire and “shake all cares and business from our age”. What I find interesting about the

above passage is that Lear creates this image of a feeble old man unable to walk upright who

instead”crawl[s]” around on the ground almost like a baby. This image suggests that growing old is like

being a child again; no responsibilities. Unfortunately it also suggests that as one grows older they

become weak and powerless. This is exactly what happens to Lear. When Lear divided up his land and

power, he divided it evenly between Goneril and Regan, his two eldest daughters. Cordelia his youngest

and favourite daughter received no land as she did not go along with her father’s game and left with the

king of France.

Lear is not treated with respect in his daughter's home; Goneril has instructed her steward, Oswald to be

rude to Lear and to encourage the rest of her servants to treat him the same way. Lear is shocked when

Oswald is impolite to him and the loyal Kent trips Oswald, knocking him to the ground. Goneril appears

and complains that Lear's knights are rowdy and tells her father that he should only keep a small, better

behaved troop with him. Lear becomes outraged and storms out of her house, calling down terrible

curses upon her. He says he will go to Regan and that she will treat him with more respect. Already, Lear

is beginning to regret his rash decision to banish Cordelia. Goneril writes to Regan to tell her what has

happened with their father and Regan, on receiving the letter, leaves for Gloucester's castle so she will

not be at home when her father comes to stay. Lear arrives at Gloucester's castle and is shocked to see

his messenger, Kent in the stocks. Goneril arrives at the castle also and a hopeless Lear soon realises that

both daughters have joined forces against him. Enraged and highly agitated, he leaves the castle and with

only the Fool for company and prepares to spend the night outdoors in the storm.

This is a horrific idea that one could force an old man out into the freezing cold storm, let alone your own

flesh and blood. You wouldn’t treat a dog like that. After all he has done for his daughters this is how they

repay him. Then Lear realises how blind he was to the fact that Cornelia was his best daughter.

We also see poor treatment of old people in King Lear with the blinding of Gloucester.  In Gloucester’s

castle, Cornwall gives Goneril the treasonous letter (written by Edmund) concerning the French army at

Dover and tells her to take it and show it to her husband, Albany. He then sends his servants to

apprehend Gloucester so that Gloucester can be punished. He orders Edmund to go with Goneril to

Albany’s palace so that Edmund will not have to witness the violent punishment of his father. Yet again

this is an outrageous act by Edmund to frame his father and put him through such a torturous

punishment. All in all old people are treated extremely bad throughout the duration of the play and

betrayal has played a major role in this.

Use of Animals in Imagery King Lear

It is not surprising that, along with the underlying themes of nature, superstition and paganism present in King Lear, animals are featured pervasively in its imagery. In fact, almost every character in the play is at some point likened to an animal, for example the “pelican daughters” who feast upon their father, as Lear says in reference to the filial ingratitude of his progeny. The use of animals in the descriptive imagery by Shakespeare serves two purposes; the first being as an outlet for the anger and frustration felt by the characters, and the second being that many of these similitudes are very effective at describing the characters mindset or ideals, for example Gloucester’s “goatish disposition”. There are many examples of such imagery, as it is used dozens of times throughout the text. Here are some of the most noteworthy of them.

The first and foremost example is Lear’s exclamation of “come not between the dragon and his wrath”, as Kent intervenes in an attempt to rescue Cordelia from Lear’s fury, as he goes on to disown her. The dragon is Lear, and you can easily imagine him as such, sitting upon his hoard of gold which is, in this case, what had previously been his daughter’s affection and submissiveness. One can imagine the wrath of the dragon against whoever attempts to steal from them, and in this case Cordelia stole from her father the possibility of them living out his days cherishing each other. It is Cordelia’s stubbornness towards her father’s games that incite his anger.

The second, and most prominent example of animal imagery being used as metaphors and similes for descriptions of characters, is their prolific use by Lear and the Fool to describe his ungrateful, spiteful and self serving daughters, Goneril and Regan. The first of these numerous examples occurs in Act I, Scene IV, when the Fool wisely exclaims, “the hedge sparrow fed the cuckoo for so long that it had its head bitten off by its young”. Later on in the play, Regan is likened to a “vulture”. These two quotes are notable as they underline the ungratefulness and sheer cruelty of his Lear’s eldest daughters. After leaving them all of his power, with the single request that he be looked after in his old age, Goneril and Regan proceed to destroy him and leave him with nothing, now that he is at his weakest. This provides an opportunity for Lear to see how foolish he was in giving away his power to such spiteful daughters, to the extent that they are likened to carrion-eating birds of prey, at the expense of the daughter who truly did care about him.

Less prominent but equally important examples of the use of animalistic imagery would include Edgar, who takes on the persona of Poor Tom, a character whose roots are ambiguous, but is definitely the most animalistic and pitiable character in the play. He is described as a “fox in stealth”, a “wolf in greediness” and a “lion in prey”. Poor Tom is a prominent example of how animals can be used to describe savagery and barbarism, such as is the case for Regan, but can also be equally effective in  describing the more pitiable or outcast members of human society. Another message that can be interpreted by Poor Tom’s description and behaviour is Shakespeare’s message to Elizabethan society that, despite the formalities of the caste system, we are all animals, at the very least on a biological level.

Shakespeare’s extensive use of animals in his descriptive and figurative imagery only further enrich the play, and provide us with an insight into the context of the Elizabethan view of the treatment of ones elders, inferiors and progeny.

Tragedy- Lear’s flaw in “King Lear “

By E. C.

It is perhaps, through every fault of his own, that tragedy unfolds around Lear during the course of the play. His quick temper, so fiery, that the resulting billows of smoke cloud any of his better judgement. Which unsurprisingly causes him to incorrectly evaluate the surrounding characters and fail to identify underlying motives. Thus can the audience ever be brought to pity him, even when he stands at the very source of all his misfortunes?

From the starting scene Lear demonstrates the fatal flaw in his personality. Dividing up his land between his three daughters so he can “unburthened crawl towards death”. In return he asks each to vouch for their love for him, where after he can decide “which of you doth love us most”. The youngest, Cordelia, refuses to play his game and feed his ego but as consequence come “between the dragon and his wrath”. In a surge of anger Lear disowns Cordelia even though he “loved her most”. Now that “her price is fallen” the prospects of a good marriage and future become very slim; “lost a father… must lose a husband”. The only offer Cordelia receives is a proposal from France, whom now she must accept and follow. Thus Lear deals himself his first blow.

Left in the care of his other pair of mean spirited daughters, who manipulate Lear’s famous temper to their advantage. Wishing him out of their charge, they launch a series of insults; “more like a tavern or a brothel than a graced palace”. Lear is quickly baited. His heated disposition lands him and his companions out on the moors in the middle of a storm.

It is here that Lear begins to understand that he “hadst little wit in his bald crown, when thou gavest thy golden one away” and “madest thy daughters thy mothers”. From this Lear commences his descent into madness. Surprisingly with his unstable mental state comes a realisation and deeper understanding of others, along with a more empathetic treatment of them. Maybe this is the biggest tragedy of all? That Lear had to go insane as punishment for his previous mistakes and rashness. That when trapped in his madness, he is in fact, trapped in purgatory. 

By the end of the play one begins to believe that King Lear really is a character “more sinned against than sinning” and either ironically or unfortunately, Lear was caught in his own vicious cycle. One where he, unknowingly, was sinning against no-one, but himself and grievously the wheels that his temper had set in motion had gathered too much momentum to prevent the ensuing tragedy. 

The theme of brotherhood in “King Lear”

There is only one prominent example of the bond of brotherhood in the play “king Lear”. The brothers in question are Edgar and Edward, the sons of Gloucester. Their unique position as the only brothers in this play forces the reader to except their situation to be standard, if not in terms of fortune then in underlying tensions and conflict. Their singular nature makes their condition of brotherhood notable to the reader.
Firstly, a lot can be seen of the general vision and viewpoint of this play by the condition of the characters of these brothers. It can be observed that there is an extreme contrast in their natures, one which causes one of the main conflicts of this narrative. Clearly brothers cannot expect to retain any kind of amicable relationship in this harsh world created by Shakespeare. In fact these brothers are shown to be in conflict over most of the major struggles in this play; Edgar representing the good, and Edmund the bad. This can be seen in their stance on Lear’s kingship and their loyalty to their father. While Edmund is working devotedly towards the destruction of his father, Edgar is working to save him and redeem his soul. In the end they are each given rewards according to their piety. Edgar is given the regency he never strived for, and Edmund is given a slow and painful death at the hand of his usurped brother.
This obvious representation of Edgar as good and Edmund as evil tells us a lot about the values of the culture in Shakespeare’s day, in other words, the cultural context. Edmund is expected to be grateful to his estranged father and show him loyalty without provocation, like Edgar does. This lack of slavish loyalty to the father figure of Gloucester, Lear and ultimately all traditional beliefs and practises results in his terminally unpleasant fate. Although his own father has never shown any respect or support for him, openly recounting the story of his illegitimate conception, Edmund is condemned to ruin as soon as his ambition causes him to act in his own favour.
It may be taken that brotherly harmony was encouraged by the Elizabethans by the trust and companionship that is shown on Edgar’s side with regards to his relationship with Edmund. He trusts him to the point of stupidity, only turning against him when he discovers his brother’s disloyalty to their father, at which point he decides on talking a violent and cruel revenge of which he is absolved by his brother’s wickedness and his own purity.

By T.May

Emotions and the suppression of emotions in King Lear

King Lear is an exquisite example of the nature of the human emotion and how we connect to emotion. The heart is the key word in terms of emotion in King Lear. We see the warm-hearted, the hard hearted and the plain heartless. One of the biggest contrasts throughout the play in terms of emotional connectedness is King lear.

In the opening scene we see a contrast between openness in emotions between the daughters. On one hand we see Goneril and Regan who are prepared to say anything to please their father. They are quick to manipulate his feelings using emotionally intense language. Goneril loves her father more than "words can wield the matter", "dearer than eyesight" a love, in her own words that makes "breath poor, and speech unable." Cordelia on the other hand seems to struggle to dictate the love she feels or is suppressing her true emotions, something that she seems to maintain for the duration of this play. " I cannot heave my heart into my mouth."

In this scene we all so see a perfect example of Lear's tempestuous and short fused nature. It is clear he is quite a passionate man with the ability to become enraged after a short time (maybe that is his biggest flaw??-that he is too well connected to express his emotions?)

As he flies off the handle he describes how much he loved Cordelia in comparison to he sisters and says "I loved her the most" -we get an idea of the type of person Lear was. He was a bad parent with the ability to manipulate emotions. This also shows his character-he was someone who craved affection and love to the point where it pushed him to madness- there is a huge sense of vulnerability and sadness in that.

In regards to Edmund and Glocester, we see the manipulation of emotions (mirroring the daughters to Lear) as Edmund's forged letter pretending to be from his brother shows the depth of evil and malice and the sheer lack of empathy as Edmund is prepared to slander his own brother and to put him in harm's way.

It also shows a parallel as to the lengths characters are pushed by society and how it affects their actions: Edmund is pushed to the extremes of having to slander his own brother's name due to Edmund's bastard status (which deems him a lesser) and King Lear is pushed to the extremes of insanity after dividing his land amongst his two scheming daughters, Goneril and Regan.

In the second key scene we see the same emotional  misogyny that is seen at the start of the play as female characters (the daughters) are described as animals. "Wolves," "Serpents"   "foxes," "crabs," "vultures," "a boil," "a plague sore," "embossed carbuncle." -The daughters lose their human characteristics. They deny their maternal instincts. It allows us to prepare for the ferocity of Goneril, Regan, Cornwall, and Edmund later on.

Shows the lack of empathy and a certain lack of emotional disconnectedness? Do Lear and the Fool mean to say these things- do they realise the emotional impact their words have?

In the storm scene Lear notes that the storm, unlike his daughters, owes him nothing and has no obligation to treat him any better.

Lear's line "O that way madness lies; let me shun that!" he believes if he tries no to think about the cruelty he has endured at the hands of his duaghters he will avoid a descent into madness (foreshadowing!) shows how governed he is by his emotions and a strong degree of self awareness.

The relationship between the storms power and Lear's emotions are important to remember. Lear is so emotionally anguished by the way he has been treated he seems slightly oblivious to it. Maybe it is a parallel? is the storm a symbol of the inner turmoil and Lear's chaotic mind?

The use of powerful language ("Blow, winds and crack your cheeks!") emphasises the intensity and chaotic emotions, making Lear seem more like an uncontrolled animal. This echoes the relationship between human and animal that we saw when Lear and the Fool were angry with Goneril and Reagan.

 Lear's unstable mental state is primarily the result of the actions aganist him by his daughters. If we say that Lear's descent into madness is the core event of this play one could argue that emotions, their suppression, their manipulation and the feeling of emtion is the core theme of this play.

Lear is constantly shouting throughout this scene as the storm rages on in the background and shows an interesting aspect in the relationship between human and nature.

Lear describes his daughters as being like animals eg "those pelican daughters"- this is a really sad moment- what great emotional suffering must have Lear endured to call his daughters such spiteful things?

Edgar also uses emotional and animalistic imagery to describe the daughters again. (see earlier!)

We see a better connectedness between Lear and his emotions. "[1] A poor, infirm, weak and despised old man." He is to be pitied. The reflection of the person whom Lear describes matches perfectly.-" I am a man more sinned against than sinning." There is also something quite sad and vulnerable about this line too. At the start we saw a powerful and driven man and here we see a poor old man drowning in self pity.

"Is it the fashion that discarded fathers Should have thus little mercy on their flesh."

"Is there any cause in nature that makes these hard hearts?" (Lear Act 3:6:74) This brings an existential and philosophical side to the daughters and their behaviour. Are they naturally cruel people or was it the way they were raised? - nature vs. nurture.

At the start of "the Fall" scene we are once again greeted with the ongoing motif of nothingness and nihilsim in this play and we feel a great sense of despair and intense sadness for Gloucester and Edgar. Edgar is still playing the disguise of Poor Tom and wandering half naked and believes the worst part to be over following his cruel brother Edmund's plan falsely claiming Edgar was out to get Gloucester. Edgar is greeted with the recently blinded Gloucetsrer and because of the situation Edgar is forced to keep up the charade of Poor Tom.

"As flies to wanton boys are we to the gods: They kill us for their sport" The scene taps into the overwhelming sense of despair and hopelessness we feel.

Edgar is the beacon of hope and positivity to the despair of his father and in a dramatic and symbolic turn, Edgar turns Gloucester's suicide into a rebirth. The scene is a key moment for emotions and the manipulation of them. It is clear Gloucster no longer wants to live yet Edgar manages to reverse these feelings. It is also a powerful scene in terms of religious connotations and imagery.

Was it cruel for Edgar to do this and manipulate his father and take advantage of him? What were Edgar's aims? This scene reveals both the complicated yet kind hearted nature of Edgar.

We also see Lear in this scene and we see the misogynistic soliloquy- lines 124-130. Lear reveals himself to be someone with pent up emotions and very bitter.

As the play draws to a close we see Cordelia who is somewhat repentant for her sister's actions, giving closure to the emotionally draining journey. It shows an emotional maturity on Cordelia's part who is prepared to sacrifice her ego to rescue her father and cover her sisters. "Thy medecine on thy lips, and let this kiss Repair those violent harms that my two sisters Have in thy revernace made."

We see the opposite of this in Edmund's character. In my opinion one would probably describe Edmund as being a pyschopath. He lacks any emotional empathy and loyalty. He is a monster who manipulated Goneril and Regan whom he cared very little about and relished watching them scheme together to compete for his love. He is a pig.

The demise of Goneril and Regan is deserved of their evil nature. They are victims of their own greed and hatred.  They represent the theme of nihilism as a character- they both have nothing to offer humanity.

Shakespeare was conveying a sense of moral justice in the play through their deaths?  

Through all these events we can see how emotions are an important element of this play. We are unsure of how to feel about characters. Those who did wrong were wronged at certain points and we feel a certain sense of confusion about how we should or shouldn't feel.

By J.S

---

 [1]

Use of Letters in King Lear

Letters are used throughout King Lear to spread false information to forward a character's plot against their foe. The act of the characters writing these false letters, usually with a negative intention, shows their true form. These letters helped develop the main plot and create subplots throughout the play.

The first letter sent is written by Edmund, framing his brother, Edgar, as the one with the negative intentions. He tricks his father, Gloucester, into thinking Edgar is plotting against him. Gloucester believes him completely, even stating that he recognises the handwriting to be Edgar's. Edmund's letter produces the chaos that spirals this story into a devastating mess, leaving Gloucester blind, and even leading to Edmund's own death. Edmund's letter informs Gloucester that Edgar is planning to murder him. Edmund's plan behind the letter is to build Gloucester's hatred and feeling of betrayal towards Edgar, thus furthering Edmund's chances of becoming Earl after his father. Because he is the illegitimate son of Gloucester, Edmund is sure that there is no way that Gloucester will allow him to inherit the title as long as Edgar is still loyal to his father. Shakespeare uses dramatic irony, as the audience knows the true intentions of Edmund, while Gloucester believes Edgar is now his enemy. The reader then observes, knowing the truth behind everything, as the family is torn apart because of Edmund's need for power and lack of conscience.

Another letter sent in the play is written to Gloucester, informing him of the French invasion. This letter is a big turning point in the play, as it pushes him to help Lear, revealing he was still loyal to the old king, and willing to fight for him. However, this causes Edmund to act and inform Cornwall that his father is a traitor, wanting to help France. This leads to the blinding of Gloucester, and Edmund finally reaching his goal of becoming Earl of Gloucester. This shows Edmund's relentless disloyalty to his father and desperate need for power.

The last two letters sent were from Goneril to Edmund, asking him to order the death of Albany, which eventually happened, and from Edmund to a guard, ordering the death of Cordealia and Lear. This shows that these letters had the power to end someone's life, the power to sway characters' opinions so easily. This made them a very powerful writing tool for Shakespeare, as he could dramatically swerve the main plot, and create many subplots, simply through deception through writing. At times in the play, it almost seemed as if letters worked better at tricking characters than spoken dialogue; if Edmund had simply spoken to Gloucester about Edgar being a traitor, I'm not convinced things would have gone down the way they did. The letters acted as very important explanations for each situation, showing who was on which side, and who was good or evil.

Is "King Lear" a negative or positive play?

Is the play ‘King Lear’ a positive or negative play?

    The play ‘King Lear’ by William Shakespeare is a very intricate and complex play with many positive and negative aspects to it. We see a lot of negativity in this play from the vial way that women are treated to the hopeless and saddening idea that you only realise what you have done when it’s too late. Despite all of this negativity there are still small beams of hope throughout the play such as when Edgar saves his father’s life and helps him see that he is valued in the world.

   In the first act, Lear is speaking about his daughters as if they are his possessions. He does not think of them as individuals who can think for themselves, but as things that have no feelings and are simply there to look pretty. The poor treatment of women continues throughout the play as, when speaks up Cordelia proves his idea of women wrong, King Lear begins to talk about his children, and women in general, using animal imagery. He calls them “little dogs” and “serpent’s” showing that he doesn't even respect his daughters enough to refer to them as the human beings they are, but talks about them as unimportant animals that cannot speak and don’t have a say in what is important or not. This shows a very negative side to King Lear as the women in the play are treated cruelly and thought of as negative things that only cause problems. We again see this horrible treatment of women in our second key moment when King Lear puts a curse on Goneril so that she cannot have any children. “To make this creature fruitful! Into her womb convey sterility!” He does this to punish her as he believes she has only brought pain and inconvenience into his life and that she isn’t grateful for all the things he has done for her. This again shows negativity in the play as King Lear sees Goneril as a negative thing in his life.

   We see more negativity the play in the idea that nobody sees the damage they've done and the pain they have caused until it is too late. This is shown in an almost humorous way, yet it is an almost sadistic type of humour. Towards the end of the play, as King Lear is at the peak of his madness, he finally begins to realise how cruel he has been to the people that care about him most and he beings to care about other people. He wants to help people and to become a better person, yet it is too late for him to do so as he is slowly losing his mind. The kind and goodhearted feelings King Lear now has are being concealed by this vicious madness that is taking hold of his mind, showing us he is too late to make up for his cruel manner. “My wits begin to turn.” This is a very sad and negative idea and in my opinion shows the negativity in this play. We again see these negative thoughts the play has when Gloucester finally realises that Edmund never cared about him and it was Edgar who was the kind and caring son all along. It is sad that Gloucester only sees how good Edgar is after losing his eyesight and it again shows this sadistic humour in the play. If Gloucester had only realised before then he would have been able to see through Edgar’s disguise and would realise that he still has a chance to change how he treated his son. Instead Gloucester has no chance as it would seem that he can only truly see once he has been blinded. “If Edgar live, oh, bless him!”

     Despite all of this negativity in this play, we can still see small glimmers of hope and positivity. One scene in which we specifically see this positivity is in Act 4 Scene 6, when Edgar saves his father’s life. This scene really shows how good Edgar truly is and how much he cares about his father. At the time he still believes that his father is angry at him and is looking to kill him, yet Edgar still wants to help his father as it is clear how much he still loves him despite all the false lies that Edmund told him. “..henceforth I’ll bear/ Addliction till it do cry out itself…” This quote shows that Gloucester no longer wants to kill himself and he now believes that the gods care about him once again. This shows positivity in the play as it shows the deep bond that the father and son have with one another, a bond that cannot be broken by the horrid lies told by Edmund for his own gain. It is one of the few times in the play where good trumps evil and proves that even in a world filled with negativity, that is still a possibility.

   To conclude, I believe that this is a mainly negative play with many depressing ideas and cruel treatment to people, specifically to women. However, despite all this negativity there are a few characters that shine through to show that the world is not a completely horrible place and that there will always be some positivity no matter how much negativity exists.  

Monarchy in King Lear

Monarchy in King Lear

While "King Lear" has evident themes of monarchy, Shakespeare does not portray his king with any extra merit. In fact, Shakespeare has taken away good qualities that a king should have, like empathy, sympathy, wisdom and a sense of justice, as well as a good judge of character. However, themes of monarchy run parallel to themes of fatherhood, we see Lear fail as a father just as he fails as a king. He is too rash, too cruel, too foolish to truly be a proper father or king. Perhaps Shakespeare is trying to assert that to be a good king you must first be a good person, as integrity, compassion and justice are integral not only for a decent person, but also a decent king. 

This view can perhaps be carried from Elizabethan society, as a king represented more than a nation; a king was God's representative and was therefore not only to be treated with the utmost respect, but was infallible. Therefore, Shakespeare's portrayal of a mad, lost king can almost be construed as blasphemy, were the characters in the play not heathens themselves. The fact that Goneril and Regan so openly defy their king, no matter what family connection they may have, is a shocking idea, and an Elizabethan audience would have been properly outraged.

Arguably, a king must be the subjects he wants to have. By this I mean that if Lear is rash, cruel and foolish, then his subjects should mirror his personality. By this reasoning, Lear should expect the cruelty is he shown by his daughters, who are law abiding subjects to this point. Both Cordelia and Kent have defied in authority in some way; Cordelia by confronting her father and Kent by staying after he'd been banished. Therefore, Lear has brought this upon himself, as king of his subjects, as being god's representative. We must ask ourselves, is this an accurate portrayal of monarchy? Is Lear's kingship the problem that leads to all other issues, or vice versa?

In the beginning of the play, we can witness Lear before his fall. He holds absolute power, he is entirely respected, as he is also incredibly foolish. However, this is unknown to himself and the rest of the cast at this point, and Lear enters in Act One with as much grandeur as can be expected by a king. We initially think that he is a rightful king, a proper monarch for his society but this notion is quickly forgotten with the absurdity of the love-test, and we see a shadow of what this king will be reduced to, a sad, lonely old man, foolish and egotistical. Those who oppose him are quickly dealt with, even those who act out of love, even those who he is directly related to. This gives the audience an impression of foolish monarchy, or at least of this monarch.

A proper and good impression of a king is that of the King of France who, by accepting Cordelia, without dowry and cast off by her father, shows compassion and reason, qualities that Lear lacks, at least at this stage in his life. France is generous and kind, two qualities that if Lear had presented with, might have stopped the events of the play in its' tracks. However, the stark contrast between Lear and France show us what Lear must have once been, and again iterates that an absolute monarch cannot be a fair one, and by being as unquestioning and dismissive of others as Lear is, he encourages his daughters Goneril and Regan to do the same. They are unafraid of divine power, as they have defied and won against the absolute power in their kingdom, god's representative, and have by reasoning defied god and won.

Eyesight Motif in King Lear

 One of the most fascinating properties in Shakespeare's 'King Lear' is the story's ability to deepen and to develop layer upon layer every time you read it. One of the tools Shakespeare uses to create this intriguing quality in his work is through the use of motifs, of which eyesight is possibly the most prominent example in the play.

 The motif of eyesight is introduced in the very first scene, starting the gradual build-up of the motif from the very beginning of the play. Gonneril tells Lear that she loves him 'more than eyesight'. Such an outlandish statement immediately grasps the attention of an audience, implanting the motif on some level into our heads. To have Gonneril, the least favourite of Lear's daughters and a relatively unimportant character, initiate such a vital motif into the play may seem like an unusual choice of Shakespearre's, but only adds to the complexity of this motif as the plot unfurls.

 Another interesting feature of the eyesight motif in 'King Lear' is it's ability to fade into the background so effortlessly during the course of the play. After Gonneril introduces the motif with such a bang, the motif gradually disappears from centre-stage and becomes almost invisible to the audience. However, the motif never truly vanishes. With the Fool's jokes about Lear's 'blindness' to his daughter's sinister intentions, with Lear's not believing his eyes at his daughter's cruelty, with Gloucester being unable to see beyond  Edmund's rouse or behind Edgar's disguise, the motif of vision and eyesight gradually gains momentum as the play takes it's course.

 Finally, the most shocking aspect of the eyesight motif in 'King Lear' is undoubtedly witnessed during the gauging of Gloucester's eyes. Throughout the play, vision and blindness are referred to in a less literal sense, such as the idea of being 'blind' to your daughter's vileness. For the motif to reach it's climax in such a physical display catches the audience completely by surprise, and leaves them without breath by the end of the scene. The fact that Gonneril suggests blinding Gloucester to her sister and brother-in-law allows her to bring the motif to it's peak of prominence on top of first bringing eyesight into the play. The horrific gore witnessed in this scene is like nothing else in 'King Lear', and can render a reader awe-struck at having been subjected to such a hideous act  of violence, while also watching the motif of eyesight reach a profound extremity like no other concealed feature in the play.

 Though the world of 'King Lear' is chaotic, confusing, cluttered, and at times may seem to be composed of little less than nonsense, as the text of the play is analysed, stunning, intricate patterns appear throughout all aspects of Shakespeare's falsified universe, creating a complexity in the world of the play that could be seconded only by reality. The motif of eyesight is the crowning example of this beautiful, premeditated wildness seen so often in 'King Lear'.

Loyalty and Betrayal in King Lear

Loyalty and betrayal play a huge part in 'King Lear'. Betrayal is particularly important as it is the trust with which characters such as Lear place in characters such as his daughters Goneril and Regan, and their consequential betrayal of  which spark the tragic sequence of events in the play. It is made clear from the outset of the play that there is a divide between characters - those who value their own loyalty, remain staunch in sed loyalty despite unnameable circumstances which are in constant occurrence throughout the play ,and put simply, those who don't. Betrayal is inevitable in the second bracket of those without loyalty. What is notably interesting is that in their respective groupings, characters share similar traits outside of loyalty or betrayal. These traits will be further explored throughout the essay, although what is in stark evidence is that these traits appear to come as a consequence of a character's loyalty, or their ability to betray. This, in my opinion, contributes to the extremely questionable morality of the play.

The best way to explore the effects and uses of loyalty and betrayal in King Lear is to voyage through the character which best represent these ever evident themes. In this way, it is an necessity that the first character put under inspection is Kent, the ultimate upholder of loyalty in the play. Kent is unusual when reviewed in terms of loyalty as he displays unwaveringly clear vision throughout the play. From Act1;Scene1, when Kent's passion, his want of the best for King Lear, gets the better of his more tactful senses  and he berates him with his most famous of lines "see better Lear", to his risky disguise in order to watch over and protect Lear, to his remaining with Lear during the storm in Act3, Kent displays his ever-loyal nature, but what most be observed is the returns he receives for his perfect loyalty - Suffering. It is through his loyalty and truth to Lear in the opening scene that results in his banishment, it is through his loyalty to Lear that he ends up suffering a period in the stocks at the hands Oswald who is, as a servant his opposite in near every way. Suffering appears to be a classic example of the traits which accompany those characters bracketed as being loyal and provides            a prime example of the worrying morality Shakespeare portrays in the play.                    

If Kent is the ultimate upholder of loyalty in the play, then Edmund is the ultimate beacon through which betrayal acts, Having said this in a measure of levels of betrayal Edmund is very closely followed by Lear's daughters Goneril and Regan. Edmund's betrayals are constant, his lust for power insatiable and growing with every step he takes up the monarchal ladder. His first major betrayal comes in Act1:Scene2 when he executes a self-made plan and has his father Gloucester read a letter he has forged in his brother Edmund's name. The letter details a plot of Edgar's to overthrow his father. Gloucester doesn't question the veracity of the letter precisely and its coming to light results in Edgar's having to take on the disguised role of Poor Tom. Edmund's betrayals continue and result in the gruesome torture of his father by Cornwall and Regan. When observing the betrayals of Edmund the morality displayed in the play again comes into question. Edmund is, one could argue, the most clear sighted character in the play. He disregards the seemingly non existent pagan gods and
manipulates those who rely upon them throughout the play. There is no scheme to which Edmund is unaware, no occurrences to which he is blind, and this clarity of vision is a trait all characters who
betray those who have them in their trust seem to share. Goneril and Regan for example are completely clear sighted in the face of Lear's blindness and their betrayal of him comes out of this consequence. It would appear that in the world of 'King Lear', loyalty is a form of blindness. It is in this way that characters willing to betray those who are loyal see constant success in the play as they are able to scheme past characters blinded by the unrealistic assumption of their unwavering loyalty. Edmund rises from an illegitimate child to a King, Goneril and Regan rise from daughters of a King to Queens. It is only the inevitable force of Shakespearian tragedy that stops their progress and results in their deaths.

Loyalty and betrayal can be perfectly contrasted through the actions of two very minor characters- the nameless servant of Act3:scene7 and Oswald through his actions in toward Kent in Act2:Scene2. In the case of the servant, he displays incredible loyalty to Gloucester as he is being tortured by Cornwall, and attacks Cornwall, killing him. The result of this loyalty, this greatest example of bravery in the play, is the death of the servant. He receives no thanks, nor even a name to go by in the play. In contrast Oswald's slander and consequential punishment of Kent, an official representative of Lear in his disguised form,  is a great betrayal of Lear who , despite not being King at sed present moment, is still of royal blood and worthy of respect.This betrayal of Lear however receives no justification and he instead receives reward for his actions from Regan,completing the contrast between loyalty and betrayal in the play.