Unity Of Place In King Lear Essay

1380 Words3 Pages

Much alike unity of time, unity of place was not explicitly defined within Poetics. In fact, Aristotle made no direct mention to unity of place. Instead it was an interpretation established by French and Italian classical dramatists in the sixteenth century (“Unities.”). It most likely arose due to limitations in creating representations of multiple locations in early theatre. It was clearer to confine the action to one setting. In theory, unity of place will concentrate the tragic effect, as all action occurs in one place and is directly related to that place. By principle, having multiple settings will diminish the tragic effects by spreading out the action and in result diluting its impact.
Once again, Shakespeare did not strictly adhere …show more content…

Despite losing the supposed benefits of unity of place, King Lear in fact accomplishes heightened affect and broadens its scope by violating unity. King Lear is expansive and all encompassing in its tragic effect, partly due to its ever changing and growing setting. By bringing in more elements of location, King Lear effectively ties the entire fate of the realm and humanity itself, to Lear’s. QUOTATIONS. It is fitting that the tragedy of King Lear encompasses multiple locations because it takes apart the entire context of life. King Lear presents a vast survey of the human condition and social structure, so applying it to the entire realm is remarkably effective. It makes the chaos feel ever expanding and unstoppable. The madness tormenting Lear’s mind spreads and threatens the entire realm, calling into question many ideals. The inclusion of multiple locations within England and even France just further expands the consideration of humanity and its social order. A simple disruption in Lear’s life boils over into his entire kingdom and endangers the very meaning of everything Lear once knew. Violating unity of place allows King Lear to have greater impact. The crushing pain of the final act is enhanced by the sense of involvement from the entire realm. There is loss and need for a restart for everyone. Since the setting of King Lear is so encompassing and expansive, its …show more content…

According to Aristotle, the importance of tragedy as a genre is to represent action. Thus unity of action purportedly has the strongest implications for the effectiveness of the work itself. Aristotle posits “a story, since it is the representation of action, should concern an action that is single and entire, with its several incidents so structured that the displacement or removal of any one of them would disturb and dislocate the whole.” (Aristotle 27) and deems this claim imperative. A good plot, and thereby an effective tragedy, does not include events, which are not connected to each other or specifically the main plot. In theory, these unconnected events are distracting from the main action and dissipate the tragic effect. With Aristotle’s definition, no sub-plot should exist in tragedy. For all events to be “necessary or [have] probable connection with each other.” (Aristotle 27) none should exist not directly related to the main action. Again, unity allows for the tragic effect to be concentrated, intending to allow for increased feelings of pity and

Open Document