King Lear by William Shakespeare

Reading Guide! Lear is a mythical figure, there is no historical evidence that he ever lived (as opposed to Macbeth). The actual story of Leir and his daughters had existed prior to Shakespeare’s time. However, it had been a simple melodrama with a happy ending. Shakespeare took the basic storyline and crafted his play – one which is in many ways unsettling. It asks many questions but provides no answers, rather it presents diametrically opposed viewpoints. The story is deliberately set in ancient pagan Britain, far back in the mists of time. There is no mention of the Christian God; there is reference is to gods plural and certain characters speak of supernatural deities believed to control events on earth. It is as if Shakespeare chose to begin at the beginning – to have Lear as Everyman asking the basic human question: “Who is it that can tell me who I am?” or What is the nature of man? What am I? Why am I? All the main characters ask this question at some point. Lear himself finally comes to a realization of what true humanity is when during the storm on the heath he sheds his power, his pride, his egocentricity (and symbolically his clothes) and recognizes his one-ness with all men. In other words, Shakespeare presents a universal, timeless struggle. Lear’s tragic flaw is egotism. At the beginning of the play he cannot see the world through any eyes other than his own. The play is a record of his journey towards self-knowledge – a tragic and painful journey towards a recognition of his basic one-ness with all mankind. The central struggle in the play (other than the main one going on in Lear's own mind) is between two groups of people - those who are motivated principally by a traditional sense of love, respect and allegiance, (Kent, Cordelia, the Fool, Edgar, Gloucester and eventually Albany) and those who serve primarily themselves (Regan, Goneril, Cornwall, Edmund, Oswald.) There is in both the main plot and secondary plot an investigation of the relationship between parents and children and between siblings. Evil is shown as being an absence of love or respect for others and not some external force. There is ambivalence about the nature of justice in the play: is man, we are asked, at the mercy of spiteful, unpredictable gods or does he decide his own fate? The only hint to be drawn from the action of the play is to observe that wrong-doing is punished but goodness not necessarily rewarded. Much of the thinking and philosophy in the play is focused on the role and position of the individual and less on systems of belief and strict social order, which makes it especially relevant for modern man. During the 20th century there was a growing climate of humanism. Man urged to determine his own fate and learn to live with it. This is what the characters in King Lear are forced to do. They had not been provided with set answers to life’s problems. Their gods were at the best unpredictable. The characters in King Lear are on their own. Free (or is it forced) to make their own decisions. Today we call this individualism.

Lear

ENG4U1Ms Vieira

King

Character Map

Anticipation Guide: Destructive Life Events 1. Consider the items below and in the left column rank the items from least horrible

(10) to most horrible (1) in terms of how destructive they would be in your life.

2. In groups of 3 discuss your responses - do you rankings agree or disagree?

3. Rank the items in how destructive you believe they might be in King Lear. Recall what you know about the typical formula for a five-act Shakespearian tragedy

Events from the Play Your Life

Experiencing a family fight

Committing murder

Being murdered

Aging

Going insane

Being in the midst of a war

Being thrown out of your home

Experiencing a thunderstorm

Dying

Having an affair

Events from the Play Predictions

Experiencing a family fight (I.i)

Committing murder (V.iii)

Being murdered (V.iii)

Aging (I.v)

Going insane (III.ii)

Being in the midst of a war (IV, V)

Being thrown out of your home (I.i)

Experiencing a thunderstorm (II, III)

Dying (V.iii)

Having an affair (V.i)

Shakespeare’s LanguageIn Shakespeare's words lie all the clues to character and situation that any reader or actor needs. It's simply a matter of knowing how to find them. The clues are not necessarily in the meanings of the words - the rhythms of the language and the patterns and sounds of the words contain a great deal of valuable information.

Both written and spoken language use rhythm - a pattern of stressed and unstressed syllables. Most forms of poetry or verse take rhythm one step further and regularize the rhythm into a formal pattern of stressed and unstressed syllables. A formal pattern of rhythm is called metre. Shakespeare writes either in blank verse, in rhymed verse or in prose.

Blank VerseBlank verse is unrhymed but uses a regular pattern of rhythm or metre. In the English language, blank verse is iambic pentameter. Pentameter means there are five poetic feet. In iambic pentameter each of these five feet is composed of two syllables: the first unstressed; the second stressed. The opening line of Twelfth Night, is a perfect iambic line: “If music be the food of love play on.” With its unstressed and stressed syllables marked or 'scanned', it looks like this: / ں / ں / ں / ں /  ں 'If mu sic be the food of love play on' ں The rhythm of blank verse is conversational and with its dee DUM, dee DUM, dee DUM, dee DUM, dee DUM rhythm, it imitates the heartbeat. In conversation, we often break the rhythmic pattern and this throws specific words into focus. Shakespeare does the same with blank verse: he often deviates from the perfect iambic line. When he does, it's a clue to a change in the character's feelings or thoughts or a change in situation or both. When the rhythm is changed, the energy and dynamic of the language have been changed. When the line ends in an unstressed syllable rather than a stressed one, as is usual with iambic pentameter, this is sometimes called a feminine or weak ending.

Rhymed VerseWhile blank verse forms the basis of Shakespeare's writing, he often uses rhyme. Frequently a rhymed couplet (a pair of lines whose end words rhyme) closes the scene and sometimes suggests what will come next:

HAMLET: The play's the thing / Wherein I'll catch the conscience of the King. Shakespeare uses rhyme and a variety of rhythm patterns to distinguish special characters such as the witches in Macbeth” “Double, double, toil and trouble / Fire burn and cauldron bubble.” In addition to the rhyme, notice that this is not an iambic line,

= weak / = strong

being only four feet long and with the stresses reversed from the iambic. Shakespeare has created a special musical rhythm for these supernatural characters.

Shakespeare also uses rhyme to make comments and for special occasions such as songs and epilogues. Puck in A Midsummer Night's Dream and Prospero in The Tempest say farewell to the audience in rhyme. Rhyme is a clue to character or situation. It is always helpful to ask why Shakespeare is using rhyme at a particular point and what effect it has. Shakespeare's many songs use rhymed verse.

ProseThe convention in Shakespeare's time was to write plays in verse. His extensive use of prose is yet another sign of his inventiveness and capacity to break with custom when it served his plan. He uses prose for a variety of purposes. Often lower class or comic characters speak prose while the more socially or morally elevated characters speak in verse, but this is far from always the case. Why does Shakespeare shift from verse to prose? The conversational tone of prose can make a character seem more natural at a particular moment or it can indicate the degeneration of a noble nature as it does with Othello. A swift movement from prose to poetry or the reverse is always an indication that a change is taking place. Shakespeare is remarkably skillful in his flexible use of verse forms and prose. While verse is more formally structured than prose, prose is not necessarily more free from rules. In fact, prose can be more subtly and sometimes more artificially structured than verse. Shakespeare regularly uses a number of rhetorical devices to give his prose form and coherence. Important among these are alliteration, assonance, repetition, antithesis, lists and puns. Important among these are alliteration, assonance, repetition, antithesis, lists and puns. These also appear in verse. Most of them are employed in Brutus's speech, which begins: BRUTUS Romans, countrymen, and lovers, hear me for my cause and be silent that you may hear. Believe me for mine honour, and have respect to mine honour, that you may believe. Censure me in your wisdom, and awake your senses that you may the better judge. If there be any in this assembly, any dear friend of Caesar's, to him I say that Brutus' love to Caesar was no less than his. If then that friend demand why Brutus rose against Caesar, this is my answer: not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more…

Lear

ENG4U1Ms Vieira

King Act One, Scene One

In the opening scene an elderly King Lear decides to give up his throne, dividing his kingdom among his three daughters. His two older daughters, Goneril and Regan and their husbands, welcome this decision. Lear’s youngest daughter, Cordelia, and Lear’s chief advisor, Kent, oppose the decision and try and get the king to reconsider. He refuses to change his mind, and almost all of the conflict that will shape the play begins. Five of the major characters in the play – Lear, Goneril, Regan, Cordelia and Kent – are clearly established in this scene.

The first important purpose of this passage is to show that the decision to divide the kingdom has already been made. The second important purpose of this passage is to establish Gloucester’s relationship with his illegitimate son, Edmund. Finally, with the entrance of King Lear and the rest of the court, the scene becomes very public, and the language changes accordingly to verse to mark that these are serious events unfolding. King Lear will explain that he is stepping down as monarch and dividing his kingdom among his three daughters. This entire scene is played out on a public stage; that is, King Lear is speaking to the entire court and through it to the country. It is the equivalent of a presidential news conference. We know this because the trumpets announce the king’s official entrance, and he is surrounded by his daughters, their husbands and his attendants. We also know these are public pronouncements because Lear uses the royal “we,” throughout the passage. When a king referred to himself as “we,” he was speaking both as an individual and as the embodiment of the nation.

Questions for Consideration

1. In the opening dialogue between Kent and Gloucester, what do we learn about: a) the King and the current ‘political’ situation? b) Gloucester’s relationship with his two sons?

2. What does Lear say he wants to achieve by dividing his kingdom between his daughters? Are there any signs that it will not be as straightforward as he anticipates?

3. How and why does Cordelia ‘mar her fortunes’?

4. What is the reason for Lear’s banishment of Kent?

5. At the end of the scene Goneril and Regan discuss their fathers’ behaviour. What does this dialogue add to our knowledge of the two sisters themselves, their father and their family relationships?

Questions for Analysis

1. Make sure you are clear about the central events in Act 1, Scene 1 as this is crucial to the subsequent actions and reactions of the play. Explain:

• what Lear is planning to do as King of Britain• what effect he anticipates this will have on his children• what upsets Lear’s plan

• what he does as a result of this• what this tells us about Lear as a king, as a father and as a human being• what larger themes/human dilemmas this all relates to

2. Look at the response of the three sisters to Lear’s request:• Goneril• Regan• Cordelia

Look at the vocabulary in Goneril and Regan’s speeches: dearer, valued, poor, prise, deed, precious. Think about Shakespeare’s use and purpose of hyperbole; note how it applies to Goneril and Regan.

Cordelia says she must remain true to herself. By the end of the act we see some of the repercussions of her honesty. Her apprehension shows us she might suspect something of this sort. If she feels this way, is it self-indulgent of her to disregard the consequences and answer her father as she does? What harm would it have done to answer in the same vein as her sisters?

3. Explain any similarities in or differences between the way in which the following are feeling at the end of scene one about what Lear has done:

• Cordelia and Kent• Goneril and Regan• France and Burgundy

Lear

ENG4U1Ms Vieira

King Act One, Scene Two

We now move to the parallel plotline involving the family of Gloucester and his two sons. Just as Lear has children who plot against him, the earl of Gloucester has a conniving child. And just as Lear mistakenly banishes the people who truly love him, so Gloucester will condemn the wrong person. In this scene we are shown the evil design right at the beginning.

We met Edmund back at the beginning of the first scene where we saw his father referring to him in an insulting manner: ‘knave,” “whoreson,” etc. Illegitimate children were often called “natural,” so it is appropriate that Edmund begins by pledging his services to the goddess Nature. Edmund’s “Nature” is a rough force which seeks to overturn civilization and order. Edmund explains how his “Nature” helps him deny any man-made status which society would seek to impose on him because of his birth. At line 2 he asks a rhetorical question: “Wherefore [why] should I / Stand in the plague of custom [allow social taboos], and permit / The curiosity of nations [the condemnation of fastidious people] to deprive me, / For that [because] I am some twelve or fourteen moonshines / Lag of a brother?” In other words, why should I be treated with less respect just because some people might object to the condition of my birth or the fact that I am not my father’s oldest son? Remember that inheritance went to the oldest son at this time, so Edmund as the younger, illegitimate son can expect little or nothing from his father.

The thing that really annoys Edmund is his status as a bastard, which he equates with the social term “base” or lower class. Edmund argues that bastards have a right to be treated equally and that, given the circumstances of their conceptions, illegitimate children are actually superior to the legitimate offspring of married couples. He evokes the heightened passion of the illicit affair which leads to the creation of a bastard, the enhanced “composition” and “fierce quality.” He contrasts that with the process of conceiving children within a marriage, which he reduces to the image of “a dull, stale, tired bed” shared by a couple who now have conventional sex without even being fully awake – “Got ‘tween asleep and wake” – and as a consequence produce lots of children – “a whole tribe” -- of no particular distinction – “fops.” Up to this point you could say that Edmund is making a pretty good case for himself. We have seen his father emotionally and socially abuse him; we have seen him rejected and about to be sent away again. He has argued persuasively that he should at least be treated equally, if not regarded as superior to other sons. However, he then goes on to say that if he has been treated unfairly, he is justified in doing what he has to in order to win. Most of Shakespeare’s villains have similar excuses for their evil: somebody mistreated them, and so they are justified in doing what they want. He is delighted at the prospect of defeating his brother in a contest poor Edgar doesn’t even know is happening. Notice that Shakespeare is careful to have Edmund assure us that his father loves both his sons equally. When the villain tells us there is no favoritism, we tend to accept that as an accurate assessment. Nevertheless, Edmund ends his speech with the battle cry of the Bastards Liberation Movement: “Now, gods, stand up for bastards!”

Edmund then proceeds to manipulate both his father and his brother, Gloucester and Edgar, and then returns to verse at line 192 to provide a summary of what he has accomplished in this scene: “A credulous father, and a brother noble, / Whose nature is so far from doing harms / That he suspects none; on whose foolish honesty / My practices ride easy. I see the business. / Let me, if not by birth, have lands by wit. / All with me’s meet [proper], that I can fashion fit.” The change of language to verse once again emphasizes that he is being truthful, in contrast to what went before. The quality that comes through in this passage is how much Edmund enjoys taking advantage of his family. He likes being a villain and feeling superior to his victims. The passage ends with a rhymed couplet, which is the device Shakespeare often used to signal to his audience that when this character leaves the stage it is the end of the scene. The next character will be in a different place and/or time.

Questions for Consideration

1. What are Edmund’s views on legitimacy and illegitimacy?

2. What are the differences between what Edmund appears to believe in, and what his father believes in?

3. How does Edmund set his trap for Gloucester and Edgar?

Lear

ENG4U1Ms Vieira

King

Act One, Scene ThreeIn the opening lines of this scene we see Goneril make good on her threat to do something about controlling her father’s exercise of power. Notice how she seeks for a rationale for curbing him. At line 1 Goneril asks her sycophantic servant, Oswald, if Lear hit one of her gentleman who apparently took exception to Lear’s jester. At line 7 she charges that Lear’s companions, the 100 knights about whom we will hear a lot, are “riotous” and that Lear himself complains all the time. Goneril’s response to this domestic tension is to refuse to speak to her father and to encourage her servants to “come slack of former services” [10], that is to deliberately insult the king.. She repeats her directions to Oswald at line 13. Dr. Phil would undoubtedly say this family needs to confront their problems, if they really are problems, and not play games. She explains her strategy and the reasons for it at line 17: Idle old man, That still would manage those authorities That he hath given away. Now by my life, Old fools are babes again, and must be used With checks as [well as] flatteries, when they are seen abused. There is a level of hatred here that Lear still thinks of himself as a king, even when he has given up the rule. Rather than being understanding of her father’s difficult transition, she dismisses him as an “old fool” who acts like a baby and has to be controlled by use of “flatteries” as well as “checks” or discipline. Goneril admits, in effect, to flattering her father when asked to do so in the first scene. She leaves to write her sister to let her know what the plan of action is. We are introduced to Oswald in this scene who will emerge as a loyal servant who does whatever his employer tells him to, regardless of the morality of the action or the consequences. Oswald will serve as a contrast to another loyal servant, Kent, who is true to the better spirit of his master, what his master should be doing if only he were thinking straight.

Questions for Consideration

1. Now that he as abdicated his power, how is Lear behaving, according to Goneril? What does she intend to do about it?

Lear

ENG4U1Ms Vieira

King Act One, Scene Four

In this scene Kent returns in disguise to serve Lear in a new capacity. King Lear is deliberately insulted and has to learn how that feels. We are introduced to the extraordinary character, the Fool, a professional jester who attempts to use humor to help make Lear see more clearly. Finally we witness the first violent confrontation as Lear discovers what Goneril really thinks of him.

On Shakespeare’s stage there was a convention, an unspoken agreement between players and audience, that if an actor simply changed clothes or took off a phony beard, his appearance would have changed sufficiently so that no one could recognize him. We saw this convention used in Twelfth Night to enable Viola to carry off her masquerade as a man. Kent tells us he has “razed” his appearance, which probably means he shaved his beard. Even more important to his disguise, however, is his change in language. From now on Kent will speak largely in prose and adopt the accent and vocabulary of a lower-class peasant. Language has been throughout the history of England the most important social identifier.

Questions for Consideration

1. How does Kent manage to continue serving Lear despite his banishment?

2. There is growing tension between Lear and his knights, and Goneril’s household. Which incidents bring it to a head? Are your sympathies entirely with Lear in this matter? Do the Fool’s comments affect your attitude?

Key Scene: Act 1 Scene 4 lines 187-309: Lear’s Clash with Goneril

1. The encounter occurs because Lear challenged Goneril about her cold and unwelcoming attitude. Look at I, iii. Why is she angry here? What other cause of irritation does she claim? What instruction does she give her servants and why?

2. 187-212: How does the Fool’s comment to Lear (191-192) sound the key note here? What does Goneril complain of (199-212?) what do you make of her attitude towards her father?

3. 213-223: what is the significance of the Fool’s comments (214-215, and 222)? What is the significance of Lear’s question on 217?

4. 224-233: Identity has already been touched on in 77 and 217. Why do you think Lear questions his identity at this point? What state of mind do you think he’s in?

5. 234-250: What further complaints does Goneril put forward here? How does she view Lear? What offer does she make to her father? What do you think her motives are?

6. 250-271: Comment on Lear’s language as he responds to his daughter. What kind of imagery dominates? How has his view of Cordelia’s ‘fault’ now changed, and why is this change significant? Why does he dismiss his knights?

7. 272-288: List all the images Lear uses in this verbal attack on Goneril. Which are most powerful and why?

8. 289-309: What is Goneril’s attitude to her father’s wild words? What is significant about Lear threatening to pluck out his own eyes? What does Lear’s conviction that he’ll find comfort with Regan tell us about him? Sum up Lear’s state of mind as he leaves.

9. Overview: This scene is the important first step in Lear’s journey towards self-knowledge and realisation of the full extent of his foolish behaviour. In what ways does he begin to see the truth of things? How does the scene help clarify our view of the characters? How far do you sympathise with Lear at the end of the scene?

Lear

ENG4U1Ms Vieira

King

Act One, Scene FiveThis short scene takes place outside Goneril’s castle as Lear waits for his horses to be brought so he can make his dramatic exit. Except for a couple of short passages of instruction to Kent, the entire scene consists of jokes between the Fool and Lear. Yet, it is one of the most poignant scenes in the play. How has Lear’s state of mind changed from the previous scene? How has the Fool’s humor changed from the previous scene? The Fool’s humor takes the form of eight jokes here. These are shorter, less elaborate than the jokes in the preceding scene, and come in a rapid-fire fashion. The subject matter for most of them continues to be Lear’s folly, but there are a couple that seem to have the sole function of distracting Lear from his growing despair.

The scene ends with the Fool addressing the audience with a warning at line 51: “She that’s a maid now, and laughs at my departure,/ Shall not be a maid long, unless things be cut shorter.” This rhymed couplet alerts the audience that the scene will now shift to another location. More importantly the Fool is warning those audience members who are only focused on the jokes and dismiss Lear’s suffering that they are missing the point. If such short-sighted persons were virgins, they would not maintain their chastity for very long, unless men’s “things” were too short to do the job. It’s a bawdy comment in questionable taste, but it does emphasize the fact that King Lear is embarking on a terrible journey.

Questions for Consideration

1. In this scene:

a) what is the Fool trying to do? b) how does he go about it? c) can you suggest why he takes this approach?

Lear

ENG4U1Ms Vieira

King

Act Two, Scene OneIn the preceding scene Lear was setting out to go to Regan and Cornwall’s castle. The entire second act takes place at Gloucester’s castle. In this scene Edmund executes his plan to strip Edgar of his inheritance, if not his life. Edmund is at his most creative in this scene, simultaneously manipulating both his brother and his father. No sooner has he gotten what he wanted from his father than Edmund moves up the ladder of success, attaching himself to Regan and Cornwall as powerful people who can help him get ahead.

When Kent and Oswald both delivered messages to Regan at her home, and she was alerted to the imminent arrival of her father, she and Cornwall decided to leave their home immediately and go off to visit Gloucester. They will tell the King’s old advisor that they need to consult with him, but it becomes clear that they have only come so as to avoid having to accommodate Lear in their home. They are shocked by the news that Gloucester’s son has apparently tried to murder him, but the couple has a political agenda, which Regan reveals at line 93: “What, did my father’s godson seek your life?/ He whom my father named your Edgar?” It seems a strange way to identify the suspect, by his relationship with Regan’s father. The purpose of these rhetorical questions becomes clearer at line 96: “Was he not companion with the riotous knights/ That tended upon my father?” In keeping with Goneril’s plan that all evil comes from their father and his attendants, Regan suggests by her questions that if Edgar has been corrupted it must have been because he hung out with those knights, or even that he was named by and associated with Lear himself. It is a real stretch to argue that Edgar is a murderer because he was Lear’s godson, but the girls don’t need to make a cogent argument; they just have to create a suspicion.

Edmund sees immediately what Regan is after and agrees with her. Edmund’s actions here are breathtaking in their swiftness. Cornwall sees Edmund as a potentially useful guy to have around, someone who knows the score. He praises Edmund’s actions in exposing the plot, calls it at line 108, “A childlike office [something done by a good son],” and Gloucester shows his wounds. Cornwall adds his command that Edgar be killed on sight and at line 115 he extends to Gloucester’s illegitimate son a great honour: “For you, Edmund, / Whose virtue and obedience doth this instant / So much commend itself, you shall be ours. / Natures of such deep trust we shall much need. / You we first seize on.” Edmund: “I shall serve you, sir. / Truly, however else.” This is ironic at several different levels. First, great lords and kings would often favour the sons of people who served them by bringing the young men to court and establishing them as wards. It was considered a mark of great favour, and Gloucester quickly thanks Cornwall for the honour. It is ironic that Edmund is being honoured as a “good” son for having tricked his father and brother. It is doubly ironic that he is being so honoured by Cornwall and Regan, the poster kids of elder abuse. It is triply ironic that Cornwall singles out the man who will take his place in his marriage bed after he dies. So Edmund’s line above about serving Cornwall “Truly, however else,” has a real strange ring to it in light of what is about to happen. Virtue by villains is rewarded by villains.

Questions for Consideration

1. Look at lines 14-76: How is Edmund’s talent for wickedness and his determination to succeed in his scheming emphasised here? (Hint, look at the scene analysis above) How does this scene parallel Act 1 Scene1?

2. By line 83, Gloucester is saying of Edgar, “I never got him” and is calling Edmund “Loyal and natural boy.” What are your feelings about Gloucester and Edgar at this stage?

Lear

ENG4U1Ms Vieira

King

Act Two, Scene TwoThis scene opens with Kent meeting Oswald in front of Gloucester’s castle and starting a fight with him. Kent offers little explanation for his hostility toward Goneril’s servant, although he does remind him at line 29 that he had beaten him after he had repeatedly insulted Lear. The full explanation for Kent’s behaviour does not come to light until Act II, scene 4, line 26 where he explains to Lear that Oswald had arrived at Regan’s just after he had delivered the king’s message. Regan and Cornwall quickly packed up and fled their home, making it clear that they were displeased with Kent and his message. The king’s royal messenger deducted that it was the message from Goneril which Oswald brought that created the change in Regan and Cornwall’s attitude. By the way, a royal messenger was considered to be a direct emissary from the monarch and was to be treated with deference and honour, as if the king himself were there. Clearly Kent has not been afforded this treatment. No wonder he is angry when Oswald innocently asks where he can put his horses. When Oswald protests that he has no idea who Kent is or why he should be so hostile, Kent says at line 12 that he knows Oswald and proceeds to deliver one of the most scathing attacks in all of Shakespeare, not so much against Oswald as an individual but as a social type: When Oswald asks what Kent knows him for, he answers: A knave, a rascal, an eater of broken meats, a base, proud, shallow, beggarly, three-suited, hundred-pound, filthy worsted-stocking knave, a lily-livered, action-taking, whoreson, glass-gazing superserviceable, finical rogue; a one-trunk-

inheriting slave; one that wouldst be a bawd inway of good service, and art nothing but thecomposition of a knave, beggar, coward, pander, andthe son and heir of a mongrel bitch; one whom Iwill beat into clamorous whining if thou deniest theleast syllable of thy addition.

If Oswald were the gentleman he pretends to be, his honour would be offended by this litany of abuse and he would demand satisfaction with his sword. In earlier days a gentleman was distinguished by his ability to carry and use a sword, licensed by his coat-of-arms. But when Kent reminds Oswald that he beat him before Lear and directly challenges him to draw his sword, the phony gentleman refuses, even when his manhood is attacked by being called a “cullionly barbermonger,” someone who spends his time in barbershops. Kent continues to demand that Oswald draw his sword, and when he refuses and cries for help, Kent beats him at line 43.

When Cornwall arrives and asks if Kent has no reverence, no sense of appropriate language and behaviour before his social betters, he replies at line 72 that “anger hath a privilege.” He explains his anger, and now his language changes. Kent has spoken in prose throughout this scene, as befits the scurrilous nature of his insults; he switches to verse as he lays out the serious charges against Oswald as a social type: That such a slave as this should wear a sword, Who wears no honesty. Such smiling rogues as these, Like rats, oft bite the holy cords [sacred bonds of marriage or childhood] atwain Which are too intrince [intricate] t’ unloose; smooth every passion That in the natures of their lords rebel, Being oil to fire, snow to the colder moods; Renege, affirm, and turn their halcyon beaks [the kingfisher’s beak] With every gale and vary [change] of their masters, Knowing naught, like dogs, but following. Oswald is the kind of servant who brings out the worst in his master. Rather than helping the person he serves maintain a moral balance, the Oswald type encourages the excesses which ultimately will destroy both of them. Unfortunately for Kent he is sharing this insight with three of the most morally flawed people ever to rampage through the world, Edmund, Regan and Cornwall. Their reaction to Kent’s

outburst is probably dismissal or incomprehension. Why wouldn’t you want a servant who did exactly what you told him to do and who mirrored your every mood? A dog makes a perfect servant.

After more lines of banter, Cornwall finally gets the insult. His reaction is swift and unexpected. He orders that the stocks be brought in to punish Kent. The stocks were a particularly unpleasant form of punishment for a man like Kent. You sat on a raised platform out in public with your feet locked in a heavy wooden device. Sitting in the stocks was no doubt uncomfortable, a lot like riding in coach on certain airlines, but its real purpose was public humiliation. Stocks were used for petty crimes like drunkenness or petty theft; they certainly weren’t used for older men, especially when they were royal messengers representing the king. Cornwall’s action is a deliberate insult to Lear, who will soon arrive, and Kent points this out.

Kent, in his wretched condition, takes the occasion to read a letter from Cordelia. As he says at line 168, “Nothing almost sees Miracles/ But misery.” Only those who are in the worse condition can see the means of their salvation. Cordelia has learned of his disguise and will undoubtedly act to help her father. Even as we approach the absolute worse of Lear’s suffering Shakespeare wants us to know that help is on the way. That way the audience can maintain some sense of balance in what is about to happen. As Kent says in the final two lines, “Fortune, good night;/ Smile once more, turn thy wheel.” One of the oldest images in Western culture is of the goddess Fortune with her wheel which constantly turns, throwing those who were on top down and elevating those, like Kent in his stocks, who were at the bottom.

Questions for Consideration

1. How does Shakespeare create comedy out of Kent’s treatment of Oswald? How does Kent justify his behaviour?

2. How does Kent respond to being put in the stocks and how is he responsible for the scene’s ending on a note of hope?

Lear

ENG4U1Ms Vieira

King

Act Two, Scene ThreeEdgar heard people shouting that he was a dangerous criminal and managed to hide in a hollow tree. He now makes a fateful decision about how he will escape the dragnet. For several hundred years before Shakespeare’s time and for some time after that, the economy of the English countryside underwent a profound change. England had historically been a country of small farmers: people who owned and worked a small plot of land in subsistence farming, and many others, like Shakespeare’s father, John, who worked someone else’s land as a tenant. In the later Middle Ages landowners in England discovered that they could make much more money raising sheep and selling wool. All they needed was land for pasture. And so land formerly used for farming was transformed for grazing sheep, and people who had farmed the land were evicted and became a class of permanent homeless wanderers. This dispossessed class of rural poor persisted generation after generation and became known as the sturdy beggars. Government officials worried about what to do with them and how to control them. Their concern resulted in a series of regulations called the Poor Laws. The main purpose of these laws was to keep the beggars from wandering and to make the community which had spawned them take responsibility for them. Local parishes, often called “tithings,” were supposed to provide shelter and food for the poor, but the homeless people had to stay where they were supposed to. If they were found outside their home parish, they could be charged with being a “vagrant” and whipped until they left. One special subcategory of “sturdy beggar” was the insane person. There were few facilities for the care and treatment of madness during the Middle Ages, and when England during its Protestant Reformation around 1540 closed the religious houses, the monasteries and nunneries which had helped the insane, there was only one major treatment center left, the Hospital of Bethlehem in London. We can guess what it was like in this place when we realize that the word “bedlam” was created by shortening the name. A place of lunatic confusion! Patients treated here were often released to free up space for others. Such released madmen were given special licenses to allow them to beg for money to keep themselves alive. The prospect of running into a released schizophrenic was scary. What made it more frightening was what people believed the two causes of madness to be: people went insane because of an excess of emotional stress, as we see happening with King Lear; or they went crazy because they were possessed by demons. To make matters worse, madness by possession was thought to be contagious, so if you were around such insanity for too long, you could become insane yourself. “Bedlam beggars” were a frightening sight, and people who met them often paid handsomely to get them to go away. This form of extortion by fear was so effective there were many cases of regular beggars pretending to be released lunatics to make more money.

People in Shakespeare’s time went to great lengths to avoid such creatures. No wonder Edgar chooses this disguise to escape detection! Throughout his charade Edgar will refer to himself in the third person as “Poor Tom” or by the names of demons who supposedly possess his spirit, as “Turleygod” at line 20. As Edgar says, evoking the motif of “nothing” once again at line 21, “That’s something yet: Edgar I nothing am,” or “ I have a chance at survival as a Bedlam beggar and I must now forget that I was ever Edgar.”

Questions for Consideration

1. How does Edgar decide to ‘preserve himself’, and why do you think he chooses that particular method?

Lear

ENG4U1Ms Vieira

King

Act Two, Scene FourIn this scene King Lear arrives at Gloucester’s castle and discovers Kent in the stocks. This deliberate insult to his authority sends him into a towering rage. He confronts Cornwall and Regan, and soon after Goneril arrives. Lear’s daughters systematically strip him of his sense of authority and therefore his identity. Lear has not learned how to compromise in this hostile new world, and filled with frustration and growing insanity, he finally rushes out into a terrible storm. His children lock the door on him. They will never see their father again.

Lear refuses to accept the fact that anyone could have deliberately done this to a royal messenger, but Kent insists that the act was done consciously and by Lear’s own daughter. At line 20 when the king refuses to believe it and swears by “Jupiter,” king of the gods, Kent counters with “By Juno [queen of the gods], I swear ay.” The act itself is something so outrageous, Lear has trouble conceiving it. Once again we are struck by how the old man has been protected from the vicissitudes of ordinary life where people get insulted everyday. At line 22 he explains the significance of the act: They durst not do’t; They could not, would not do’t. ‘Tis worse than murder To do upon respect [the respect due a king] such violent outrage. Resolve [tell] me with all modest [appropriate] haste which way Thou mightst deserve or they impose this usage Coming from us. [being a royal messenger] At lines 26 – 44 Kent describes in full what happened. He delivered his message to Regan and Cornwall at their home, but before they had read what Lear had sent, they were interrupted by the arrival of Oswald from Goneril. Her message was given priority, and upon reading it, Regan and Cornwall immediately decided to leave. They ordered Kent to follow them for an answer, but they made their disapproval of Lear’s message clear by giving Kent dirty looks. Arriving at Gloucester’s, Kent once again encountered Oswald and, realizing the poisonous nature of his message, Kent challenged him to a fight. It is this which has incensed Cornwall and Regan to punish him.

The Fool sees the consequences of what has happened, and he tries to warn Lear at line 45: “Winter’s not gone yet, if wild geese fly that way.” In other words, “You are in for more cold and stormy weather if silly people like Oswald or even your daughter and son-in-law act like this.” He then sings a comic song which amplifies on what Lear can expect, basically saying: Your children have told you what you wanted to hear so they could get their hands on your wealth. Now they will cause you great pain.

At line 55 Lear has an unusual reaction to this obvious truth about his family relationships: “O, how this mother swells up toward my heart!/ Hysterica passio, down, thou climbing sorrow,/ Thy element’s below.” People at this time believed that extreme emotional upset in men was a pathological condition, and they associated it with women, calling it “the mother.” The technical term Lear uses here, “hysterica passio,” reminds us that emotions had been connected since the ancient Greeks with female sexuality. “Hysteria” and “hysterectomy” have the same root word. The major symptom of “the mother” was a choking sensation, which Lear believes will come from his overcharged heart and seize him. This is one more sign that Lear is headed for some kind of crisis.

In the last part of this scene Regan and Goneril combine to destroy Lear’s sanity. Lear is so intent on getting affirmation of how badly he has been treated, that he ignores the reality of his situation. He expects Regan to comfort him and agree that he is “more sinned against than sinning.” The fancy term for Lear’s failure to see is called cognitive dissonance. It simply means that even when we know better, we keep making the same mistakes. Regan takes her sister’s side and agrees it would be ‘dangerous’ to have 100 servants stay with the king. What’s most remarkable about this reasonable-sounding explanation is that Lear had not mentioned anything about Goneril kicking out 50 of his knights; the two sisters have obviously been in contact. Lear misses the significance of this piece of information. She then basically says: “You are old. You need someone to run your life. Go back and stay with Goneril.” Naturally Lear rejects this simple solution. In the old days he would have ordered his daughter

punished for even thinking such a thing. Now, stripped of power, Lear is reduced at line 152 to the verbal resistance most of us use when we aren’t happy, sarcasm. Lear doesn’t really want to go back and apologize for being old and beg for sustenance. He reinforces his sarcasm by kneeling. On Shakespeare’s stage to kneel implies that the kneeler is in an inferior social position to the person before whom he kneels, as one would be if he had to beg. Lear does this for dramatic effect, to highlight how incongruous it is for the king to have to lower himself to anyone. Despite the impact of an eighty-year-old king on his knees, Regan dismisses the gesture at line 156 as an “unsightly trick.” Regan tells Lear that because she away from home she does not have what is needed to care for him. He must return with Goneril. This from the daughter he was counting on!

King Lear for the first time begins to look beyond his own rage and sense of betrayal. If his daughters are not as he would have them, whose fault is it? In a remarkable speech at lines 218 –230, he begins to accept responsibility, although in a rather odd way - as he calls Goneril the most disgusting things, acknowledges that she belongs to him, and if she is bad, the fault lies in him, in his “corrupted blood.”

Goneril tells her father at line 260, “What need you five-and-twenty? Ten? Or five?/ To follow in a house where twice so many/ Have command to tend you?” To which Regan adds, “What need one?” Lear answers this rhetorical question in one of the most famous speeches in the play. In it Lear articulates some hard-won wisdom, gives vent to a sense of injury and finally reveals his breaking point and descent into madness. At line 263 he responds to the question of need: O reason [calculate] not the need! Our basest beggars Are in the poorest things superfluous [may have too much of something petty]. Allow not nature more than nature needs [what’s necessary for life], Man’s life is cheap as beast’s. Thou art a lady; If only to go warm were gorgeous, Why, nature needs not what thou gorgeous wear’st, Which scarcely keeps thee warm. “You cannot measure need. Even the poorest person has too much of something. If we restrict people to just the bare minimum to meet their needs then they are no better than animals. For example, you are a fine lady who wears gorgeous clothes. If we define your need as mere warmth, you would not need your fine garments which, in truth, barely keep you warm anyway.” Lear here effectively turns the argument back on his daughters, who are undoubtedly quite vain about their latest from Nordstrom’s.

In their anger both Lear and Gloucester characterize their children as “unnatural” as Lear does here. He falls into his familiar pattern of cursing and threatening dire punishment. But here, at line 279, the full realization of his situation comes crashing down on the old king in mid-sentence. He cannot think of what he will inflict upon daughters and is reduced to pathetically promising that whatever the punishments are, “they shall be the terrors of the earth.” At that moment Lear’s spirit finally breaks. He feels himself start to weep and again has that fear this will destroy his manhood. So, since he cannot bring down “noble anger” and he cannot allow himself to weep, he concludes that his heart will break. Shakespeare signals this internal crisis by having the sound of a gathering storm offstage. We can see the storm as a metaphor, a symbol, for what Lear is suffering. Shakespeare’s audience would have seen a closer connection between the two events. They believed that there were subtle but strong links between the little world of man, the microcosm, and the large world of nature, the macrocosm. If things were falling apart for King Lear, that could trigger a sympathetic reaction in the weather.

Questions for Consideration

1. What is the dramatic irony of Lear’s approach to Regan and Goneril?

2. What arguments do Goneril and Regan use when they confront Lear together? What do you think is the real issue here?

Analysis of Lear’s Speech

1. Explore this speech: “O! reason not the need . . . I shall go mad.” (Scene 4, 263-285)

263-266: How is the poorest man’s life better than an animal’s?

266-269: How are his daughter’s inconsistent, according to Lear?

270: Why should he need patience? To deal with his daughter’s or his own thoughts?

271-272: What’s his attitude here?

273-277: Who’s he blaming for his daughter’s behaviour? Would you place responsibility here?

277-282: Is his rage at this point likely to frighten his daughters?

285: O Fool! I shall go mad. Is this said to shame his daughters or because he really believes it, or because he doesn’t know what he’s saying?

2. Can the developing action of the play be seen as a struggle between good and evil characters or is that too simple? What justifications can you find for the ‘evil’ characters’ actions? To what extent do the ‘good’ characters bring their problems on themselves? (refer to Edgar and Kent in Scene 1 and 2, and Fool and Lear in Scene 4)

Character Overview

1. How do Gloucester and Cornwall appear in Act Two? Look for evidence in Gloucester’s exchange with Edmund in scene one and his defence of Kent is in scene 2, at Cornwall’s treatment of Kent and Gloucester’s comments about Cornwall.

2. How does Edmund show himself in his true colours in this act? How successful is he in pursing his plan and what techniques does he use? Look at scene 2 in particular.

3. What is Lear’s state of mind at the end of the act? Use evidence from scene 4, 21-26, 152-154, 268-285 to start begin.

Key Scene: Act 2 Scene 4, 125-188

Lear seeks comfort from Regan, who’s already been told of the confrontation with Goneril by letter.

Before this scene:Scene1: Regan and Cornwall arrive at Gloucester’s in an effort to avoid Lear, and Edmund joins forces with them. How does the sub-plot here mirror Lear’s behaviour to Cordelia (34-84)? What is the significance of Cornwall’s comments 108-115?Scene 2: Kent arrives at Gloucester’s and is put in stocks by Cornwall after brawling with Oswald. What does Cornwall’s action here suggest about his attitude to Lear? What is the significance of Regan’s comment (144-146)?Scene 4 opening: Lear and the Fool arrive to find Kent in the stocksWhat is Lear’s initial response (13-26) on hearing who’s responsible? As the truth dawns (54-56) what is he afraid of? What thoughts and emotions run thru his mind as he’s kept waiting to see Regan and Cornwall (86-119)

During the scene:125-135: What does Lear feel about his welcome? Can his instinctive reaction to cut blood ties be reconciled with his perceived view of natural and unnatural behaviour in others? Does his reference to “sharp tooth’d unkindness” remind you an earlier comment he made to Goneril? How appropriate is the imagery of Goneril as a bird of prey?136-143: What has been the nature of Lear’s “O Regan” and how, then does he feel about her response in 136-8? What is the significance of her use of “sir” to address her father?144-156: What attitude does Regan have towards Lear’s age? How does Lear respond to Regan’s suggestion about asking Goneril’s forgiveness? How close is Lear’s mock image of himself to what his daughter’s really feel about him? What is implied by Regan’s words in 155?156-162: Of what does Lear accuse Goneril? How do you interpret Lear’s state of mind in 160-2? What is the implication of Cornwall’s interjection?163-168: In his continuing curse of Goneril, is Lear’s imagery consistent with that in lines 158-162? Which lines are more effective? What is the significance of Regan’s “O the blest Gods!”? Is Regan justified in her accusation of Lear?169-180: Why does Lear still proclaim Regan’s devotion, even though she’s defended Goneril’s behaviour? Is this dramatic irony or does Lear appreciate the situation (though unwilling to acknowledge it)? In the light of this, what is the significance of his final words here? How does Lear’s vocabulary here compare with that he used when talking of Goneril? What is Regan’s attitude toward her father’s words?181-188: What is the dramatic effect of Goneril’s heralded arrival? How do you think Regan feels about Gloucester’s arrival? Why? Lear’s mind is fixed on the stocking of Kent. Why has this act now assumed symbolic significance?