Is King Lear Nihilistic or Hopeful?

Is male monarch Lear nihilistic or aspirer? Satisfying, hopeful, and redemptive some critics would say that these adjectives belong nowhere near a description of King Lear. maven critic, Thomas Roche, nonwithstanding states that the bids expiration is as bleak and un wagesing as hu homokind keister reach outside the gates of funny house (164). Certainly, Roches pessimistic interpretation has merit subsequently(prenominal) exclusively, Lear has foregathern nearly every 1 he once c atomic number 18d for die in the winding dying himself. Although this aspect of the duck soup is true, agreeing with this negative persuasion requires a somebody to believe that Lear follows nonhing and that he suffers and dies in vain.Indeed, this is ex locomotely what Roche believes when he states that at the inclines abrogate, Lear still can non tell hefty from detestation . . . or true from out of true (164). This nihilistic approach, however, non solely disregards m some(prenomi nal) of the plays moments of philosophic insight, nevertheless it as well completely misinterprets Shakespe bes intent. That is not to say that Lear is without fault at the end of the play as Shakespe atomic number 18 surely unders a worryd, Lear is still hu piece beings, and as such, he is subject to humans frailty. What is most important astir(predicate) Lear, however, is not that he dies a faultinged man however that he dies an improved man. on that pointfore, although King Lear king get-go appear bleak, Shakespeare suggests that Lears invigoration, and human vivification in general, is worth on the whole of its misery because it is lots by dint of woefulness that raft collide with friendship slightly the true nature of their individual selves and closely the nature of all humanity (Roche 164). From the very line of descent of the play, Shakespeare suggests that King Lear has much to attend. As Maynard Mack explains in his essay Action and World in King L ear, the reader/audience is immediately invited to comprehend that Lear is too deeply . . . omfort competent and secure in his robes and furrd g stimulates, in his rituals of authority and deference . . . and in his childish charades (170). In other words, there is an immediate sense that Lear is not real aware of the rasping veridicalities of human life. For instance, when Lear says that he has divided his kingdom into trines for each daughter so that he can retire and Unburthened crawl toward death, he shows that he is completely escapeing in viridity sense by assuming that his plan bequeath go according to his get out and that the transition of function get out run smoothly (1. . 43). roughly instantly, Lear is proven foolish when Regan and Goneril hit together and agree to do something, and in the heat to ecdysiast their father of whatsoever power that he has remaining (1. 1. 306, 311). Mack calls this rapid string of sluicets that follow Lears hasty abdication the waiting coil of consequences that leaps into threatening life, bringing with it the obvious message that Lear was terribly wrong in choosing to reward his false-flattering daughters with the gift of his kingdom (170).Lears gift to Goneril and Regan, whose flying deception shows the falseness of their affections toward their father, proves that Lear is uneffective to see the go to bed, or lack thereof, that others feature for him. Likewise, when he be fall downs enraged at Cordelia aft(prenominal) she refuses to flatter him, Lear reveals that he, the want Goneril and Regan, is unable to assimilate altruistic discern for another person when he says to Cordelia that it would have been Better thou/ Hadst not been innate(p) than not t have pleased me (1. . 235-236). In essence, his . . . power and his love to flattery bows and he is only able to love another person when that person appeals to his sense of vanity, so when those who truly do love Lear, namely Cordelia and K ent, refuse to appease his vain nature, Lear banishes them, Without grace . . . love . . . or benison (1. 1. 149, 266). This inability to accept love and affinitys as their own reward, Mack states, is Lears dark flaw (170).Mack argues that relationships can lead to happiness but that they lead to warmheartednessache and despair equally as pr executeically in come in to have any good relationships, then, a person must accept others for who they are, which is something that Lear is unable and unwilling to do (Mack 170). Indeed, Lear would have been very felicitous living his remaining years without any pregnant knowledge about love or relationships, ring himself in a childish charade of false love and false true statement from this level off forward, however, Lear will have to shoot the consequences of his blindingly illiterate actions (Mack 170).The ignorance about life and human nature that Lear demonstrates in the plays graduation scene, then, leads to his largest mi stake, the mistake that serves as a bit point from which all other actions are the at once consequence. As Mack explains, because Shakespeare put the turning point at the offshoot of the play, The pith of action in Lear lies preferably in effects than in antecedents, and particularly in its capacity, as with Lear in the opening scene, to generate energies that will hurl themselves . . . in reverberations of dis stray (170). That is, because Lears fatal flaw resents itself early rather than later on in the playas is customary for Shakespearean catastrophethe meanings and consequences of his actions, as well as Lears own thoughts/awareness, have a longer clock to evolve. How the early turning point in Lear divine services to express Lears learning experience is clarified by comparing the play with another Shakespearean tragedy the turning point in Othello, for example, occurs in act 3, scene 3 when the seeds of prehensiley that Iago has planted end-to-end the first three a cts ultimately take foot inside of Othellos mind.It is not until this time that Othellos fatal flaw emerges, when, in a jealous rage, he vows that his bloody thoughts Shall nevr look congest . . . / Till a capable and wide vindicate / Swallow them Desdemona and Cassio up (3. 3. 454-457). The play is already half(prenominal) over before Shakespeare reveals Othellos fatal flaw, and it is not until the final scene that Othello learns how gullible he has been. In essence, Othello learns nada from his experience he dies in vain, low-spirited and heartbroken.In Lear, on the other hand, the main action by means ofout the entire play revolves around Lears teasing suffering and his purgatorial learning experience, all stemming, of course, from his rash, ignorant behavior in the first act. In tell for Lear to learn from his selfish and ignorant behaviors, he must first realize that he has been blind to the truth. Lear is served a cold dish of reality when Goneril and Regan disrespe ctfully refuse to allow their father the privilege of his noble knights, which of course, are the last symbol of his past authority and his kingly pride GONERIL. Hear me, my lord.What leases you five and twenty? Ten? Or five? To follow in a house where twice so many an(prenominal) Have a command to tend you? REGAN. What need one? (2. 4. 259-263) Not only do these lines give how Lears daughters have contemptuously taken apart his remaining power, but they also represent the button of Lears dignity by leaving him a shell of his former self, without a single pliable knight left to appease his sense of self-importance. erstwhile this happens, Lear is left enraged and desperate, pridefully stating that even our basest beggars / Are in the poorest superfluous and that he call for . . . ore than nature needs, else military mans life is cheap as tools (2. 4. 263-266). In other words, Lear feels that his daughters are treating him like an animal by depriving him of his royal train . Clearly, Lear still clings to the pompous supposition that his needs are above the needs of the basest beggar and he still feels like the bleak victim of his daughters cruel behavior (2. 4. 263). crimson with all of Lears continuing faults, however, the seeds of knowledge are antecedent to grab hold it has been torturesome, but he in conclusion sees that Goneril and Regans false tongues had blinded him from their true, unloving natures.That is, when he calls them unnatural hags and. . . a disease thats in my flesh, he finally sees what love is not (2. 4. 277, 221). In this way, Lear has had his motiflized vision of the truthone where he is flattered, pampered, and adoredpainfully stripped away from him even still, it will take a purgatorial assault and subsequent repentance before Lear learns what the true meaning of love is. Fittingly, as Lear pulls out of the castle and into the harsh weather, Regan states that the injuries that willful men do themselves procure / must iness be their own schoolmasters (2. . 301-303). What Regan means by this is that the combat will teach Lear that he must drinkable his pride, but the statement also foreshadows how Lear will learn something much much important about human nature while he suffers from the elements. In fact, it is in the rage of the storm, interspersed with his own rage, that Lear has his first unselfish thoughts, as is evident when he asks the Fool How dost my boy? artwork cold? and he (Lear) says to him abject Fool and knave, I have one part in my heart / Thats sorry for you yet (3. 2. 68, 72-73).Lear further portrays the empathy that he has for others when he stands alone on the heath and, in a moment of heartfelt lucidness, laments over the houseless bulk Poor rude(a) wretches, wheresoeer you are, That bide the pelt of this pitiless storm, How shall your houseless heads and unfed sides, Your looped and windowed raggedness, defend you From seasons such as these? (3. 4. 28-33) Not only doe s Lear express sincere caution for others during this monologue, but he also expresses regret for the way that he has treated his subjects when he says that O, I have taen / Too little feel for of this (3. 4. 33-34). Indeed, this is the first time in the play that Lear admits any kind of wrongdoing, and as such, it is the first time that he looks inside himself at his own soul and sees that it, like his eldest daughters souls, is far from spotless. Following Lears grievous insight on the heath, he moves into the hovel where, later meeting Edgar, who is disguised as the beggar Poor Tom, he begins to question the nature of all humanity.When Lear sees Edgars cold, shivering, and uncovered body, he asks the eternal question Is man no more than this? (3. 4. 105). When Lear says that The unaccomodated man is no more / but such a poor, bare, forked animal, he is essentially saying that human beings, like their naked bodies, are pitiable creatures (3. 4. 109-110). Likewise, when he pr oceeds to strip of his garments, he is making the symbolic gesture that he is no wear out than Poor Tom that is, he realizes that he, too, is pitiable.Lears recognition that his own body is pathetic, the literary critic Paul Jorgensen argues in his book Lears Self-Discovery, is Lears first insight. Jorgensen argues, self-knowledge means understanding the wickedness of the flesh in order to attain wisdom, he asserts, people must be willing to cope that they are born of the seed of Adam and as such, are impure . . . and abominable before divinity fudge (26). Shakespeare, however, does not suggest that Lear is necessarily doomed because he is the Son of Adam.Rather, the episode with Poor Tom in the hovel simply suggests that all of humanity, including its royalty, is flawed using Lears insight as an example, Shakespeare suggests that in order for people to be redeemed by God, they must first realize humankinds shortcomings and learn to pity one and all. Lears compassion toward Edg ars frailty and his insistence that he have the companionship of the naked, noble philosopher proves that he has intimate more than estimable empathy and self-awareness he has also well-read to value his relationships with people despite their flaws, regardless of what he might gain from these relationships (3. . 175). Another example of Lear learning altruistic betrothal comes from his relationship with the Fool, who, as A. C. Bradley explains, makes incessant and cutting reminders of Lears self-indulgence and wrong then, Lear gets nothing from the Fool other than insults, such as when the Fool suggests that Lear has a little piddling wit (Bradley 24 3. 2. 74). Yet despite his lack of reward, Bradley argues, Lear comes in his affliction to think of others first, and to seek, in dictation solicitude for his poor boy, the shelter he scorns for his own bare head (24).In essence, Lear has learned how to accept his relationships as their own reward, which, as surely Mack would agree, is the first step in learning how to love (Mack 170). Clearly, the relationship that Lear has with his Fool is preposterous in fact, the Fools role in the play is so unusual that one critic, Jan Kott, argues in his essay King Lear, or Endgame that the Fools character represents the motion of the entire play, namely, the decay and fall of the world (152).In an wonky world where no action has any real meaning, Kott states, the Fool is the only character to realize that the only true madness is to regard this world as rational (167). Certainly, what Kott says about the Fool is correct, to a point. The soliloquy he gives while in the hovel in which he prophesizes that the realm of Albion will come to colossal confusion certainly proves that the Fool does represent an blind drunkist viewpoint, but Kott misinterprets Shakespeares intent when he states that the play is itself absurd (3. 2. 91-92). One must remember that Shakespeare makes the Fool dissolve at the end of act 3 f or a reason.Surely, life is meaningless during the first half of the play when Lear blindly lives his life without truly learning anything about the nature of humanity, but as Lear suffers in the third act, he also learns how to feel for the weak and houseless poor, to make out the falseness of flattery and the brutality of authority, and to pierce through rank and raiment to the common humanity below (Bradley 24). As a result of learning, Shakespeare suggests, the worldand Lears part in itceases to be absurd consequently, the Fool, and his philosophy, gently disappear.It is by no coincidence that Lears suffering and subsequent learning in the third act occur during a miserable storm. In fact, Shakespeare uses the storm as a physical representation of the behave storm of emotions that occurs in Lears mind that is, the combative storm symbolizes and embellishes what Lear himself calls The tempest in my mind (3. 4. 6,12). Likewise, it is by no coincidence that Goneril, Regan and C ornwall grow worse from their succeeder they all remain warm, dry, and nurtureable during the storm and they have all gained great power, but not one of them learns anything during the course of the play.Indeed, as Bradley explains, The warm castle becomes a room in hell and the storm move heath a sanctuary (33). The power of comfort to corrupt is apparent several times during the play, but it is perhaps most shocking when Cornwall gouges out Gloucesters eyes and proceeds to stomp on them, presentment the old man that Upon these eyes of thine Ill good deal my foot (3. 7. 69). It is in these lines that the reader/audience sees how powerful, and and then untouchable, people feel when they have all of the comfort of the world to support them (3. . 69). Cornwall, like Lear at the beginning of the play, feels invincible, but unlike Lear, he never learns that he is not ague / proof (4. 6. 105-106). Therefore, by tell apart Cornwall, and the other bad characters, to Lear, Shakespea re not only fortifys the idea that knowledge and redemption come to those who suffer through physical and emotional storms, but he also suggests that people who have power and comfort a lot feel that they are superhuman and have nothing left to learn (Bradley 33).Of course, the eventual demise of all of the wickedly flourishing proves otherwise. In addition to the bad characters acting as foils to Lear, Gloucesters symbolic blindness and subsequent literal blindness also help to emphasize how Lear gains knowledge through suffering. Indeed, Gloucester acts as a foil to Lear throughout the play both are initially blind to the actions of their wicked children, both foreswear their allegiant children, and, in turn, both learn the truth in very painful ways.Until his blinding, Gloucester believes that Edgar is a unconnected and fastened villain who has betrayed him and that Edmund is a loyal . . . boy, but the quickness with which Gloucester realizes Edmunds true intent after Cor nwall has blinded him, screaming O my follies Then Edgar was maltreated strongly implies that, like Lear, Gloucester had to suffer in order to see the light (2. 1. 79-86 3. 7. 92-93). In this way, Shakespeare uses irony to reinforce the idea that those who have eyes are practically blind to the truth and those who suffer often see more truth than their bodies and minds can handle.Yet another person one might compare Lear to is his loving and loyal daughter, Cordelia, who is so angelic that her tears are like holy water that from heavenly eyes flowing (4. 3. 31). In essence, she is the goodliest of human figures and a model to which Lear can aspire to become more like (4. 3. 17). Indeed, Lear shows that he has become more like his blessed daughter after he reconciles with her and tells her that When thou dost ask me blessing, Ill kneel down / And ask of thee forgiveness . . . (5. 3. 10-11).This humble, indeed shameful statement seems not to have come from the same selfish, egotist ical king who banishes his daughter for not proving her love to him, and in fact, it does not. Lear is a changed man. What his purgatory has prepared him for, his reunification with Cordelia, the plays Christ-figure, has set in stone. Lear has finally and completely learned how to love, and for that, he is forgiven and completely redeemed. There are some critics, of course, who believe that Lear does not learn how to love, or learn anything else for that matter.In his essay Nothing Almost Sees Miracles Tragic Knowledge in King Lear, Roche even argues that Shakespeare intended Lear to be a total failure, in fact and in vision (168). Roche continues by stating that at the end of the play, Lear sees nothing because every gesture of his love is countered by an equal and opposite gesture of offense (164). Indeed, Roche is correct when he states that Lear is still flawed at the end of the play.After all, he still feels like a victim to Goneril and Regans cruel behavior and he is still ve ngeful, as is evident when he proudly states to Cordelias corpse that I killed the slave that was a-hanging thee (5. 3. 276). Even in his defense of Lears knowledge, Jorgensen states that Lear is still pathetically unwise in worldly matters at the end of the play, but he continues by stating that none of this matters because Lear has learned that which, especially for a dying man, is all-important (7).That is, Lear has learned about the meaning of love, the pitiable frailty of the human form, and the miseries of the unfortunate. In essence, he has learned what it means to be a human instead of a king. Therefore, it does not matter that Lear still has faults because his suffering has taught him eternal truthstruths that are worthy of his redemption. In the end, King Lear almost ceases to be tragic (Bradley 32). Certainly, Lears suffering is severe, but Shakespeare shows that it is Lears suffering that leads to his learning and his subsequent redemption.Prior to Lears painful banishme nt, he is a pampered, flattered king living a false life, full of false love. It is excruciating for Lear to causa that his life has been 80 years of lies, but in order to learn the truth, he must first suffer through the pain, and as Shakespeare clearly shows, it is better to learn through suffering than to remain comfortable and ignorant. Therefore, Lears life is worth all of the agonies it incurs after all, it is only after Lear begins to suffer that he truly begins to live.