Shakespeare’s King Lear: Analysis (2)
In this series, I will be sharing the literature analysis essays I have written as part of my preparation for CAIE’s A2-Level Literature in English. I thought I would be a waste to let them collect dust now that I have been an A-Level graduate for two years now, so I believe the next best thing is to share it online hoping someone preparing for their exams will find it useful!
Context
This essay is an extract-based response. It is not possible for me to insert the extract, but you can find it in Act 4 Scene 6, wherein the audience witness King Lear meeting Gloucester and Edgar.
Essay
The essay is in response to this question:
Paying close attention to the effects of the writing, discuss the following passage, showing its significance to the play.
‘King Lear’ is a drama that revolves around King Lear and the aftermath of his decision to equally divide all his land among two of his three daughters, Goneril and Regan, while he banished his third daughter, Cordelia. This extract comes after a comedic yet endearing scene wherein Edgar deceived the blinded Gloucester that he survived the suicidal leap from a cliff; the use of deception by Edgar, prompted by his love for his father, contrasts strikingly to Edmund’s use of deception for personal gain and power. In this extract, the audience witnesses the presentation of Lear’s fragmented state of mind, as he meets Edgar and Gloucester.
As the audience have witnessed starting from Act 3, Lear’s humility began growing as he faced the storm in which he not only came to a recognition of his two daughters’ ‘selfishness so callous that it cannot be touched by the most elemental human pity’ (Dunn) for casting him out, but also realised his failings as a king to care for his underprivileged subjects. Yet, critic Kirsch shrewdly observes that it is this knowledge of human frailty and his failures that ‘increased his sorrow to the point of madness’. Hence, this extract presents his madness and insanity, which underscores his inability to reconcile with his loss of kingship, and underpins his wrath at Goneril and Regan. First and foremost, Lear enters, as per stage directions, ‘fantastically dressed with wild flowers’, which may be both comedic and worrying for audiences to witness, with the latter reaction being the more probable for the Elizabethan audience of ‘King Lear’ as there is a disturbance to the social stratum at the pinnacle of which King Lear used to reside — as critic Kinney notes, wild flowers were commonly used as a mediaeval treatment for mental disorders, which would imply Lear’s madness. Edgar, too, observes Lear’s unconventional appearance: ‘the safer sense will ne’er accommodate his master thus.’ Furthermore, his inner tumult can be witnessed in the content of his dialogue, in which he seems to be hallucinating imaginary animals: ‘Look, look, a mouse! Peace, peace, this piece of toasted cheese will do’t.’ and again ‘O, well flown, bird. I’ th’ clout, i’ th’ clout. Hewgh!’ In these lines, the repetition (‘look, look’, ‘peace, peace’, and ‘i’ th’ clout, i’ th’ clout’), the ecphonesis of ‘O’, and the exclamation mark (which may be presented as Lear shouting towards the imagined mouse) contribute to the presentation of his mental disturbance and turmoil. As Lear continues on, the audience understands his madness as a result of his inability and seeming reluctance to grapple and reconcile with his loss of kingship — the antilabe in lines 26 to 27 display this: he is very swift in assuming the label of ‘the king’. Thus, he starts exclaiming his utmost power: ‘When I do stare, see how the subject quakes’, and holds an imaginary trial that reminds the audience of his earlier one wherein he tried Goneril and Regan. He ‘pardon[s] that man’s life’ with certitude as stressed by the brevity of the line, ostensibly permitting adultery (‘Die for adultery? No.’) In Lear’s justification for his authorisation for adultery, it is clear that Lear’s dramatic monologue is driven by his wrath against his evil daughters, as their ingratitude has broken the heart of Lear, shattered his reason, and burst asunder the bonds of family affection in him (Dunn). This is evidenced in his comparison of ‘Gloucester’s bastard son / [who] was kinder to his father than [Lear’s] daughters / got ’tween the lawful sheets’, which manifests irony that is doubly painful for Gloucester and Edgar who truly know the truth being the opposite. Moreover, Lear’s anger at Goneril and Regan is projected onto all women as seen in his denunciation of women’s sexual promiscuity, via comparing their sinful debauchery being worse than animals like ‘fitchew’ and ‘soiled horses’. Along with animalistic diction, the asyndetic listing of ‘hell…darkness…sulfurous pit’ depicting an imagery of vice and immorality, coupled with the /s/ sibilance (connoting threatening evil) work to underpin and foreground Lear’s anger at the ostensible pointlessness of the legitimacy of children (specifically Regan and Goneril) for they are more evil than illegitimate children.
In his reflection on ‘King Lear’, critic Kirsch observes that the play is composed of oppositions, and this is profoundly encapsulated by Lear’s inability to mediate between his wrath and his humility. In this extract, his humility grows but it always oscillates with his wrath, never replaces it. His dialogue oscillates from madness and hallucination, to a shrewd narration of the truth that he has learned, which has significance but lacks cohesion (Kinney). Being obsessed with his daughters’ ingratitude (Dunn), he mistakes Gloucester for them (‘Ha! Goneril with a white beard? Ha, Regan?). In his fractured language (‘Ha!’ and again ‘Ha’) which reads like sarcasm, he points out their false flattery of praising his wisdom, with figurative language of ‘white beard’ connoting age and wisdom, when in actuality he lacks it (‘black ones were there’). He further points out the insincerity of Goneril and Regan who appease him by repetition of his commands like ‘Ay’ and ‘No’. Fortunately, he ‘found’ and ‘smelt’ their false treatment towards him when he was battling the weatherly manifestations of ‘rain’, ‘storm’, and ‘thunder’ — a reminder of the climactic storm scene in the previous act wherein Lear realised that he is not ‘ague-proof’. The line ‘I am not ague-proof’ is a profound summation of his newfound sense of humility in the face of chaos and destruction, the line of which is utilised, partly due to its brevity, to underscore Lear’s ongoing process of anagnorisis. This is further evident in the line ‘it smells of mortality’ in which he is ‘embarrassed at his own humanity’, hesitating to accept Gloucester’s gesture intending to honour him (Kinney): Lear realises that being placed on a pedestal has made his ego ballooned, blinding his sight in terms of good governance and ability to accept human mortality, causing an entire upheaval portrayed in this play. Therefore, Lear undergoes character development. At this point of the extract, Lear’s insistence on being the king: ‘I am the king himself’ demonstrates that Shakespeare does not intend to completely disrupt the Elizabethan social stratum with a replacement of kingship (evident as many characters still honour him as their king, as well as Cordelia’s plan of invasion to reinstate Lear’s title) but illuminates that Lear has achieved a greater awareness and understanding of his follies and responsibilities of his role. Seeing Lear’s character development, the audience may start to sympathise and consider Lear’s redemption as a character in improvement, as even though the loss of kingship and the physical suffering he has endured are unnatural disruption of social stratum of King Lear’s time, the formerly pompous king has grown and matured, which will be further displayed in later scenes where Lear begs for Cordelia’s forgiveness, opening up the possibility for resolution.
In this extract, Edgar and Gloucester’s loyalty can be attested to via their respective reactions towards witnessing Lear’s appearance. Edgar’s reaction of shock towards Lear’s madness is illuminated by the ecphonesis and exclamation in the line ‘O thou side-piercing sight!’. His reaction underscores the surrealism of the situation. It is possible that this shock and sad reaction towards the unfortunate circumstance of the king is compounded by Edgar’s realisation of his responsibility in pushing Lear over the edge of sanity into the abyss of insanity through his pretence as Poor Tom. ‘And my heart breaks at it’: a line profoundly pathos-inducing for the audience as Edgar is the only sane character in the extract, yet is as powerless in helping Lear as Gloucester is. In addition, Gloucester’s response to Lear’s presence is a testament of his loyalty (previously proven through his aid of Lear in seeking shelter which led to his blinding), as he is able to recognise Lear (‘I know that voice.’) just by the premise of his voice, without sight. It is endearing to see the loyalty and respect with which Gloucester still treats Lear, emphasised by his exclamation in the form of an ecphonesis of his desire to ‘kiss that hand!’ As critic Storozynsky notes, Lear is symbolic of the world and its orderings, Gloucester’s lament (evident in the ecphonesis) in lines 52 and 53 corroborate the idea that the unnatural disruption of Lear’s kingship will bring about destructive consequences (‘wear out to nought’) for all of humanity. At the end of this extract, it is clear that Shakespeare has utilised the subplot of Gloucester’s blinding to parallel, and thus complement and reinforce the main plot of Lear’s suffering to highlight and stress the theme of blindness and insight. Lear’s metaphorical blindness towards his daughters’ false flattery, which brought him to unprecedented lows, led him to a character growth, likewise Gloucester’s literal blinding by Regan and Cornwall led him to ‘see[ing]’ the true colours of Edmund.
In distillation, the respective suffering of Lear and Gloucester, which arose from indubitably similar events, provided them with insight of insurmountable value regarding the true characteristics of each of their children, and hence facilitates Lear’s anagnorisis and Gloucester’s character development. Audiences are led to an expectation of a satisfactory resolution in which Lear’s kingship is reinstated and that he would be a better king. However, in tragic Shakespearean reversal, a future irony is set up in that despite the protagonists’ character development witnessed throughout the play, the play would ultimately end with the prevailing triumph of evil which causes Lear and Gloucester’s death, leaving them with no opportunity to rectify previous mistakes. Hence, it is the reversal of expectations that underscores the poignant, nihilistic tragedy of this play whereby the only solace lies in the self-destruction of the evil forces concurrent with Lear and Gloucester’s perish (Dunn).
Marks: 25/25
