Shakespeare: King Lear

William Shakespeare: King Lear (1605).

Introduction.

King Lear might well be one of the better-known plays written by Shakespeare. This does not imply that it is easy to understand, as the large number of divergent interpretations already suggest (“King Lear”, n.d.). The complexity of the tragedy is also reflected in my personal history with regard to King Lear. I read the play, watched a DVD, heard it read on audio CD, discussed it with others. Yet, I still struggle to disentangle the various subplots, how they are intertwined, and to understand the plethora of themes and motives. Even so, once I heard an English father read and discuss it with some of his children, in their early teens, who took turns in reading the several roles. By going over it slowly they were able to extract sense and meaning. So, in principle reading it with youngsters should be possible. Given the features of King Lear, including itsstructure, the number of themes, and the language, from a pedagogical perspective it might then be an idea to focus on just a few elements. Elements which are selected should be within reach of the (young or more mature) readers and play into the meaning these may have in their personal lives. If I read Skakespeare’s master piece again with this in mind, to me two elements which will be discussed below seem particularly appropriate in my life as it is now: a quotation from Lear’s interaction with Cordelia, his third daughter, and the theme of relinquishing a position with its concomitant characteristics and how that works out later on.

As summaries abound (e.g. “King Lear Summary”, n.d.; “King Lear: Plot Summary”, n.d.) I refrain from formulating my own. King Lear abdicates as king and divides his realm and power over two of his 3 daughters. They deceive him, as well as each other, their husbands and various others in linked subplots. Eventually the third daughter (Cordelia) turns out to be the one who really loves him. Over the course of the play Lear seems to go insane (but this is already a matter of interpretation) and towards the end of the play almost all die, including Lear and Cordelia.

Discussion.

Two issues will be discussed: a quotation from Lear’s interaction with Cordelia, and the theme of voluntarily leaving a position for one lower in the hierarchy and how that works out later on.

When Lear asks his three daughters who loves him most, Cordelia, the youngest one, does not want to play along and flatter him as her sisters do. Lear does not see through her admittedly somewhat unpolished (“Cordelia”, n.d.) honesty. He gets angry and says:

‘Mend your speech a little, lest it mar your fortunes’.

This is, of course, a thinly veiled threat that if she does not come up with something Lear likes better, he will not grant her a part of his kingdom. Cordelia, however, does not want to change what she says and consequently Lear splits his kingdom over his two eldest daughters and their husbands. This quote aptly and beautifully summarises the dilemma between being honest and outspoken and therefore disliked and in this case disinherited, versus speaking words which are well received and procure benefits, even though they are insincere. As a matter of fact, the horns of the dilemma are even closer, as Lear suggests that changing the message just ‘a little’ might have prevented Cordelia’s losing out on her inheritance. While flattery implies exaggeration, perhaps distortion of the truth or even white lies, does that mean that honesty, in all its raw bluntness, should always be the right policy?

As the tragedy unfolds, Shakespeare’s answer seems to be somewhat ambiguous. Indeed, Cordelia loses her part of the kingdom, and loss as a consequence of being honest might be what happens. Also, flattery may deceive people who otherwise should and could have known better, as King Lear clearly acknowledges later on in the play. By then, however, it may be too little too late. Yet another point seems to be that Cordelia could have chosen to be a little more willing to express her love clearly and unequivocally. Evidently, in that case the plot would have collapsed at the very beginning and if only for this reason Shakespeare was unable to let Cordelia listen to her father in this respect. Finally, there is yet another element which adds to the (plausibly intended) ambiguity, because in the drama honesty eventually prevails, in the sense that Lear finally recognises the truth of what Cordelia said at the beginning. For these considerations, the quote above arguably serves to express and highlight a dilemma, and it can therefore act as a lens through which the ensuing actions can be explored.

The second point to be discussed, briefly, deals with the idea of voluntarily giving up such a powerful position Lear had as a king, particularly so in these days. In doing so, he trusted his successors in their intentions and dealings, as well as in their being faithful to their promises. The tragedy clearly shows that Lear’s expectations did not work out satisfactorily. It suggests that even close relatives and subordinates cannot automatically be trusted and that one’s impressions can be wrong. This works both ways, as e.g. the figure of Kent shows, who also suffers after having been honest, incidentally. King Lear makes clear that a decision to relinquish a position is irrevocable and may be rued when unforeseen developments unfold.

References.