In Shakespearean tragedy, good and evil are normally very clearly defined. Discuss in relation to King Lear
From ZuluNotes - Free Leaving Cert Notes
In Shakespearean tragedy, good and evil are normally very clearly defined. Discuss in relation to King Lear.
I disagree with this statement. In my study of King Lear, I found the exact opposite to be undoubtedly true. William Shakespeare does not offer us the very worst and very best in human nature but in fact presents us with a more realistic view of society. Using Lear as my first example, we follow the protagonist through a plethora of characteristics: His rash, egotistical nature in the opening scene; his suffering and vulnerability is evident in the storm scene; and finally his redemption in the closing scenes.
Even someone who appears evil upon first viewing can turn out to be more complex than you could imagine. Edmund, in my view, is a very well-rounded and three-dimensional character. Despite his shrewd and horrifying acts committed he tries to redeem himself in the closing scene, “some good I mean to do, despite of mine own nature”. As well as this, his actions are somewhat justified by the despicable treatment shown to him by his father, “there was good sport at his making”. This clearly shows that even someone as Machiavellian as Edmund cannot easily be classified into one genre.
Cordelia is another character who cannot clearly be defined. While she is intended as a source of good, her character has much more depth than first meets the eye. We see from the love test that she is stubborn and slightly naïve: “I love your majesty according to my bond. No more nor less”. She will not satisfy her father’s egotistical whim – an action which would seem to contrast to her portrayal as a divine being: “she shakes the holy water from her heavenly eyes”. We see yet another aspect of Cordelia’s personality as she appears strong minded and assertive – a quality not shared by many Shakespearean women. She tells Burgundy exactly what she thinks about his greed when he declines her, due to the lack of a dowry: “respects of fortune are his love, I shall not be his wife”.
Despite these characters, the statement does hold some truth in that Goneril and Regan are portrayed as purely evil. They are subject to many animal comparisons due to their evil and sadistic intentions. Throughout the tragedy they don’t exhibit one redeeming feature. These women are clearly defined as evil and this notion is further reinforced by the fact that they eventually destroy each other: “humanity must perforce prey on itself like monsters of the deep”. Similar in this respect are the characters of Kent, Albany and Edgar. They are shown to have no wrongdoings and, as such, can be used to back up the given statement.
Apart from these exceptions, however, none of the Shakespearean characters can be clearly defined as either ‘good’ or ‘bad’. Certainly with Lear and Gloucester, the two old men go through a number of mental states on their journeys to self awareness. In the opening act, each man is portrayed as vain, egotistical, rash and impulsive. The banishment of Kent and Cordelia, “here I disclaim all paternal care” is mirrored effectively with Edgar’s banishment in the subplot. As both men slowly become victims at the hands of those whom they had trusted they begin to see the error of their ways, “I did her wrong”, and they can no longer be clearly defined as short-sighted. There is great dramatic irony in the suffering they go through. It is only after Lear succumbs to madness that he gains an insight into the true intentions of people. Similarly, Gloucester sees the world as it truly is only after he has become physically blinded. “I have no way, and therefore want no eyes. I stumbled when I saw”.
Throughout the play King Lear, Shakespeare offers us a wide perspective of the world. We don’t see characters who are the very best and very worst in nature but instead appreciate that people can not be clearly defined. As a race, we are undoubtedly flawed and the characters of Lear, Cordelia and Edmund help to portray this. While some people like Goneril and Edgar are clearly defined, these are in my opinion, minor characters and we must look to the lead roles to see a truer representation of society.
Due to these facts, it is my strong belief that good and evil are not very clearly defined in Shakespearean tragedy.
