King Lear Vs A Thousand Acres

870 Words2 Pages

While it may appear that Jane Smiley's A Thousand Acres is nothing but a modernized interpretation of Shakespeare's King Lear, one can see that below the surface these two tales are anything but alike. Through Smiley's characters Larry, Caroline, Ginny and Rose, it is easy to conclude that they contrast their "parallels," Lear, Cordelia, Goneril and Rose, greatly from Shakespeare's play. Among the multiple themes that make this conclusion possible, the most prominent are the contrasting themes of relationships, outcomes, character development and motivations. At first, Shakespeare portrays King Lear as an arrogant man whose only concern is himself; Lear has no problem relishing in his title and power as ruler, but has trouble carrying out the responsibilities of a king and doing good for his people. With this mindset, Lear manages to …show more content…

Similar to Lear, Larry is an arrogant man who pays little mind to his daughter who fails to worship him like his other daughters do. While this is similar, the most important difference between these two characters is their change as a person throughout the story. While Lear grows, Larry back tracks. Not only does he continue to be self centered and outrageously rude, he fails to accept his flaws and wrongdoings and has no remorse whatsoever, "Daddy thinks history starts fresh everyday, every minute... That's how he keeps on betraying us, why he roars at us with such conviction" (Smiley 215). Larry is not able to reconcile his relationship with his daughters, like Lear did with Cordelia. Larry was not mentally well in the end, and he even believes one of his children died due to the sisters, "She's dead...Caroline! Caroline's dead! I think those sisters stole the body and buried her already" (Smiley 319). Larry pushes everyone away and remains the same throughout the entire novel, proving that these two characters are far from

Open Document