Is King Lear Nihilistic or Hopeful?

Is fag Lear nihilistic or hopeful? Satisfying, hopeful, and redemptive near critics would say that these adjectives belong nowhere near a description of business moveer Lear. One critic, Thomas Roche, even off states that the die hards ending is as bleak and unrewarding as man can reach outdoors the gates of hell (164). Certainly, Roches pessimistic interpretation has merit concomitantly(prenominal)wards every, Lear has seen nearly every mavin he once c ard for die before destruction himself. Although this position of the admit is authoritative, agreeing with this negative view requires a person to believe that Lear corresponds zero story and that he suffers and dies in trivial.Indeed, this is exactly what Roche believes when he states that at the plays end, Lear palliate can non tell good from evil . . . or rightful(a) from morose (164). This nihilistic approach, however, non provided disregards more than of the plays moments of philosophical insight, neertheless it as well as completely misinterprets Shakespeares intent. That is not to say that Lear is without shift at the end of the play as Shakespeare surely unders oerlyd, Lear is lifelessness kinds, and as such, he is subject to serviceman frailty. What is most important about Lear, however, is not that he dies a flawed man only that he dies an improve man.Therefore, although King Lear might freshman appear bleak, Shakespeare suggests that Lears smell, and valet de chambre life in general, is value all of its misery because it is often through ugly that people gain knowledge about the true nature of their psyche selves and about the nature of all valet de chambreity (Roche 164). From the very descent of the play, Shakespeare suggests that King Lear has much to say. As Maynard Mack explains in his establish Action and human race in King Lear, the reader/audience is immediately invited to sense buzz off that Lear is too deeply . . . omfortable and secure in his robes and furrd gowns, in his rituals of authority and complaisance . . . and in his chil swear out charades (170). In otherwise words, there is an immediate sense that Lear is not genuinely aware of the harsh realities of human life. For instance, when Lear says that he has change integrity his kingdom into thirds for each daughter so that he can put out and Unburthened crawl toward death, he shows that he is completely missing in viridity sense by assuming that his plan leave alone go harmonise to his will and that the transition of power will run smoothly (1. . 43). just about instantly, Lear is proven foolish when Regan and G unityril hit together and agree to do something, and in the heat to denudate their father of any power that he has rest (1. 1. 306, 311). Mack calls this rapid string of events that follow Lears hasty abdication the waiting coil of consequences that leaps into threatening life, bringing with it the unmistakable message that Lear was dete stably wrong in choosing to reward his false-flattering daughters with the indue of his kingdom (170).Lears gift to Goneril and Regan, whose quick deception shows the falseness of their affections toward their father, proves that Lear is unable to see the make water it a mien, or lack thereof, that others bind for him. Likewise, when he be answers enraged at Cordelia after she refuses to flatter him, Lear reveals that he, similar Goneril and Regan, is unable to submit altruistic love for another person when he says to Cordelia that it would have been Better thou/ Hadst not been born than not t have pleased me (1. . 235-236). In essence, his . . . power and his love to flattery bows and he is precisely 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 Kent, refuse to appease his vain nature, Lear banishes them, Without grace . . . love . . . or benison (1. 1. 149, 266). This inability to accep t love and relationships as their own reward, Mack states, is Lears fatal flaw (170).Mack argues that relationships can lead to happiness exactly that they lead to lovingnessache and despair equally as often in align to have any good relationships, then, a person essentialiness(prenominal) 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 happy living his remaining years without any important knowledge about love or relationships, surrounding himself in a childish charade of false love and false truth from this point forward, however, Lear will have to learn the consequences of his screenlandingly ignorant military actions (Mack 170).The ignorance about life and human nature that Lear demonstrates in the plays first scene, then, leads to his largest mis draw, the mistake that serves as a turning point from which all other actions are the get up consequence. As Mack explains, because Shak espeare put the turning point at the beginning of the play, The meaning of action in Lear lies quite a in effects than in antecedents, and peculiarly in its capacity, as with Lear in the opening scene, to generate energies that will lunge themselves . . . in reverberations of disorder (170). That is, because Lears fatal flaw resents itself early rather than later on in the playas is customary for Shakespearean tragedythe meanings and consequences of his actions, as well as Lears own thoughts/awareness, have a longer time to evolve. How the early turning point in Lear helps to emphasize Lears learning experience is clarified by canvas the play with another Shakespearean tragedy the turning point in Othello, for example, occurs in act 3, scene 3 when the seeds of jealousy that Iago has planted throughout the first three acts finally take root intimate of Othellos brainiac.It is not until this time that Othellos fatal flaw emerges, when, in a jealous rage, he vows that his blood y thoughts Shall nevr look back . . . / bowl a capable and wide revenge / Swallow them Desdemona and Cassio up (3. 3. 454-457). The play is already half 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 zero from his experience he dies in vain, humiliated and heartbroken.In Lear, on the other hand, the main action throughout the entire play revolves around Lears painful anguish and his purgatorial learning experience, all stemming, of course, from his rash, ignorant behavior in the first act. In order for Lear to learn from his selfish and ignorant ways, he must(prenominal) first realize that he has been blind to the truth. Lear is served a cold dish of reality when Goneril and Regan disrespectfully refuse to allow their father the privilege of his terrific knights, which of course, are the last symbol of his past authority and his kingly soak GONERIL. Hear me, my lo rd.What needs you louvre and twenty? Ten? Or five? To follow in a house where twice so many Have a command to tend you? REGAN. What need one? (2. 4. 259-263) not only do these lines represent how Lears daughters have contemptuously interpreted away his remaining power, tho they also represent the loss of Lears dignity by leaving him a shell of his former self, without a single conciliatory knight left to appease his sense of self-importance. formerly this happens, Lear is left enraged and desperate, pridefully stating that even our basest beggars / Are in the poorest superfluous and that he needs . . . ore than nature needs, else Mans life is cheap as beasts (2. 4. 263-266). In other words, Lear feels that his daughters are treating him equal an animal(prenominal) 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 equivalent the acquitted victim of his daughters cruel behavior (2. 4. 263). Even with all of Lears inveterate faults, however, the seeds of knowledge are beginning to grab hold it has been painful, but he finally sees that Goneril and Regans false tongues had blinded him from their true, unloving natures.That is, when he calls them stirred 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 idealized vision of the truthone where he is flattered, pampered, and adoredpainfully stripped away from him even still, it will take a purgatorial act and subsequent repentance before Lear learns what the true meaning of love is. Fittingly, as Lear storms out of the castle and into the harsh weather, Regan states that the injuries that froward men do themselves procure / Must be their own schoolmasters (2. . 301-303). What Regan actor by this is that the storm will teach Lear that he must move back his pride, but the statement also foreshadows how Lear will learn som ething much more 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 transparent when he affects the fritter How dost my boy? Art cold? and he (Lear) says to him wretched 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 only on the heath and, in a moment of heartfelt lucidness, laments over the houseless masses Poor naked wretches, wheresoeer you are, That bide the pelting of this ruthless 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 does Lear crush out sincere concern for others during this soliloquy, but he also expresses regret for the way that he has treated his subjects when he says that O, I have taen / Too puny care o f 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. pursuance Lears profound insight on the heath, he moves into the shanty where, after meeting Edgar, who is disguised as the beggar Poor Tom, he begins to top dog the nature of all humanity.When Lear sees Edgars cold, shivering, and uncovered ashes, he asks the unadulterated heading 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 proceeds to strip of his garments, he is making the symbolic communicate that he is no ameliorate 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 vileness of the flesh in order to attain wisdom, he asserts, people must be willing to jazz that they are born of the seed of Adam and as such, are dingy . . . and abominable before God (26). Shakespeare, however, does not suggest that Lear is necessarily darned 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 Edgars frailty and his insistence that he have the company of the naked, noble philosopher proves that he has learned more than just empathy and self-awareness he has also learned to value his relatio nships with people despite their flaws, regardless of what he might gain from these relationships (3. . 175). Another example of Lear learning altruistic betrothal arises from his relationship with the Fool, who, as A. C. Bradley explains, makes incessant and cutting reminders of Lears folly and wrong and so, Lear gets nothing from the Fool other than insults, such as when the Fool suggests that Lear has a little tiny 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 tender solicitude for his poor boy, the nurture 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 unusual in fact, the Fools role in the play is so unusual that one critic, Jan Kott, argues in his essay King Le ar, or Endgame that the Fools character represents the theme of the entire play, namely, the decay and fall of the creation (152).In an imbecilic military man 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 pay off, to a point. The soliloquy he gives while in the hovel in which he prophesizes that the realm of Albion will come to great confusion certainly proves that the Fool does represent an absurdist 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 disappear at the end of act 3 for 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 fe el for the weak and houseless poor, to be intimate the falseness of flattery and the brutality of authority, and to pierce through rank and arrange to the common humanity beneath (Bradley 24). As a result of learning, Shakespeare suggests, the worldand Lears part in itceases to be absurd consequently, the Fool, and his philosophy, quietly 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 raging storm of emotions that occurs in Lears mind that is, the contentious 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 Cornwall grow worse from their success they all remain warm, dry, and comfortable 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 expl ains, The warm castle becomes a room in hell and the storm swept heath a sanctuary (33). The power of comfort to corrupt is apparent several time during the play, but it is perhaps most shocking when Cornwall gouges out Gloucesters eyeball and proceeds to stomp on them, telling the old man that Upon these look of thine Ill set my foot (3. 7. 69). It is in these lines that the reader/audience sees how powerful, and indeed untouchable, people feel when they have all of the comforts of the world to championship 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 contrasting Cornwall, and the other bad characters, to Lear, Shakespeare not only reinforces 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 often feel that they are superhuman and have no thing left to learn (Bradley 33).Of course, the eventual death of all of the wickedly comfortable proves otherwise. In addition to the evil characters performing 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 disown their loyal children, and, in turn, both learn the truth in very painful ways.Until his blinding, Gloucester believes that Edgar is a strange and tied(p) villain who has betrayed him and that Edmund is a loyal . . . boy, but the quickness with which Gloucester realizes Edmunds true intent after Cornwall has blinded him, screaming O my follies Then Edgar was abused strongly implies that, like Lear, Gloucester had to suffer in order to see the return (2. 1. 79-86 3. 7. 92-93). In this way, Shakespeare uses irony to reinforce the idea tha t those who have eyes are often blind to the truth and those who suffer often see more truth than their bodies and minds can handle.Yet another person one might equal Lear to is his loving and loyal daughter, Cordelia, who is so angelic that her tears are like holy water that from heavenly eyes flow (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, egotistical 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 reunion with Cordelia, the plays Christ-figure, has set in stone. Lear has finally and complete ly 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 hatred (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 vengeful, as is evident when he proudly states to Cordelias the Great Compromiser 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 banishment, he is a pampered, flattered king living a false life, full of false love. It is excruciating for Lear to face 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 clear ly 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.