When the reader turns their focus to Gloucester, they can immediately see the view he holds over both of his sons. As he speaks to Kent about Edmund, the reader learns that Gloucester has had to explain his unfortunate relation to him so many times now that he is no longer embarrassed by it, but, “brazen to it“ (I.i). Then in the next lines, Gloucester goes on to say that his real son Edgar is “no dearer in my account” (I.i). Thus, even though Edgar is legitimate and Edmund is a ‘bastard child,’ Gloucester doesn’t seem to be very interested in either of them. This self-interest allows Edmund to play to Gloucester’s own interests and fears with ease. It allows Edmund to have his father turn his back on his son without so much as a second thought. …show more content…
Someone arguing for the view of human action would not focus on the fact that Edmund disregarded the gods, as was the supporting fact in the former theory, but instead focus on Edmund’s obsession with ridding himself of the title ‘bastard child,’ and how it drove him to his death. Perhaps it was not divine justice, but his desire to lose the degrading title that was unwillingly bestowed upon him at birth which drove his action to take revenge on his brother for getting all of his father’s inheritance. This drive gets Edmund fairly far in the tragedy, and he almost has it all. He comes so far and is so close to his victory, in fact, that power and success cloud his judgment. Thus, when Edgar comes to him, disguised as another knight and challenges him to battle, Edmund readily agrees to defend his newfound title. The reader later finds out from Goneril that his fight was completely unnecessary, as “By the’ law of arm thou waste not bound to answer/unknown opposite…” (V.iii.). Edgar calls Edmund a traitor and in the heat of the moment, Edmund does not ask him name, but draws his sword. Thus, Goneril explains that did not need to fight. Once he has been slain, she angrily points out that he was not defeated, but, “cozened and bugiled” (V.iii.). One must admit that Edmund is a very smart and conniving man, so when Edmund comes to him and draws his sword, one would think that he’d be a little more wise to risking his life so soon …show more content…
At the end of the play, the reader expects for Cordelia, King Lear, and Gloucester to return to their lives, yet the unforeseen and unwanted death of Cordelia suddenly twists this theory on its head. So what view does King Lear want its reader to take once the tragedy has finished? Did the lives of the characters depend on their view of the divine, or just the right and wrong actions they took throughout the play? The two views are both so equally prominent in the tragedy that a reader could debate the possibility of each. Perhaps the ambiguity and contradicting deaths are a sign that the book does not take a view itself, and desires the reader to debate this question on their own. Perhaps both views are wrong, and King Lear does not mean to leave the reader unsatisfied or questioning, but to promote the idea that man must live as if divine justice exists, even if it's only a product of rich and wishful
Few Shakespearean plays have caused the controversy that is found with King Lear’s ending scenes. Othello kills himself, Macbeth is executed, and of course in hamlet, everyone dies. Lear, however, is different from other Shakespearean classics. Is Lear mad or lucid? Is Cordelia really dead? Is Edmund’s delay explainable? What is the nature of the Lear world that occasioned all of this? How does Knight’s thesis relate to the ending?
This is the first run through the group of onlookers perceives how malevolent and horrible Edmund is and what his goals are. In the event that Gloucester had not treated his "knave child" so severely, he won't not have been underhanded. Since, Gloucester constantly indicated Edmund that he favored Edgar over him, Edmund grew up
Edmund did not support his family just because he was a bastard child. Gloucester loved Edmund very much but it was not enough for him. Edgar was the one who showed support for his father when Gloucester was going through a very tough time. Supporting a family is what helps them move on from the
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.
Hobbes’ description of this restless desire for power proves to be consistent with the actions that Regan and, especially, Goneril take throughout the play. Not satisfied with only the power that comes along with ruling a sector of the kingdom, Regan and Goneril each seek to win the heart of Edmund, the bastard of Gloucester who is granted the title of Earl of Gloucester following his betrayal of his father to Regan’s husband, the Duke of Cornwall. The desire to take Edmund’s hand in marriage, thereby claiming a stake in the land that Edmund governs, resulted from Edmund’s seduction of each of the two sisters as part of his own plot to eventually claim the entire kingdom of Britain for himself. Thus, a parallel occurs throughout the play as Goneril, Regan, and Edmund each seek the aggrandizement of their own power, as Hobbes claimed all humans desire, creating a twisted triangle of seduction and betrayal.
Starting the play with the revelation of Edmund’s plans to see his half brother and father’s downfall, we receive an image of a father who cares only for pure bloods of higher class per say. One can conclude that this man is obviously high class and stereo typically favors the older, direct bloodline son, nevertheless, we can’t take a rash conclusion so fast. Thus, we wait for the plot to develop and let us glance into the true selves of the characters further. We come to the knowledge that Lord Gloucester realizes he values his ties with the king to a great extent, him risking and losing his title as lord due to aiding King Lear. Afterwards, we see him come to appreciation of virtues of honesty and his sons after he is captured by the Duke, losing his eyes as punishment. Gloucester as a character has developed greatly, going forth through challenges and misdemeanors against his pride and being, ending disgraced and blind. Yet, he holds a calm sense to himself, valuing what he has left and becoming more than humble with others. This is a transformation worthy of Shakespeare himself, rather impressive at the very least. This man has lived through the betrayal of his bastard child and being blinded violently for helping a distressed king, he has sacrificed much with spiritual values in return. Astounding that he didn’t suicide out of pure remorse that he will never be able to witness the world again. Unfortunately, he does die of a mixture of happiness and shock when he is revealed that Edgar still breathes life, so he has that going for
In the beginning of the play we see how Gloucester’s illegitimate son Edmund plans to rid of him and his brother who was the legitimate son Edgar, in order to inherit his father's wealth and power. To put this plan into action Edmund forges a letter that describes a plan to kill their father, for the sake of quickening the inheritance process, in which he makes Gloucester believe is from Edgar. But Edmund also manipulates Edgar, telling him lies of their father being upset with him, also telling him at all cost to avoid their father, and carry a weapon. After seeing the fake letter he believes Edgar wrote, and Edgar’s behavior, Gloucester is convinced his illegitimate son is after killing him, in believing so he send his men after him, which
When Edmund tells his father about Edgar’s plan Gloucester does not question the situation, but immediately loses his trust for Edgar. Edgar feels the same when Edmund tells Edgar that he needs to hide from their father. The father and son’s relationship is destroyed by this outside force. The family is broken apart because they could not trust each
The power that makes Edmund corrupt is trust. He uses the trust to manipulate and control his father for the benefit of himself. He frames his brother by composing a false letter to his father implicating a plot to kill Gloucester, that when “our father would sleep till I waked him, you should enjoy half his revenue forever.” (1, 2, 55-56) Gloucester replies with “this villain of mine comes under the prediction of mine: there’s son against father” (1, 2, 112-117) This shows that Gloucester had great faith and trust in his son Edgar. To better his plan he goes to Edgar and convinces him to run away. The thought that he would frame his own brother for the chance to gain power shows his corruption, and that he will do anything to have more power. Edmund writes another letter, except this implicates his father in a plot with France to kill The Duke of Cornwall. He does this so that “the younger rises [and] the old doth fall” (3, 4, 25) and he will become the Earl. Edmund is so corrupted and blinded by his quest for power that he is willing to jeopardize his father’s
What makes injustices so horrid is that they are not the victim's fault. Edmund himself plays absolutely no part in being conceived as a bastard son. All throughout his childhood, he is treated inferior to his legitimate brother Edgar and often has his mother insulted by his father. Gloucester calls Edmund’s mother derogatory terms like a whore, and even blames Edmunds conception solely on her. As soon as the reader starts reading the play, he or she is introduced to Gloucester's attitude toward his son when he states, “Though this knave came saucily into the world before he was sent for, yet his mother was fair. There was good sport in his making, and the whoreson must be acknowledged.”(Shakespeare I, I 20-23). Throughout this derogatory speech, the “knave” is standing by doing nothing. Instead of being viewed an average son, Edmund is seen as a burden and
Although Cordelia appears in Act I, Scene I and disappears until Act IV, she has an enormous impact on the play as a whole. It is generally acknowledged that the role played by Cordelia in King Lear is a symbolic one. She is a symbol of good amidst the evil characters within the play. Since the play is about values which have been corrupted and must be restored, it is not surprising that the figure who directs the action must be embodiment of those values which are in jeopardy – love, truth, pity, honour, courage and forgiveness. Cordelia’s reply does not initiate the tragedy; Lear’s misguided question does that. Her “nothing” sets her father’s tragic journey in motion. There is nothing wrong with her remarks.
He also tells Edgar that Cornwall is not pleased with him over a dispute between Albany and Cornwall that Edgar knows nothing about. He then urges Edgar to flee just before he lies to Gloucester about Edgar’s intent. Gloucester, believing Edmund’s lies condemns Edgar to death and promises Edmund his lordship. Edmund, having disposed of his brother and securing his eventual reward sees an opportunity to acquire his land and status a little more swiftly. When Gloucester flees to help Lear he entrusts Edmund with ensuring Cornwall does not discover Gloucester’s plans and the location of letter regarding an imminent French invasion. Edmund immediately betrays his father and shows Cornwall the letter, making him believe Gloucester is working for the French. Gloucester is soon after discovered and brought before Cornwall and Reagan. While Gloucester is being blinded by Cornwall, Edmund is busy courting Goneril outside of her palace. Edmund decides to double his chances of becoming King by courting Reagan as well. Edmund’s final act of treachery occurs when he gives orders to the Captain to hang Lear and Cordelia. He lies even in his dying breath as he stalls in order to ensure the death of Cordelia: “Despite of mine own nature. Quickly send-/ Be brief in it - to th’ castle, for my writ/ Is on the life of Lear, and on Cordelia./ Nay, send in time.” (Shakespeare 5.3.292-295) Edmund’s actions led
Gloucester is exactly like Lear in the sense that Lear picked the wrong to disown and turn away from. Edmund, Gloucester’s son who had been gone for 9 years, was extremely jealous of his brother Edgar. Edmund then lies and manipulates both Edgar and Gloucester by telling Gloucester that Edgar is plotting against him and wants to kill him. This then causes Gloucester to become exceedingly angry and sent Edmund out to bring Edgar back to him (Lear 1.2.105). In comparison with that story King Lear turned away from his one daughter, Cordelia, who truly cared for him only because she would not confess her love for him. While his other two daughters, Regan and Goneril, were trying to kill Lear off and take his money and power (Lear 1.1.90-95).
Unlike King Lear, Edmund has no power at the beginning of the play. Being Gloucester’s youngest and illegitimate son he is not accepted by society or his father. Gloucester says in front of Edgar, “His breeding, sir, hath been at my charge / I have so often blushed to acknowledge him that now I am brazed to it” (1.1.8-9). Edgar, Edmund’s older brother will inherit their father's wealth, land, and title. Knowing this Edmund’s hunger for power has probably grown through the years, giving him the motivation to act the way he did. In 1.2 Edmund tells the audience that he’s going to con
Although Edmund is driven by forces more powerful than simple self-preservation, we are never quite given a direct sense of malicious intent or bloodthirstiness. He may be deceitful, shrewd, and cunning, but these qualities are borne of his desire to reclaim the legitimacy that he believes human law has been denying him, not because of any malevolent feeling toward others. He professes to value natural law, believing in the Machiavellian principles of survival of the fittest, and feigning compassion and affiliation only when it serves his self-interests. Edmund’s claims of obeying natural law fall flat; they seem to merely be a convenient means of assuaging his compunctions about the sociopathic measures he takes to pursue his ambition. He both embraces and disregards these natural laws, using his very human powers of eloquence and persuasion to achieve his aims. At the conclusion of the play, Edmund has a sudden and dramatic transformation as he is dying, attempting to save Lear