Monday 26 October 2015

King Lear- Character Profile

Is King Lear a tragic hero? 

                                 


King Lear is the archetypal tragic hero. Throughout the play it's unclear what Lear's hamartia s is. From scene to scene it changes from rage, to ego , to folly. For me, Lear is a deeply flawed character whose mental and physical deterioration leads to peripeteia that no one can save him from. His anagnorisis arrives when he's surrounded by dead bodies.

As AC Bradley writes: "Shakespearean tragedies stem from the tragic flaws of the protagonist." I feel that Bradley is completely right, not only can this view be applied to Lear but also Othello (his tragic flaw is jealously and possessiveness), Hamlet (inability to act to avenge his father's death ) and Macbeth  (ambition).
So what is Lear's tragic flaw?

For AC Bradley it's his hubris that renders him 'half generous and half selfish. For spark notes his tragic flaw is that he values appearance above reality. I think it's hard to pick one tragic flaw for Lear as Simon Russel Beale (the absolute G who played King Lear in NT Live production- 2014) says we never get to see Lear at his best. We never see the Lear that the fool loves or the Lear that Kent worships. All we see is an idiotic old man that makes bad decision one after the other that spiral out of his or anyone else's control. Every bad decision he makes points to another fatal flaw. The love test is the biggest moment of folly. Why is he doing this? What will he gain? as SRB it's a 'catastrophic criminal mistake."  On the penalty of death I think that Lear's fatal flaw is his blindness. He is blind to everyone and everything but what makes it worse is that, at points you feel that he  purposefully makes himself blind. He can't bear to see things he has done so shifts the blame onto something else so that he doesn't have to come to terms with the fact that he has caused all of this.

Couple of quotes to back this up:

"See better Lear and let me still remain/ The true blank of thine eye" - Kent 1.1

"Which of you shall we say doth love us most"- Lear 1.1

"Where are his eyes? Either his notion weakens, his discernings are lethargied."- Lear

"Come not between the dragon and his wrath"

"Well let it be so. Thy truth be thy dower."

"Dearer than eyesight, space and liberty"- Goneril 1.1 during the love test. This is obvs bullshit but Lear can't see this

"When majesty falls to folly.... This hideous rashness"- YAAAS KENT! YOU TELL HIM BETCH...

Source Material 


There have been many changes from the various primary source materials that Shakespeare may have used to write King Lear. As Trevor Nunn writes: "Late 19/early 20th century versions of Lear...perceived as kind and gentle.. a man goaded.. by two wicked sisters". Fairy tale motif. 


                                          


In the original King Leir, Leir is mourning for the loss of his wife. Immediately this makes the audience sympathise with Leir but also provides a motive for the love test. As SRB says handing over 1/3rd of your kingdom to a foreign power is politically suicidal. But in Leir it's easy to blame his grieving for a sudden blindness on how he shall rule his kingdom.


                            


But in Lear it's just like da fuq? It comes out of nowhere and there doesn't really seem to be a motive. I think the authorial purpose of Shakespeare was to involve the audience in the peripeteia of Lear. Initially the audience is very distant from Lear, basically we see him as a crazy loony. But through his self realization the audience becomes much more sympathetic allowing their to be catharsis for both Lear and the audience by the time Lear/Cordelia etc. dies.

Compared to all the sources Shakespeare is able to add depth and dimension to Lear. Lear is never really black or white but rather occupies the shades of grey. His 'hideous rashness' coupled with his evocation to help the nation's poor shows him as an extremely complex psychological character.

 CONTEXT!!!

In the Court of Chancery the records of 1588 to 1589 show a sensational case that was publicly arousing interest in London. 
Sir William Allen, a leading figure in the Company of Merchant Adventurers and former Lord Mayor of London, had three daughters, all married, one to a Frenchman Francis Verzelin. Allen, having reached an age, wished to relieve himself of the burden of his possessions and divided his property between the three and arranged he should stay at each in turn. 
But once in possession of the houses and property, his daughters then treated him ill, begrudging all service and comfort. The daughters claimed that coal was an unnecessary expense for him, 'limited his fire' making him bitterly cold, and treated him with scorn and disdain. They abused his staff, called his servants 'fussocks'. Allen died in misery and cursed his daughters.

Love Test

This is the first time that we see Lear in the play but unfortunately he is presented as a rash ruler with no perspective. As mentioned countless times before, Lear has no clear motive for the love test and therefore we immediately start to question him.  

Compared to the source material (love test seen in Monmouth's, Leir and Faerie Queen) Goneril and Reagan known about the love test therefore are able to prepare and sabotage Cordelia's speech. But Shakespeare consciously removes this element so that all 3 sisters start on a level playing field- we are able to respect them for their intelligence and how politically savvy they're. 

                                         
                                          


Sigmund Freud asserted that Cordelia symbolises Death. Therefore, when the play begins with Lear rejecting his daughter, it can be interpreted as him rejecting death; Lear is unwilling to face the finitude of his being. Alternatively, an analysis based on Adlerian theory suggests that the King's contest among his daughters in Act one has more to do with his control over the unmarried Cordelia.

Productions + The Love Test


  • Sam Mendes (2014) - National Theatre. Makes the love test in a v. v. public setting. They are surrounded by his retinue and there are microphones that are able to project this image of a show or spectacle. As Simon Russel Beale says the love test is a 'living will' and the placing in such a public setting shows the distance between Lear and his daughters. Suggests that familial relationships are based on power/land rather than love. 
  • Trevor Nunn (2008)- RSC. Much more intimate- Lear is in all his military regalia with his daughters crowded around him. For me it's a much more homely feeling and doesn't really match up to the cool/dictatorish setting of Mendes. 
One of the interesting lexical choices that arise from the love test is the lexis of measurement. Throughout the love test, Lear quantifies love in order for it to have any meaning. In turn, Goneril and Regan are able to appropriate his own language back to him in order to persuade him of their 'genuine love'. 

"But now her price has fallen"
"Beyond what can be valued, rich or rare"
"...prize me at her worth..."
"I tell you all her wealth"

'Love' is an abstract noun. it is supposed to be all encompassing. But Lear's interpretation of love is much more sinister. It is used to breed an environment of competitive individualism that causes the sisters to try and outvie each other. Furthermore it also places importance on people in terms of what they can do for him rather than how good of a person they're. 




Later on in the play Lear says to Goneril: "Darkness and devils. Degenerate bastard." This is absolutely awful to say to anyone let alone your own daughter. But once Goneril has gone against Lear she is immediately a monster, an other. When she pets his ego he loves her but as soon as she begins to question him the tables turn. This 'hideous rashness' plagues everyone; even though Goneril is a bitch, she makes a valid points about why she's so angry at Lear. Which leads me onto the next point....

Importance of Lear's retinue

Throughout Shakespeare's plays there are many silent servants that are seen as background characters.  They are mostly onlookers and are overlooked by critics and readers. But KL offers an exception to this. The Knights have been given more interpretative parts than other walk on parts. They way they are staged can effect the whole interpretation. If the 'men are so disorded, debauched and bold' as Goneril remarks then surely her anger is valid. Who the hell wants 100 knights treating your hallowed court like the fucking playboy mansion. BYE FELICIA! But if the knights are civilised like the Jonas Brother pre Nick trying to be a male stripper then you see the malice of the two sisters




There are no stage directions about how the knights should act but Goneril insists that the 'your disordered rabble strike my people and make servants of their betters."

Reunion Scene- Folio vs Quarto

Their influence is particularly evident in the differences between the Quarto and Folio.  The reunion scene  means that the presence of attendants transforms a private conversation into a public scene. In the Quarto the only characters on stage are Lear, Cordelia, Kent a doctor and gentleman.


                       


In the Quarto the reunion is extremely intimate and allows for a de-politcised, familial focus on the Lear- Cordelia relationship. But in the Folio the servants who carry him in makes his entrance reminiscent of a royal ceremony. Bringing him back in a royal chair for Jacobean audiences may raise the audience's expectations of Lear and eventually Cordelia's rise back to the throne in the source material King Leir. Shakespeare, an audience baiter and original thug.




Edmund's self wounding

                                  


Servants mirror the authority of their master: they function as a visible representation- a literal embodiment- of their master's power. When Gloucester makes his servants try and catch Edgar the servants are not only a display of his authority; they are an outward representation of Gloucester's deceived inner conviction about his son. The servants function as a physical embodiment of Gloucester's mental determination, malicious intent and firm belief in Edgar's villainy.

Doubling up of actors

                                 


The metatheatrical effects of doubling medium-sized parts such as Cordelia and the Fool have long been noted by critics. In the case of Lear's lost retinue, the loss of his royal attendants and thus his royal power and authority would have been emphasized at the Globe when the actors who played his attendants kept reappearing as the new servants of other master. These actors- on stage but no longer Lear's- function as a repeated visual reminder of Lear's lost status and authority. and a physical sign of the transfer of power from his court to the households of his daughters and their husbands.

Storm Scene 

We find that, as A.C.Bradley puts it, the storm provides a dramatic centre, which helps Lear find out about human nature. He also discovers that nature is totally unconcerned with human affairs. Lear sees himself in the storm; the many manifestations of the storm are analagous to the conflicts in his own life. 

                         

In contemplating the plight of Lear, the reader or playgoer is influenced to sympathy, and is made finely aware of the shortcomings of human nature. In a manner above any other, Shakespeare, in King Lear, reveals the purpose of human struggle. A human's ideas of morality, and his methods of achieving it, are not necessarily, or hardly ever, right

What does the storm symbolise?


  •  Mental madness = inscape vs outscape
  • Confusion and lack of control is his mind
  • Chaos created in the state/individual/family/nation universe
  • Anger of nature therefore a divine punishment
  • An agent of God and associates it with his daughters
  • Natural/political
  • Lear is the storm and the language reflects his chaos
Although Lear is clearly quite insane the grandeur of his poetry is able to give him a status and magnificence that defies his humble station. 

                                   



In this painting, Lear seems to have a sense of authority. You have to admire a man who is able to take on nature. Because the power mankind has is finite compared to transient nature. He is a 'mortal God...image of male authority'. "Blow winds, and crack your cheeks! Rage, blow! You cataracts and hurricanoes, spout" The monosyllabic imperative exclamatory statements are able to show the sheer power Lear has, or thinks he has. The apocalyptic imagery that he uses could suggest that Lear has elevated himself to such a position that he feels that like God, he is able to create or destroy the world.

However there is also evidence that Lear starts to gain wisdom in this scene. There is a widening scope as Lear starts to focus on the rural poor, an oppressed part of society in Elizabethan England. In 1590s in an England racked by poverty, unemployment and commercial depression would have said that theirs was a better world or that human inventiveness had restored a good and just society. There was a subclass of cripples and hobbling wounded, all virtually un-pensioned.  Nature enemy of the poor- bad harvests created shortages that sent price soaring. Food riots broke out + troops called in to restore order. Malnutrition grew chronic- 1597 the average wage was less than a third of what it had been a century before. Staple foods of the poor= beans, peas, cereals of all types. Loaf of bread still cost a penny- once bought a loaf weighing 3 ½ lbs by 1597 now shrunk to 8 oz.

QUOTES:

"O I have ta'en/ Too little care of this"

"Poor naked wretches, wheresoe'er you are"

"Take physic, pomp./ Expose thyself to what wretches feel." 

"That thou may'st shake the superflux to them/ And show heavens more just"

"How shall your houseless heads and unfed sides... defend you" 

His empathy starts to increase, as Trevor Nunn writes"King can journey through the guts of a beggar". He starts to question himself, why haven't I have done anything about this before? I should place myself in this situation? This situation which he truly embraces when meeting Tom O'Bedlam. Furthermore, this is the only time we start to see Lear caring about others more than himself. Throughout Act 1 and 2, Lear sees the fool as a source of entertainment but know he genuinely care about him and almost becomes a surrogate son. 

How dost, my boy? Art Cold?
Come your hovel.
Poor fool and knave,
I have one part in my heart
That's sorry for thee.


However this is not complete anagnorisis, as evidenced by the mock trial in 3.6. Lear still focuses on the filial ingratitude
"The tempest in my mind doth from my senses take all feelings else/ Save what beats here filial ingratitude"

                               



V   But sympathy starts to increase for him because if we get to the end and don't feel anything for Lear but contempt than the tragedy hasn't worked. This scene is instrumental in playing with our emotions so that it truly becomes a tragedy.
                
      Stripping Section

    Both Edgar and Lear strip. But because this is Lear's profile I'll focus on him. The motif of clothing is
   quite important throughout the play. When Kent starts a fight about Oswald, most of his insults
     revolve around his clothes that make him pretentious.



"  "Nature disclaims in thee; a tailor made thee."

    As Kent claims: "I am much more than my out-wall"
       
   References to clothing are closely linked to ideas about appearance and reality. Outward appearances are often deceptive in King Lear.
  The apparel of all Lear's closest companions on the heath- the Fool, Kent and Edgar - is significant. All 3 are humbly dressed. In site of their inferior status - signified by their clothing- servants are frequently the source of hope, charity and justice in King Lear. 
    
                                      



   
    In the first scene, immaculately dressed as a military dictator, Lear is in control, confident
    enough to allow himself a little chuckle as he puts his disfunctional daughters on the spot. By 
    the time we get to the scenes on the heath he seems to have physically shrunk, shambling  
    across the stage wearing baggy vest and underpants, later in a hospital gown or pyjama 
     bottoms.

                                  

     
     Ceremonial garments are able to conceal the truth. With his royal garb on, Lear cannot see beyond the trappings of majesty. Which leads to the v. emotive scene where Lear strips: "Off, off you lending! Come unbutton here." Lear realises that he no longer has any power, so why must he take part in the ceremony anymore? Also he removes his clothes because he now needs to see beyond appearances
     Without the trappings of ceremony, Lear is able to see underneath it all men are equal. Hierarchy is a social construct but it doesn't actually mean anything. 



   According to Arden edition of Shakespeare it is common for the Fool and Kent to try and stop Lear from stripping off. Some productions allow him to strip completely, which would be so strange for a modern audience. This old man who symbolised power, wisdom and authority has become vulnerable and has almost become the beast. Whereas other productions allow Lear to be in an undershirt to show the debasement of his societal position. 

   Mock Trial
   
   What is the purpose of the mock trial? 
  •      Parody of the love test in 1.1
  •      Trial conducted by a fool, lunatic, pretend lunatic = comment on human justice?
  •      Undermines all trial that are carried out by authority figures in King Lear
   "The play is hard on organised human society and institutions of any kind"- Trevor Nunn 


                                  


   
   The absurd nature of the trial of the two stools, which Lear addresses as "she-foxes," is grotesque in its humour, especially when Lear makes Tom o' Bedlam his "robed man of justice," which, as the
      audience can visually see, is hilarious given that this title represents a pun on the only article of clothing he has on. The ridiculous nature of the mock trial is continued when the Fool is appointed as
     "yoke-fellow of equity," which, given his nature as a Fool is rather inappropriate, to say the least The scene as a whole shows the way in which Lear, in his madness, has converted the tragedy of what has happened to him into something of a farce, which interestingly does not make us feel his tragic situation is one that he faces with dignity. 

                                    

 The substantive readings of F are perceived by many as superior to those of Q, while Q’s ‘mock trial’ scene has repeatedly proved an immensely powerful moment in performances of the play, speaking directly to twentieth-century audiences informed philosophically by the ‘theatre of the absurd’, pioneered by writers such as Samuel Beckett as a way of illustrating the desperate futility of man’s existence (a huge thematic concern in King Lear).


That the scene was cut from Shakespeare’s later adaptation may suggest that it didn’t have the same poignant resonance with Jacobean audiences, though whatever the case may have been, the Folio can nonetheless be seen by this example to be, among many other things, a valuable source of evidence for theatre historians as well as literary critics.

The disintegration of Lear’s seemingly well-ordered kingdom is spelled out for us in a whole series of scenes in which there is, it seems, no ray of light. Horror is piled on horror, culminating in the blinding of Gloucester. The placement of the mock trial of Reagan and Goneril is directly before the blinding of Gloucester. One trial of his daughters follows the brutal trial of Gloucester in the next scene. 

The mock trial is the last time that we seen the Fool. His last line: "And I'll go to bed at noon"- I'll be discussing the importance and the disappearance of the fool in a separate blog post. 
Lewy Body Dementia/ Insanity
 It is extremely difficult to ascertain where in the play King Lear the hero becomes mad. The abnormal behaviour, the extreme irritability, the exhibition of disinhibited thoughts may be the harbinger of psychosis or his premorbid traits. When the Duke of Kent pleads lenience in Lear for Lear's youngest daughter Cordelia, he banishes them from his realm and explodes: "Peace, Kent! /Come not between the dragon and his wrath."

Unlike other Renaissance dramatists, who used 'mad scenes' for comic effect, Shakespeare seems intent on a serious portrayal of madness in 'King Lear'. There are different types of madness in the play. Lear's rash actions of 1.1 can be viewed as political insanity. Lear compares his madness to the torments of hell and struggles to frantically to retain his wits. The other characters are horrified by his loss of reason and try desperately to keep him sane. But is it pointless?

As Simon Russell Beale says- As an actor you have to decide whether you want to play a Lear that is already mad or one who is descending into madness as the play progresses. I chose to play a Lear who is already mad.In this one, I thought I bet Shakespeare, being the acute observer of human nature that he is, would have studied old men,” he said. “I thought: I’m going to do a bit of research.” King Lear could have been suffering from Lewy Body dementia, the actor Simon Russell Beale has suggested, as he discloses the medical research he undertook before taking on the role.


Lewy Body dementia occurs in quick stages that involve frightening hallucinations, with many remarking that they see barking dogs: "The little dogs and all". The disease is linked to Parkinsons and many suffers say that they have overwhelming feelings of shame and anger 

Powerpoint Presentation

To thee and thine hereditary ever
Remain this ample third of our fair kingdom;
No less in space, validity, and pleasure,
Than that 
conferr'd on Goneril. Now, our joy,
Although the last, not least; to whose young love
The vines of France and milk of Burgundy
Strive to be 
interess'd; what can you say to draw
A third more opulent than your sisters? Speak.

Sense of ceremony present; flowing blank verse of Lear and lack of cadence suggests rehearsed performance. Symmetrical lines and parallel images suggest this further: ‘with shadowy forests…with plenteous rivers…’
Elevated, lofty speech (often visually represented by looking down at the map) suggest his dominion over the kingdom

Verse form suggests he is not a single private individual (amplification of landscape/ imagery of boundless landscape supports further)

Juxtaposition of language styles
Language used to conceal and reveal the truth- styles set against each other, arguably revealing an overall truth

Taciturnity of Cordelia  V hypocritical rhetorical excesses of Goneril and Regan

Blunt speech assumed by the courtier, Kent, in his role as a servant Fool’s wise nonsense – both
 forms of truth

 Lear’s controlled purposeful verse in first scene linguistic emptiness of ‘Howl, howl, howl.’
 Arguably, he regains some form of linguistic truth with the blank verse line (although reversed),
 ‘Never, never, never...’

Edgar’s linguistic play: madman, dialect of a Somerset peasant and speech of a countryman. He 
reflects the chaos but his ability to adapt to the landscape also stabilises the chaos via localisation 
with the landscape. Edmund’s fixed utterances and reliance on a stable universe (where ‘gods 
stand up for bastards’) which jar with the increasing chaos that surrounds him.

Edmund’s forged letter Goneril and Regan’s deceptive words; both fool their fathers


“Shakespeare, in Lear, is savage. He doesn't give us catharsis; he gives us entropy. And he rips the 
arse out of the moment of tragic insight.” 


Schema/ Schemata 

In psychology and cognitive science, a schema (plural schemata or schemas), describes an organized
pattern of thought or behaviour.

It can also be described as a mental structure of preconceived ideas, a framework representing some aspect of the world, or a system of organizing and perceiving new information.

Schemata have a tendency to remain unchanged, even in the face of contradictory information

Donald Freeman applies the theory of conceptual metaphor in an analysis of King Lear's opening
 scene, and shows that the scene's figurative language depends upon metaphoric projection from 
the contradiction of two schemata: BALANCE (e.g. money, power, land, love) and CONNECTION
 (e.g. between family members, father and daughters, king and subject, between all humans)

Filial love and family relationships (and therefore balance and connection) for Lear are 
defined within a financial/ accounting framework. Cordelia’s ideas directly oppose this:
she recognises the ‘bond’ and the ‘duties’, but cannot ‘heave’ her ‘heart into (her) 
mouth’. The two frameworks are simply not compatible.


Nature

Beatriz Ródenas Tolosa argues that conflicting concepts of nature between characters, particularly
between Lear, Gloucester and Edgar, cause much of the chaos in the play

Lear – nature as great chain of being

Gloucester- nature and astrology; extended chain where heavens control the earth

Edmund- nature as something animalistic, predatory and almost lustful

Monday 19 October 2015

Secondary Sources for King Lear

Part 2! Here we go! HEEEY!!! HOOO!!!
Jk, it's not going to be that exciting

 John Higgins - The First Parte of the Mirour for Magistrates containing the falles of the first infortunate Princes of this lande 

Published 1574, presents stories of famous British monarchs on whom Renaissance rulers could model themselves. Cordelia narrates the story of Lear + his family from her own perspective.


                        


"In age my father had a childishe minde."

Lear denies C of a dowry and marries G to the King of Albany and Ragan to Prince of Camber and Cornwall. The King of France hears of her virtues and she accepts his offer of marriage.

C then talks of 5 yr reign after Leire's death, overthrow by her nephews and her suicide in prison

Edmund Spenser- The Faerie Queene 

Attempts to trace history of British kingdom, in celebration of Elizabeth I. Epic poem = blue print for Renaissance thought, politics, society and religion whilst showing poetic fluency of English. Spenser presents troubled monarchs eg. Lear as a warning to his audience of noble people to seek 'vertuous and gentle discipline' instead.
Cordeill hangs herself. In previous versions she either stabs or 'slays herself'
                       
                          

  • "Whose simple answere, wanting colours faire/ To paint it forth, him to displeasance moov'd"
  • "That love is not, where most it is profest"


Sir Phillip Sidney - The Countesse of Pembroke's Arcadia

Sidney is a good example of a Renaissance man- courtier, soldier, poet, philosopher who was dead at 32


                                      



Intrigues in the Gloucester family including Edmund's betrayal of his father and his innocent brother don't appear in any other source material except this one.

There is a good and bad son motif
'blind fathers' who have been mislef

Samuel Harsnett- A Declaration of Egregious Popish Impostures 

This was a sensational account of Catholic priests who exort money by conducting bogus exorcisms on impressionable people. Published in 1603 it was printed on order of Privy council as part of a propaganda war against Catholicism.

                          


WS borrowed names of the devils conjured by Edgar as Poor Tom. There are 82 links to Harsnett in the play. Repeated references to Satan inside Tom meant that Shakespeare was taking the piss- sceptic of witchcraft and demonic possession



James I- The True Law of Free Monarchies 

Responsibilities of monarchs and subjects- published in 1598 and reprinted in 1603. Widely read by those curious or concerned about James's probable behaviour as King of England. Discusses monarchs as father figures and his views on 'monstorous and unnaturall' children


                                           



  • "The King becomes a naturall Father to all his Lieges"
  • "fatherly duety is bounde to care for the nourishing, education and vertuous government of his children: even so is the King bounde to care for all his subjects." 
  • "monstrous and unnaturall to his sonnes to rise up against him to controll him at their appetite"


James I - Basilikon Doron [The King's Gift] 

Written as a guidebook for his eldest son Henry. Published in 1599 but reprinted 1603. Henry died in 1612 and Charles I became the monarch. 
Uses an example of Brutus whose 3 children made the fatal mistake of dividing Britain into 3 countries of England, Scotland and Wales = warning to Henry


                                      

  • "make your eldest sonne Issac, leaving him all your kingdomes and provyde the rest with private possessions."
  • deviding your kingdome ye shall leave the seede of division & discorde among your posteritie"
  • "King is as one set on a stage, whose smallest actions and gestures , all the people gazinglie doe beholde." 


Primary sources for King Lear

Shakespeare used many different sources in order to produce his plays. It was customary for many Renaissance dramatists to pick and choose parts from various different sources and incorporate them into their own work. There was little concept of originality and it was definitely seen as something to abide to.

In this post I will be listing the sources, as well as quotes/further info etc.

Primary Sources 

Geoffrey Monmouth - Historia Regum Britanniae 

Existed as a Latin manuscript. Although WS probably consulted it he was more likely to use other source texts (probs because this one is shit). Geoffrey was first to present King Lear's story- he may have invented the love test and division of the kingdom. Later, he incorporated this into later histories as if it was fact.

                                         


  • Leir divides the kingdom so that the daughters attract husbands 
  • "Is there any daughter that can lover her Father more than Duty requires?.... whoever pretends to it, must disguise her real Sentiments under the Veil of flattery"
  • Aganippus, King of Franks insists that he loves Cordelia and takes her without her dowry
  • "his two Daughters, made an Insurrection against him, and deprived him of his Kingdom"
  • Cordeilla orders a retinue of servants to clothe and heal Lear and later C+ A receive Lear honourably 
  • Leir returns to Britain with C + forces they've raised. 5 yrs into C reign she's betrayed by her 2 nephews (Regan + Goneril's sons) and kills herself in prison 


Raphael Holinshed- The Historie of England in The First and Second Volumes of Chronicles 

WS consulted the 1st volume published in 1577. Follows Geoffrey in all its key points

                                          

  •  But the greatest grief... was to see the unkindnesse of his daughters
  • the unnaturalness...not withstanding their faire and pleasant words... he fled the land & sailed into Gallia there to seeke some comfort of his yongest daughter Cordeilla
  • 'honorablie, and lovinglie received'
  • 'his hart was greatlie comforted'
  • Aganippus created a mightie armie ... to see him againe restored to his kingdome" 
  • His bodie buried at Leicester in a vault under the channel of th river of Sore beneath the towne 


 Anon- The True Chronicle Historie of King Leir and his three daughters Gonorill, Ragan, and Cordella 
MAIN SOURCE!!!

Written before WS + same played performed by the Queen's and Sussex's Men's acting companies on 8th April 1594. Follows histories of Geoffrey + poems of Higgins and Spenser than WS does. In particular, the happy ending of Lear's restoration to the throne and Cordelia's succession to her father as a monarch of Britain.


                                                

Quick summary 
  • Opens with Leir mourning death of his wife- wonders how to allow daughters to accept suitors he has chosen for them
  • C only marries for love therefore creates a love test
  • G + R are warned about this test before= reharse + sabotage C's response
  • C refuses to flatter him so L divides the kingdom between R + G
  • C leaves but falls in love with disguised Gallian (French King- Oh la la!)
  • L quarrels with G over his retinue + leaves for R unaware they are plotting to murder him
  • L fights with R, so L + P run away but are pursued by a messenger to kill them
  • L + P disguise themselves as sailors and go to France where the meet C + her husband disguised as country bumpkins
  • They form an army, go to England where they confront R, G and their husbands
  • L returns to throne as king of Britain + C and husband are his heirs

                      


This is a didactic novel= trite whereas WS adds dimension + depth while this remains a simple narrative. It's also a much more pious play: "My kingle title I thee have gaynd/ Thank heavens, not me".  But in Shakespeare's play we're not sure there is a God- see AC Bradley

What does Shakespeare add?
  1. Fool
  2. Gloucester Plot
  3. Heath scene
  4. eye gouging
  5. Edmund + the bastard motif
  6. Edgar as poor Tom
  7. deaths of Lear and Cordelia 
  8. Lear's madness
  9. Key focus on psychology/inner workings of the mind= HUMAN SUFFERING 
This is motivation for my revision... don't judge me!
                                           
Key Differences between Leir and Lear
Leir

  • Mourning Queen Lear
  • Gives him an excuse for being so trusting
  • Grieving 
  • Add psychological motives
  • Goneril and Regan now about the love test and can prepare while C can't
  • Courtier =Pernillus
  • Need to give land in order to attract men 
Lear 

  • No mother therefore where is the motive? - wants to pet his ego
  • C sees through the rhetoric but in Lear it's just an aside
  • Courtier= Kent's banishment in disguise
  • Adds Lears rages = reunion is much more poignant
  • Interesting use of contrasting pairs- Edmund and Edgar
  • Goneril and Regan are already married
  • Pains to present that R + G are not horribly evil at the start 

Thursday 8 October 2015

Fool Part 2

Cba to put them all together...

Foolishness and Folly

See notes on Desiderus Erasmus 

Critic Epsom claims Shakespeare derived his use of 'fool' from Erasmus's "In Praise of Folly", a satirical text in praise of madness and folly but developed it further

WS creates a cynical world where fools are present but the fool in King Lear is much more complex. 
There are ironic aversions of folly and wisdom that cast darker shadows. 

The fool's perception of the true horror of the situation prompts his goading of his master from the outset
                       
                                




"Thou shouldst not have been old till thou hadst been wise"

"Why, to put's head in, not to give it away to his daughters and leave his horns without a case."

"Dost thou call me fool, boy? / All thy other titles thou hast given away; that thou wast born with" 

"...they will not let me have all the fool to myself, they'll be snatching" 

"Now thou art an O, without a figure; I am better than thou art now. I am a fool, thou art nothing." 

But as Erasmus writes: "Kings dislike the truth. But fools can speak the truth and even insults and be heard with positive please: indeed the words that would cause a wise man his life are surprisingly enjoyable  when uttered by a clown."  

As Goneril says: "Not only, sir, this your all-licensed fool" 

Sottie 

Sottie or Sotie was a type of comedy popular in Europe from the end of the 15th century to the 17th taking the form of a short, satirical play

Linked by genre to the morality plays in the late Middle Ages

Its theme is the universal sway of Mother Folly and by the end of the play, all characters are reduced to the 'man in the cap and bells'

                                              


In the plays, these fools would make observations and exchange thoughts on contemporary events and individuals. Shorter plays, sometimes referred to as parades, need not have any plot at all, but relied simply on a detached dialogue.

The purpose of these events was to present a world turned upside-down, in this case with the fools as fonts of wisdom.The fools were dressed in grey robes, and wore a hood with donkey ears

Enid Welsford relates the central scenes in Act 3 and 3 to the culminating moments of the sottie 

Symbolism of the fool 

The fool is the spirit in search of experience. He represents a mystical cleverness, independent of reason and a childlike ability to tune into the inner workings of the world. 

He is always un-numbered or zero in the tarot pack, operating independently and often having the ability to trump others. 

When the Fool appears in a spread, it is asking you to strip down to the core of yourself and questioning whether your self vision is obscured

                                                


This is seen in Lear as through the Fool's riddles he is able to show the error of his ways. 

"But I can tell why a snail has a house. Why? Why, to put ’s head in, not to give it away to his daughters and leave his horns without a case."

It can also be a warning that significant change is coming, or that you need to confront fears or face the unknown 

Fools

HISTORY OF THE FOOL 

The fool is traced back to ancient times- in the Middle ages, a jester, and in Renaissance who is familiar servant in an aristocratic home. 
They were often regarded as pets or mascots- they were there to amuse, but also to criticise their masters and guests. 

                                          


In medieval times jesters entertained with a wide variety of skills: principal ones included songs, music and storytelling; additional ones included acrobatics, juggling, telling jokes and magic.

The fools were primarily there to provide witty commentary on contemporary events as well as remind the king of his humanity.  This is exactly what the fool does for Lear. 

However, there was a crueler side whereby some of the fools were mentally deficient and physically deformed, requiring the protection of powerful patrons to avoid abuse. This shows a darker side of being a fool where people laughed at them rather than with them. 


NATURAL VS PROFESSIONAL FOOL

For the fool,  distinctions were made between the natural fool and the professional fool. 

The natural fools were seen as almost as supernatural. They had a prophetic quality to them- the fool in King Lear obviously falls into this category. Whereas for a professional fool it was a merely a job that allowed them to act. The natural fool was seen as innately nit-witted, moronic, or mad, the licensed fool was given leeway by permission of the court. In other words, both were excused, to some extent, for their behavior, the first because he "couldn't help it", and the second by decree.

Follies could be disregarded as the ravings of a madman or divinely inspired: the 'natural fool' was often seen as touched by God
Much to Gonerill's annoyance, Lear's 'all-licensed' Fool enjoys a privileged status. His characteristic idiom suggests he is a "natural" fool, not an artificial one, though his perceptiveness and wit show that he is far from being an idiot, however "touched" he might be. 

THE FOOL IN SHAKESPEARE'S PLAYS 

Shakespearean fools are usually clever peasants or commoners that use their wits to outdo people of higher social standing
The role of the fool was popularised by Robert Armin in The King's Men as opposed to Will Kempe's clowns. 

"Armin's fool is a stage presence rather than a solo artist. His major skills were mime and mimicry; even his improvisational material had to be reworked and rehearsed. His greatest asset was as a foil to the other stage actors." 


They increased in popularity between 1598 and 1605 as shown by fools in WS's work 
Fester- Twelfth Night 
Lavatch - All's Well That Ends Well
The role was popular + significant; Shakespeare extends it in King Lear so that folly becomes a dominant theme. Popular fools in real life were Archie Armstrong and Will Sommers.  

Like other characters, the fool began to speak outside of the narrow confines of exemplary morality, to address themes of love, psychic turmoil, and all of the innumerable themes that arise in Shakespeare, and in modern theater.

                         


Clowning scenes in Shakespeare's tragedies mostly appear immediately after a truly horrific scene: The Gravediggers in Hamlet after Ophelia's suicide; The Porter in Macbeth just after the murder of the King; and as Cleopatra  prepares herself for death in Antony and Cleopatra

Nevertheless, it is argued that Shakespeare's clowning goes beyond just 'comic relief', instead making the horrific or deeply complex scenes more understandable and "true to the realities of living, then and now" by shifting the focus from the fictional world to the audience's reality and thereby conveying "more effectively the theme of the dramas"