Tragedy Through Misreading in William Shakespeare's King Lear

976 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Tragic flaw in the characters of King Lear

Tragedy Through Misreading in William Shakespeare's King Lear

Shakespeare’s tragedy, King Lear, portrays many important misconceptions which result in a long sequence of tragic events. The foundation of the story revolves around two characters, King Lear and Gloucester, and concentrates on their common flaw, the inability to read truth in other characters. For example, the king condemns his own daughter after he clearly misreads the truth behind her “dower,”(1.1.107) or honesty. Later, Gloucester passes judgment on his son Edgar based on a letter in which he “shall not need spectacles”(1.2.35) to read. While these two characters continue to misread people’s words, advisors around them repeatedly give hints to their misinterpretations, which pave the road for possible reconciliation. The realization of their mistakes, however, occurs after tragedy is inevitable.

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.

Even though Gloucester is a fundamentally good man he tends to have a pessimistic view on his situation, as well as the rest of the world. Gloucester displays his inability to read and comprehend reality once more when he begins to read the skies. “...

... middle of paper ...

...able to regain his ability to see but it is during the last act of the play in which the circumstances are completely out of his control. These characters both die because they are pushed way past the limits of human fortitude and competence.

When Lear tells Gloucester “A man may see how this world /goes with no eyes” (4.6.146-47) he displays both of their misfortunes, but it is too late to prevent ultimate tragedy. Shakespeare proposes that their tragic saga is a mere game to the heavens. “As flies to wanton boys, are we to th’ gods,/They kill us for their sport” (4.1.37-38). This line generalizes the overall simplicity behind the tragedy of King Lear. Even though Gloucester and Lear made terrible, fatal errors the reader feels at the end as if it is intended to be their destiny.

Work Cited

Shakespeare, William. King Lear . New York: Oxford UP, 1994.

Show More
Related

  • True Power in "Shooting an Elephant" by George Orwell

    1473 Words  | 3 Pages

    The state of power established through the imperialistic backdrop show that Orwell should have control over the Burmese. Orwell is a British colonial officer in Burma, which is under the control of the British, and because of this he should have authority and control over the Burmans. The presence of the empire is established when Orwell explains that, “with one part of my mind I thought of the British Raj as an unbreakable tyranny...upon the will of the prostrate people; with another part I thought that the greatest joy in the world would be to drive a bayonet into a Buddhist priest’s gut.” (144) This ideal imperialistic circumstance, where ...

    Read More

  • The Tragedy of King Lear Analysis

    2095 Words  | 5 Pages

    In The Tragedy of King Lear, particularly in the first half of the play, Lear continually swears to the gods. He invokes them for mercies and begs them for destruction; he binds both his oaths and his curses with their names. The older characters—Lear and Gloucester—tend view their world as strictly within the moral framework of the pagan religion. As Lear expresses it, the central core of his religion lies in the idea of earthly justice. In II.4.14-15, Lear expresses his disbelief that Regan and Albany would have put the disguised Kent, his messenger, in stocks. He at first attempts to deny the rather obvious fact in front of him, objecting “No” twice before swearing it. By the time Lear invokes the king of the pagan gods, his refusal to believe has become willful and almost absurd. Kent replies, not without sarcasm, by affixing the name of the queen of the gods to a contradictory statement. The formula is turned into nonsense by its repetition. In contradicting Lear’s oath as well as the assertion with which it is coupled, Kent is subtly challenging Lear’s conception of the universe as controlled by just gods. He is also and perhaps more importantly, challenging Lear’s relationship with the gods. It is Kent who most lucidly and repeatedly opposes the ideas put forth by Lear; his actions as well as his statements undermine Lear’s hypotheses about divine order. Lear does not find his foil in youth but in middle age; not in the opposite excess of his own—Edmund’s calculation, say—but in Kent’s comparative moderation. Likewise the viable alternative to his relationship to divine justice is not shown by Edmund with his ...

    Read More

  • Orwell's Elephant

    722 Words  | 2 Pages

    George Orwell’s essay, “Shooting an Elephant,” was written as an attack on British imperialism and totalitarianism. Orwell recounts an experience of shooting an escaped elephant from his time as a policeman in Burma during the British Raj, utilizing a remorseful, reflective tone. He observes that “When the white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom that he destroys” (14), and that “He wears a mask, and his face grows to fit it” (14). Orwell is not only correct in his assertion that totalitarianism is harmful, he further explains how it is detrimental to all those that are umbrellaed under it.

    Read More

  • How Does Orwell Create Tension In Shooting An Elephant

    121 Words  | 1 Pages

    In “Shooting an Elephant” writer George Orwell illustrates the terrible episode that explains more than just the action of “shooting an elephant.” Orwell describes the scene of the killing of an elephant in Burma and reveals a number of emotions he experienced during the short, but traumatic event. Effectively, the writer uses many literary techniques to plant emotions and create tension in this scene, leading to an ironic presentation of imperialism. With each of the realistic descriptions of the observing multitude and the concrete appeal of the narrator’s pathos, Orwell thrives in persuading the audience that imperialism not only has a destructive impact on those being governed under the imperialists’ oppressive power, but also corrupts

    Read More

  • Fate in Shakespeare's King Lear

    2056 Words  | 5 Pages

    Fate in King Lear & nbsp;           "There's a divinity that shapes our ends, rough hew them how we will. I will be able to do so. "  These words from Hamlet are echoed, even more pessimistically,  in Shakespeare's play, The Tragedy of King Lear, Gloucester. Like flies to wanton boys, are we to the gods, they kill us for their sport".  In Lear, the characters are subjected to the various tragedies of life over and over again. & nbsp; An abundance of cyclic imagery in Lear shows that good people are.

    Read More

  • plotlear Parallel Plots of Shakespeare's King Lear

    1893 Words  | 4 Pages

    As is by now apparent, there are a multitude of parallel plots within Shakespeare's play King Lear.  In each plot, a character's breach of loyalty condemned the character to certain death in the final scene of the play.  Several of the characters who exhibited treachery and later died were King Lear, Cordelia, Edmund, and Goneril.  Accordingly, Kent, the Fool, Edgar, and Albany all survived the play because they did not cast aside their loyalties.

    Read More

  • Media Manipulation Exposed in George Orwell's Shooting an Elephant

    1588 Words  | 4 Pages

    Orwell, George. “Shooting an Elephant.” The Brief Arlington Reader. Ed. Nancy Perry. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2004. 334-339.

    Read More

  • Human Suffering in Inferno and King Lear

    1552 Words  | 4 Pages

    Through Lear, Shakespeare expertly portrays the inevitability of human suffering. The “little nothings,” seemingly insignificant choices that Lear makes over the course of the play, inevitably evolve into unstoppable forces that change Lear’s life for the worse. He falls for Goneril’s and Regan’s flattery and his pride turns him away from Cordelia’s unembellished affection. He is constantly advised by Kent and the Fool to avoid such choices, but his stubborn hubris prevents him from seeing the wisdom hidden in the Fool’s words: “Prithee, tell him, so much the rent of his land comes to: he will not believe a fool” (Shakespeare 21). This leads to Lear’s eventual “unburdening,” as foreshadowed in Act I. This unburdening is exacerbated by his failure to recognize and learn from his initial mistakes until it is too late. Lear’s lack of recognition is, in part, explained by his belief in a predestined life controlled completely by the gods: “It is the stars, the stars above us govern our conditions” (Shakespeare 101). The elder characters in King Lear pin their various sufferings on the will of...

    Read More

  • Analyzing King Lear's Tragic Flaws

    862 Words  | 2 Pages

    King Lear is a play about a tragic hero, by the name of King Lear, whose flaws get the best of him. A tragic hero must possess three qualities. The first is they must have power, in other words, a leader. King Lear has the highest rank of any leader. He is a king. The next quality is they must have a tragic flaw, and King Lear has several of those. Finally, they must experience a downfall. Lear's realization of his mistakes is more than a downfall. It is a tragedy. Lear is a tragic hero because he has those three qualities. His flaws are his arrogance, his ignorance, and his misjudgments, each contributing to the other.

    Read More

  • Shakespeare's King Lear - A World too Cruel?

    1688 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • King Lear as a Tragedy Caused by Arrogance, Rash Decisions and Poor Judgement of Character

    546 Words  | 2 Pages

    King Lear as a Tragedy Caused by Arrogance, Rash Decisions and Poor Judgement of Character

    Read More

  • Anxiety Disorders

    1294 Words  | 3 Pages

    Anxiety is a normal reaction to stressful situations that helps in the coping process for individuals. On some occasions, anxiety may become so severe that it impairs the ability to cope and can create psychosocial impairment. High levels of anxiety that interfere with daily activities and social interaction are considered a psychiatric disorder. Anxiety disorders are treatable and can have profound effects on the psychosocial aspect of the individuals life.

    Read More

  • Blindness and Sight - Lack of Insight in King Lear

    1420 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Shakespeare's classic tragedy, King Lear, the issue of sight and its relevance to clear vision is a recurring theme.  Shakespeare's principal means of portraying this theme is through the characters of Lear and Gloucester. Although Lear can physically see, he is blind in the sense that he lacks insight, understanding, and direction. In contrast, Gloucester becomes physically blind but gains the type of vision that Lear lacks. It is evident from these two characters that clear vision is not derived solely from physical sight. Lear's failure to understand this is the principal cause of his demise, while Gloucester learns to achieve clear vision, and consequently avoids a fate similar to Lear's.

    Read More

  • Comparing Lear and Gloucester in Shakespeare's King Lear

    1980 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...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.

    Read More

  • Shakespeare's King Lear - The Redemption of King Lear

    740 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...e and determination to repair his life is evident at this point, and continues to show for the duration of the play.

    Read More

More about Tragedy Through Misreading in William Shakespeare's King Lear

Open Document