As Harold Bloom analyzes various interpretations of King Lear in his book, Bloom’s Shakespeare Through the Ages: King Lear, he starts by discussing modern critical interpretations of King Lear. Bloom believes Shakespeare used King Lear to mold out a sense of reality that cannot be seen in any other plays or books except the Bible (304-305). Furthermore, like many other critics have said, Bloom agrees that many elements of King Lear are similar to the Book of Job. However, Bloom believes that Shakespeare sought to have this play resemble the Book of Job in order for the audience to see Job as a model for King Lear’s situation and emphasize the negativity of King Lear’s tragedy. Bloom notes however that King Lear was not like Job because …show more content…
Bloom’s first analysis is of The Fool who he defines as a displaced spirit who is not only beloved, but also a mad person, child, and victim. The Fool and King Lear are believed to always appear together throughout the play because The Fool is responsible for controlling the king’s nobility while destroying some of the king’s sanity. The Fool appears to serve as a teacher for whoever needs him (in this case King Lear), and may travel from play to play, which could explain why The Fool abruptly disappears in the middle of King Lear (Bloom …show more content…
When I had first reviewed King Lear, it was difficult for me to see the point in the Fool. Initially, the Fool had seemed like a random character just thrown into the play. However after reading Bloom’s critique, I now see how much of an important role the Fool had in the play. Without the Fool as a guide for King Lear, it seems unlikely that the main messages of the play would have gotten across since the Fool served to instill the meaning of life in King Lear. Bloom’s analysis of the Fool had also gotten me thinking more about why he would be given that name. Although Bloom believed the Fool’s name resembled his randomness and immaturity, I think his name may be the Fool since he teaches us messages that we’re too oblivious (or foolish) to
Shakespeare, William. "King Lear: A Conflated Text." The Norton Shakespeare. Ed. Stephen Greenblatt. New York:
Societal and environmental factors, even from the beginning of adolescence, shape people’s interpretation and comprehension of love (Hartup 8-13). This makes it decidedly difficult for people to notice a distinction between the different types of love. Not only do copious types of love exist, but also there are varying definitions of love (Rubin 2-4). Whilst some people may define love as immaturity, others may define it as a positive passionate emotion between two, occasionally multiple, people (1). The primary type of love, defined by the latter statement in the previous sentence, in King Lear is familial love — rather than the romantic love that a multitude of Shakespeare’s other plays revolve around. Bloom mentions
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.
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.
Fools, as I understand them, were kept by kings as entertainment devices prior to the advent of television. Lear's Fool, how-ever, transcends the role as entertainer to assume the role of both Ann Landers and Jim Davis. Particularly intriguing to me are his witticisms and humorous tidbits which interweave foreshadowing, practical advice, humor, and characterization into a succinct, meterical saying.
In Shakespeare’s King Lear, the Fool is a source of chaos and disruption in King Lear’s tumultuous life. The Fool causes the King distress by insulting him, making light of his problems, and telling him the truth. On the road to Regan’s, the Fool says “If thou wert my Fool, nuncle, I’d have thee / beaten for being old before thy time.” (1.5.40-41). He denies the king the respect due to him as an aged King, causing the King to wonder at his worthiness. The fool also makes light of Lear’s qualms making snide remarks in response to Lear’s ruminations. When Lear asks Edgar cryptically, “wouldst thou give ‘em all?” the Fool responds, “Nay, he reserved a blanket, else we had been all shamed” (3.4.69-72). The Fool’s snide remarks do little to maintain Lear’s fragile control of his faculties. However, the Fool speaks to the king candidly, a rare occasion in Lear’s life. Even Kent acknowledges the truth of the Fool’s statements, saying, “This is not altogether fool, my lord” (1.4.155).
King Lear is not the only one of Shakespeare’s plays to contain a comical scapegoat; in the Merchant of Venice, Gobbo is used to bring comedy and irony to an otherwise serious play, although his supposedly comical exploitation of his father’s blindness in the first act may also prepare us for the theme of cruelty which is evident in the play. We may further suggest that the fool’s surreal and absurd comments in King Lear ("thy bor’st thine ass on thine back o’er the dirt") imply the disorder within the hierarchy as a whole. However, as Touchstone in As You Like It is used as a comedic device by Shakespeare, so the fool is sometimes used for comic effect, employing the Elizabethan/Jacobean euphemistic "thing" as a synonym for penis. The fool in King Lear is an example of Shakespeare using the fool as a voice to bridge the gap between the audience and the stage. The "all-licensed fool" makes many of his quips at the expense of the king. Due to his role as Lear’s amusing sidekick, he was able to get away with this unlike any other, as is shown in the confrontation between Lear and Kent in act one scene one. Lear is the absolute ruler of the country - what he says is as good as God’s word – which reflects the Divine Right of Kings, a Medieval doctrine which was still extant in the early seventeenth century although it was beginning to come under sig...
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
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 ...
King Lear is a Shakespearian tragedy revolving largely around one central theme, personal transformation. Shakespeare shows in King Lear that the main characters of the play experience a transformative phase, where they are greatly changed through their suffering. Through the course of the play Lear is the most transformed of all the characters. He goes through seven major stages of transformation on his way to becoming an omniscient character: resentment, regret, recognition, acceptance and admittance, guilt, redemption, and optimism. Shakespeare identifies King Lear as a contemptuous human being who is purified through his suffering into some sort of god.
The only one that can hold a mirror, telling the king the truth about his behaviour is the Fool. He is allowed to say anything of criticism without fear of retributions. He is actually Lear’s external conscience, speaking the truth about his three daughters. The Fool has greater wisdom about the world and s...
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.
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.
Lear’s first turning point in the play is resulted from miserably leaving Gloucester’s kingdom and discovering himself and his alter ego (The Fool) outside in a ferocious storm. Through Lear’s continuous built up anger since the two separate displeasing visitations with his daughters Goneril and Regan, and the additional rage of the storm; Lear begins his process of self-reflection. At the beginning of the storm Lear is furious with the actions of his daughter’s Goneril and Regan and attempts to challenge the storm to be even fiercer. Lear shouts, “Blow, winds, and crack your cheeks! Rage! Blow!” Act III, sc. ii, ll. 1, amidst Lear’s almighty calls the Fool makes effort for Lear to retrieve shelter. Then Lear says, “My wits begin to turn. Come on, my boy. How dost, my b...
In Shakespeare's classic tragedy, King Lear, there are several characters who do not see the reality of their situation. Two such characters are Lear and Gloucester. Both characters exhibit a blindness to the world around them. Lear does not see clearly the truth of his daughters mentions, while Gloucester is also blinded by Edmond's treachery. This failure to see reality leads to Lear's intellectual blindness, which is his insanity, and Gloucester's physical blindness that leads to his trusting tendencies. Each character achieves inner awareness at the end as their surreal blindness is lifted and they realize the truth. Both Lear and Gloucester are characters used by Shakespeare to show the relevance of having a clear vision in life.