King Lear Reflection Essay

King Lear poses many questions to its audience. Shakespeare’s conventions throughout the story hold true to the plot until Albany’s speech is interrupted by Lear’s rambling words. Upon closer examination however, it is obvious that the play’s writer meant to violate some of the conventions which he set earlier in the story through the crazed king's words. The character’s verses can be interpreted several ways, showing a different side of the conventions which Shakespeare sets. Focusing on the particular scene shows an underlying theme concerning the human race. His writing leaves the audience with a question about the story’s true meaning.

a) The opening Act of King Lear evidently portrays Lear’s downward movement as it coincides with Aristotle’s structure of Greek tragedy. The play begins with Lear, a hero of noble birth and ruler of Britain, in an ordered society soon to be disrupted by a fatal flaw that is the result of his excessive pride. His journey from the ordered to the disordered world becomes apparent after he hands his land over to his two elder daughters and banishes his youngest daughter Cordelia from the kingdom. The initial situation began when Lear asks Cordelia, “What can you say to draw / A third more opulent than your sisters?” (I i 87-88), in which she answers “Nothing, my lord” (I i 89). This demonstrates Lear’s arrogance and triggers

Lear cannot deny his ultimate role as the king. He desires to maintain his name and his rights as king, but to give control of the kingdom to his daughters and their husbands. However, this cannot work: "We know immediately that he is doomed to painful disillusionment by his assumption that his identity as king, father, and man, being fixed in the macrocosmic scheme of things, must remain unshaken without its worldly supports" (Egan 32). So, King Lear's exercising of this nonexistent power establishes his tragic flaw and the problem of the play: the power of the kingdom must reside in Lear only.

Of the deaths in Shakespeare’s King Lear, the death of Cordelia and King Lear at the end of Act V are most significant in revealing the development of Lear and how his development contributes to the theme surrounding it. The dynamic King Lear is a tragic hero whose fatal flaw, arrogance, prompts his removal from power and eventually the death of both himself and Cordelia. However, by the time of King Lear’s death, his arrogance has been replaced with a compassion which allows him to mourn the death of Cordelia and die from his own grief. Besides redeeming himself for his flawed judgement, the compassionate King Lear of Act V recognizes the loyalty in characters like Kent and Cordelia, while also seeing through the dishonesty of Regan and Goneril which fools the King Lear of Act I. King Lear’s transition from disowning Cordelia because of his arrogance to recognizing her as his only faithful daughter is demonstrated through Lear’s death, which serves as the culmination of his development and a reversal of his character. Furthermore, his death elaborates the theme of how someone’s arrogance may blind them from the reality of others’ intentions, which can be seen through a more compassionate and humble lens.

At the beginning of “King Lear,” an authoritative and willful protagonist dominates his court, making a fateful decision by rewarding his two treacherous daughters and banishing his faithful one in an effort to preserve his own pride. However, it becomes evident during the course of the tragedy that this protagonist, Lear, uses his power only as a means of projecting a persona, which he hides behind as he struggles to maintain confidence in himself. This poses a problem, since the audience is prevented from feeling sympathy for the king. Shakespeare’s ironic solution is to allow Lear’s progressing madness to be paired with his recognition of truth, thereby forcing Lear to shed his persona, and

Cordelia’s disinheritance and banishment are frighteningly disproportionate to the “sin” she has committed in not flattering Lear. So too, is Kent’s treatment at his hands. This concept of disproportionate consequences for actions done, underlines how monstrous Lear’s arrogance is, as well as his petty tyranny and his lack of self-knowledge. However, the horrors Lear himself will have to suffer later in the play, as a result of his own folly, will also be out of all proportion to his initial blunder. Without Cordelia in the play, these actions would not have been sparked in Lear.

The entire play is built around one man’s laziness. As the play commences one may question why Lear would decide to prematurely give up his kingdom. It is quite possible that he transferred his authorities before it was

"Unhappy that I am, I cannot heave My heart into my mouth: I love your majesty According to my bond; no more nor less." Cordelia speaks honestly and sensibly, but by doing so she injures Lear's pride, and for this she is disinherited. And when the King's most trusted advisor takes Cordelia's side, the Lear is forced to banish him also to save face. So far Lear appears more sinning than sinned against.

Shakespeare's tragedy King Lear can be interpreted in many ways and many responses. The imprecision’s and complication of the play has led

Often said to be the exemplification of an angel on earth, Cordelia’s character is won over by so many readers’ hearts. However there is a side to Cordelia

Shakespeare’s King Lear fabricated a world of its own, in which distinct virtues and vices were personified by individuals with diverse points of view. With each conflict in the play, the characters’ actions and decisions were parallel to the integrity of their heart and mind, exhibiting the virtue or vice they represented. With this strategy, Shakespeare shares that with trust should come discretion.

The opportunity to view both productions of King Lear has appeared twice for me in the past two years. The first time I viewed Trevor Nunn’s 2009 production of King Lear my review would have been based solely on my ability to understand the dialogue and my appreciation of the acting of Ian McKellen. Two years later I have a better understanding of the actual play and while I still enjoy the 2009 production the 1982 production directed by Jonathan Miller presents the words of William Shakespeare in a more accurate and period specific manor.

The most prevailing images in King Lear are the images (metaphoric and actual) of nature. The concept of nature seems to consume the dialogue, monologues, and setting.

     The play, “King Lear” by William Shakespeare, starts with noblemen Kent and Gloucester having a conversation and the audience finds out that Gloucester has two sons. Edgar who is his heir, and Edmund his unimportant son. This info. leads to the mini-plot. Then, Lear enters to say that he is going to end his life’s tasks and problems. He then points to the map, he tells the people there that he will split his land into three parts. They are going to be given to his three daughters. The two oldest, Goneril and Regan, tell their father that their love for him goes beyond expectations. The youngest one, Cordelia, tells him that she loves him, but only as she should love her father. He is then

Lear's entry into the play is similar to Gloucester's such that, through close analysis of the dialogue between the King and his daughters, the reader gains awful knowledge of the arrogance and ignorance that will soon become his downfall . The drama of his opening speech is at all points excessive; the reader discerns a man that is long accustomed to being listened to and indulged in every way. In a moral