Example research essay topic: 20 Th Century Lear And Cordelia - 1,243 words

NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote

Many scholars consider King Lear one of Shakespeare's greatest plays. This is because of its power; it tackles all issues and is still relevant today to the extent that it has been called Shakespeare's play for the 20 th century. King Lear is cathartic and a discouragingly accurate portrayal of human nature. It shows us altruism, selfishness, love, hate, stupidity and understanding. It questions fate, the gods, our purpose and how, why and what human nature is.

It is this, the sheer amount, and power of its themes which explains why King Lear is held by so many scholars, past and present, in such high regard. However, whether the play the play has an optimistic or pessimistic outlook is a question that has been debated over the centuries. Whether the play is optimistic or pessimistic is of great importance to the meaning of the play as a whole, as the message it conveys hinges on whether the play is hopeful or disparagingly tragic. Is Shakespeare trying to say that life is completely pointless? That we are simply like flies to wanton boys, they kill us for their sport. Alternatively, is he trying to show us that there is a point to life; that we must learn, love, and try to live honourably and decently?

There are two predominant schools of thought in the dispute over whether the play is optimistic or pessimistic. These are represented both in the play and in the opinions of critics. In general, critics of the late 20 th century find the play profoundly pessimistic and earlier critics find the play optimistic. The pessimistic opinion on the play argues that, in King Lear, human nature is portrayed as being essentially bad and that the play is attempting to say that there is no purpose to life. Gonerill, Regan and Edmund represent this immoral, evil, quality to human nature.

Edmund refers to nature many times throughout the play: Thou, nature, art my goddess; to thy law My services are bound. Wherefore should I Stand in the way of custom, and permit The curiosity of nations to deprive me This shows how Edmund wants to disrupt the order - imposed by man - by which he is made to suffer because of his illegitimacy. This could be considered pessimistic, as regards our nature, in two ways. Firstly, Edmunds desire to create chaos, for him to thrive, grow and prosper could show how nature is essentially selfish, as all he seeks is personal gain. However, this could be explained by Edmunds lack of love in his youth due to his illegitimacy, but I dont think that Edmund is a psychological study into his lack of a father figure and the damage caused to him by it, merely a symbol for evil. Secondly, Shakespeare could be commenting on the strictness of the order, the nature that we have created, that caused the audience to think that somebody was evil purely because they were born illegitimately.

This same selfishness is shown through the actions of Gonerill and Regan, who plot to do something in that to take advantage of their fathers disposition. They dont love their father with the bond that should exist between parent and child. Here we see the two different types of nature. There is this bad nature, which is selfish, greedy and single-minded. This type of nature is natural in the Celtic, matriarchal manner, where witchcraft and the fairies and gods/ Prosper it with thee (4. 6. 29 - 30).

Yet, on the other hand, there is the nature that we have created, the, what would have been called Roman style nature, in Lears pagan Britain, where order exists in a male-dominated society. By living by this form of nature, man is loving and generous and the bond exists. Cordelia, Kent, Edgar, and Lear represent this nature. Cordelia is a Christ-like figure that represents pure good, in opposition to Edmund. Lear constantly tries to understand how the matriarchal, Celtic nature, that he would call unnatural, assumed power. The shift in the power, the order, the nature, from men to women; Roman to Celtic; good to bad; is what plunges the country into chaos and Lear into madness.

However, Lears madness is also a result of the way in which, by virtue of the fact that he abdicated and in doing so rebelled against the order and the chain-of-being, it his fault that the country is in chaos. As Danby put it, rebellion against this law is rebellion against ones self, loss of all nature and produces a lapse into chaos. The plays optimism depends on whether it displays predominantly the subsequent learning by Lear, and Gloucester and the eventual triumph of Cordelia over her sisters or the bad side of human nature. In the first Act, Cordelia, and Edgar, are forced away from home; this is a physical severance of the bond.

However, Shakespeare shows us how love and loyalty are eventually rewarded; Cordelia and Lear reconcile and die happily and Edgar receives the kingship. In other words: good nature defeats bad nature. Critics such as A. C Bradley see this as being optimistic; that the human spirit is essentially good. Others, such as J.

Stampfer dont recognise this as being optimistic, but instead observe primarily the fact that Lear and Cordelia die. His sentiments are echoed in the play. He says that there is no justice in Lear dying immediately after his complete penance. He therefore believes that complete penance is neither worthwhile nor possible and that we are simply like flies to wanton boys. This has led Stampfer and other 20 th century critics have said that nature is therefore ruthless. Why should a dog, a horse, a rat have life, And thou no breath at all Stampfer takes this to show how iniquitous life is.

He thinks that the fact that Cordelia dies immediately after the restoration of order and the apology of her father is unfair on them both. The gods unfairly deal the pain felt by Lear, shown above, to him, as, if the gods were good he would live a long life with Cordelia by his side. This shows that nature can take away life at any moment. It is this seemingly unnecessary pain, combined with the subsequent abrupt death of Lear himself, which causes Stampfer to believe that the penance of Lear and the pain he went through, and the loyalty shown by Cordelia isnt rewarded and life and loyalty are therefore meaningless.

This would be a profoundly pessimistic view of the play, and one that I cant agree with. Even if mans life is as cheap as beasts and we are like flies to wanton boys life hasnt become meaningless, indeed, Lear and Cordelia are happy at the end of the play, even as prisoners, and their promulgations of love and reconciliation are, in my opinion more powerful and important than the unfortunate reality that this happiness is short-lived. We two alone will sing like birds it cage; And pray, and sing, and tell old tales, and laugh At gilded butterflies This shows the joy shared between Cordelia and Lear after their reconciliation and after Lear realised he is a very foolish fond old man who was not in perfect mind. This understanding brought fulfilment to Lear, and in my opinion, this is extremely optimistic in that it shows us that we can all learn. Also, Lears untimely death almost immediately aft...

Research essay sample on 20 Th Century Lear And Cordelia