Essay Response
Every new reading of King Lear implies a reconsideration of the ways audiences value and
respond to it.
Critical interpretations of literary works have been formed and developed through changes
in the views of different social groups throughout history. In recent times, this has caused an
embracing of more democratic social values, allowing such interpretations to become vital in the
study of literature as a representation of society. A work such as Shakespeare's King Lear (16081623)1 can be examined from several different critical viewpoints, every new reading a
reconsideration of the ways audiences value and respond to the text. It follows that when two
scenes of significance, the opening and closing scenes of the play, are perceived from three
different critical interpretations, responses are also vastly different.
The opening scene is regarded by many as the scene which determines the events of the
remainder of the play. In establishment of situation, setting and characters, this scene witnesses
Lear's endowment of his land and power to each of his three daughters, Gonerill, Regan and
Cordelia. Having predetermined each portion of land and which daughter is to receive it, Lear
effectively 'baits' his daughters by telling them: "Which of you shall we say doth love us most,/That
we our largest bounty may extend/Where nature doth with merit challenge?" [I/i/44-6] Having
intended the largest portion of land for his youngest and favourite, Cordelia, Lear is shocked when
she does not flatter him as her sisters have done. As a result, he leaves her nothing and banishes
her from the kingdom.
When this scene is analysed in accordance with new historicist theory, Cordelia's
banishment is seen as a justifiable punishment for violating the rules of the state, set by Lear. As
monarch and supreme ruler of the state, Lear's word is law, under God, and must be obeyed.
Cordelia's reply, "I love your majesty/According to my bond, no more nor less...You have begot me,
bred me, loved me. I/Return these duties back as are right fit,/Obey you, love you and most honour
you." [I/i/87-93] shows real love for her father, but is reluctantly said, and not the proclamation of
utmost affection and exaggerated praise Lear had desired. From a new historicist's point of view,
whether Lear realises his folly is a secondary matter; in his duty as king, he cannot admit himself to
be wrong, and so without any other alternative, he banishes his favourite ("Here I disclaim all my
paternal care,/Propinquity and property of blood,/And as a stranger to my heart and me/Hold thee
from this forever." [I/i/106 -110]). Regardless of later events, Gonerill and Regan, whom Lear
claimed he loved less, received more than what they had hoped for in this scene, by acting within
the confines of the king's command. This is further evidence of the new historicist view of any
individual's societal duty as more important than duty towards family. This interpretation claims
the cause of tragedy in the play as being the result of the transfer of power to society's 'illegitimate'
members, such as Edmond, coupled by 'legitimate' characters such as Gonerill, Regan, Cordelia,
and Lear, who act in 'illegitimate' ways. The opening scene in its entirety can be seen as an
'illegitimate act', as it represents both Lear's failing as a king to produce a male heir, and his
distribution of wealth and power, which by law should have been bequeathed to the eldest born.
Hence the scene becomes the source of all tragedies which follow.
1
Halio, J.L. "The New Cambridge Shakespeare, The Tragedy of King Lear, p.xxxi. The play first appeared in 1608
in quarto edition, with a subsequent folio edition published in 1623.
A very different view explaining the events of this scene is evident when the play is viewed
in the context of a 'pseudo-family drama', which examines the characters of the play as a family
unit, with little emphasis on social responsibility and hierarchy. In this interpretation, Lear is
portrayed as a rash, overbearing parent, self-centred and flawed in the sense that he does not impart
equal love to each of his daughters. When he addresses Cordelia: "Now our joy,/Although our last
and least...What can you say to draw/A third more opulent than your sisters?" [I/i/77-81], clearly
shows favouritism towards Cordelia, which causes feelings of neglect and resentment in the elder
sisters. This interpretation attributes the flattery they impart on their father as not a symbol of
vanity and avarice, but an almost desperate 'clambering' for his love. Gonerill's speech, 'Sir, I love
you more than word can wield the matter,/As much as child e'er loved, or father found;/A love that
makes breath poor, and speech unable..." [I/i/50-6] becomes a plea for her father's love, 'As much
as child e'er loved' suggesting that although she was the eldest, she was always most neglected.
This love, or want of love becomes a determining factor in actions of each of his three daughters
throughout the play. The 'pseudo-family' theory differs from others, in that it seeks to justify the
actions of the characters within the play in a manner conforming to those of ordinary human
relationships. This justification lies in the neglect of his daughters by Lear, amplified by the
absence of a maternal figure. The universality of such mistreatment is shown through an almost
identical situation involving Gloucester and his two sons, reaffirming the view of the 'pseudofamily' interpretation of the play as an examination of any typical family unit.
A feminist reading of King Lear similarly cites the absence of a female 'guidance figure' as
being one of the causes of tragedy in the play. In the opening scene Regan and Gonerill conform to
the values of a patriarchal society, by imparting adulation when required by their father. This can
also be seen as a form of submissive compliance, emphasised by Gonerill in her oration: "I love
you.../Beyond what can be valued, rich or rare,/No less than life, with grace, health, beauty,
honour..." [I/i/52-3]. Grace, health, beauty and honour are in this case what society values in a
woman, not what Gonerill herself values, as is evident, juxtaposed by the consequences of her
deadly ambition in the latter part of the play. The Elizabethan patriarchal categorisation of women
as 'angel' or 'devil' is also very distinct, and takes genesis from the biblical story of temptation in
the Garden of Eden. The two eldest sisters, Regan in particular, are portrayed as 'devil' characters,
evil by nature, who are easily tempted and use their sexuality to gain power. Cordelia, on the other
hand, embodies the view of woman as 'angel', described by Lear, "Her voice was ever soft,/Gentle
and low, an excellent thing in woman." [V/iii/246-7], for although she refuses to obey her father in
the first instance, she shows undying devotion and respect towards him, and has no evil ambition
which may cause her to submit to temptation ("For I want that glib and oily art,/No unchaste
action or dishonoured step/That hath deprived me of your grace and favour"). After she is
banished by her father, Cordelia is effectively left a pauper, with no means of survival, until the
King of France agrees to marry her and 'rescue' her from her situation. A feminist would view this
as a slight to woman's character, hence Gonerill and Regan would be seen as better and stronger
female characters, although they commit many wrongdoings later on in the play.
The events of the closing scene of the play affirm many of the views presented in the
varying interpretations. In the final scene all three daughters die, alongside Lear and Edmond. In a
feminist interpretation, this can be attributed to their refusal to conform to the standards set by the
social patriarchy of their time. The manner in which they die suggests that a patriarchal society
views power given to a female as a very dangerous thing; Gonerill and Regan are portrayed as not
knowing how to use their power, and even Cordelia fails in her attempt to lead an army and win a
war. Gonerill, having at last gained power over her father and sisters, abuses it by allowing her
father and Cordelia to be sentenced to death, poisoning Regan, and finally killing herself.
Gonerill's frenzied madness is the result of the possession of power, as she explains to Albany
before she dies, "Say if I do [know it]; the laws are mine, not thine. Who can arraign me for't?"
[V/iii/147-8]. On closer examination of Gonerill's character, it is evident that her actions are the
cause of her unhappiness as an ambitious woman in an unappreciative, male-dominated society.
Her suicide may also have been the result of self hatred, for it is suggested that she is infertile at the
beginning of the play, and she is later cursed by her father ("Into her womb convey sterility,/Dry up
in her the organs of increase..." [I/iv/233-4]). As child-bearing was one of the main roles of
women in Elizabethan society, infertility was viewed as an attribute which made women worthless.
It is interesting to note also that infertility in such a patriarchal society was never accredited to the
male, pertaining to the belief that the female was the 'soil' which nurtured the male seed. It is hence
justifiable that Gonerill died for the sole reason that she was infertile. Feminist theory rejects this
idea, as well as the stationing of a male ruler at the end of the play, and the implication that this
ruler will restore social stability.
Contrary to the feminist interpretation, in the new historicist view, the women die in the
closing scene of the play, not as inferior beings in a patriarchal society, but because they dared to
challenge the rulings of a monolithic patriarchal government. The concept of what is 'legitimate' is
prominent in this scene, as each character who disobeys the rulings of the government, regardless
of good or evil, is killed for such actions. Only three major characters are consistently lawful
throughout the play, and essentially they survive. The interpretation here becomes ironic; Kent
lives because he remains faithful to the king in his duty, however this duty requires nothing of him
after the king's death. Kent acknowledges this at the end of the scene: "I have a journey, sir,
shortly to go:/My master calls me; I must not say no." [V/iii/295-6], hence it is implied that Kent,
too, dies at the end of the play. Edgar and Albany, the two remaining men, are considered morally
right in this interpretation because they have not deviated from the decree of the state, and are
hence left to rule the kingdom. Ultimately, it is shown that monolith of Elizabethan society
remains undisturbed at the end of the play, and no changes have been made to the government,
although the royal family itself has undergone a vicious upheaval.
A family criticism of the play's closing scene interprets the death of Lear, Gloucester, and
their children as the inevitable outcome of a problem created long before the events of the
beginning of the play. The strongest assertion of this theory is that a child's character and integrity
is determined by their upbringing. Hence, all the misgivings of Edmond, Gonerill and Regan are
attributed to their mistreatment as children, their actions the result of jealousy caused by parental
neglect. Lear's regret and apology, made towards Cordelia at the beginning of the scene ("You must
bear with me. Pray you now, forget/And forgive. I am old and foolish" [V/iii/80-1]) is not
extended towards his other two daughters. Lear feels that he has been mistreated; he tells Cordelia,
"...for your sisters/Have, as I do remember, done me wrong." [V/iii/71-2], however a family
criticism would observe that this wrongdoing has been the result of Lear's mistreatment of Gonerill
and Regan, thus Lear dies justly at the end of the play. It is also noteworthy that Regan, Gonerill
and Edmond are justified in their actions, as they have had only each other to confide in. Gonerill's
suicide in this final scene can hence be attributed to no purpose remaining for her to live. Edgar's
closing message summarises the moral message of the play from the 'pseudo-family' perspective;
"The weight of this sad time we must obey,/Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say."
[V/iii/297-8]. This provides a link back to the opening scene, in which speaking what 'ought to be
said' promulgates a dangerous moral code that manifests itself in the tragedy which occurs.
In essence, each new reading of King Lear encodes a different interpretation of text and
context, based on a certain set of values. By considering each interpretation and drawing
comparisons between them, inferences can be made concerning aspects of Elizabethan society
which confined the individual and its own development. When a literary source is critically viewed
as the state in microcosm, such inferences can be applied to existing society. Hence, the new
readings of literary texts such as King Lear has and will continue to propagate the progress of
society as a whole.