EA 190 Shakespeare & Japan Week 6 Lecture Bibliography assignment Comparative Presentations Blood Imagery (Crystal, Bevis, Allan) Weather Imagery (Brandon, Shirley, Keenan) Light and Dark (Sam) Light and Dark (Michelangelo) Clothing and Armor (Perla and Blanca) Heath versus Spiderweb Forest (Louis, Tomoya, Jay)
INTRO TO KING LEAR Thug Notes on King Lear (2 minute summary) National Theater trailer for King Lear with Simon Beale (directed by Sam Mendes) Ian McKellen in King Lear part 1, part 2 (2008) I. General introduction to how King Lear has been thought about by scholars: What is the main theme? II. The political and religious situation of Shakespeare and King James I A. Probably written in 1605, two years before Macbeth B. Like Macbeth, King Lear is based on a history, The True Chronicle Historie of King Leir and his Three Daughters. 1. The prehistoric, pre-Christian King Lear (or Leir) is supposed to have attempted to divide his kingdom (understood anachronistically as "Britain") into three parts. As in the play, he ends up dividing the country into 2 parts, and banishing his third daughter, Cordelia. In King Lear, Britain is made up of center, Scotland and Wales: Albany= Scotland to the north Cornwall = southwestern England (Wales) Cordelia = the center, where Lear expects to retire. C. Why would this ancient tragedy be of interest to James 1? 1. Right at this time King James is trying to reunify England and Scotland into one country under his rule. Uses Lear as an example in speeches. (No one today gets this, but no one in Shakespeare's time would have missed it.) 2. King James argues he will repair the mistake Lear made. C. However, setting it in far past gives the story a fairy-tale quality, that makes the issues more universal 1. no real interest in psychology or motivations of villains D. Underlying assumption that the king as “head of the body politic/state” = father as “head of the household” (this is similar to Neo-Confucian beliefs) 1. Fathers and kings should command the respect of their children and subjects. (Does this happen in King Lear?) 2. BUT fathers and kings should also be worthy of respect, and think well about their children and subjects. (Both Lear and Gloucester eventually realize that they have not done this, both with respect to their children and to their poverty stricken subjects.) 3. HOWEVER, according to James I, even if the king is not worthy of respect, because he rules by “divine right,” he should not be overthrown. a. This is a tricky point. But Shakespeare clearly indicates that even though Lear makes disastrous mistakes in judgment, his betrayal and overthrow by his daughters is not justified. In Macbeth he lets Macbeth be overthrown. C. Exorcism as Theater: From the spring of 1585 through the summer of 1586 a series of public exorcisms were performed by Catholic priests, led by Jesuit William Weston, known as Father Edmunds. Possession by fiends or devils was popularly understood as a cause of insanity. By “casting out” the devils that possessed the person, they could be restored to sanity. 1. However, as part of the exclusion of Catholicism from England, there was a movement to show that exorcisms by Catholic priests were actually faked (performance) meant to inspire faith in the gullible and naïve. a. In 1603, long after the priests involved had been arrested and punished, Samuel Harsnett, chaplain to the bishop of London, wrote A Declaration of Egregious Popish Impostures in which he gave detailed accounts of each possession, explaining how they were frauds. 2. In King Lear, Edgar disguises himself as the mad beggar Tom O’Bedlam, and indicates that he is being possessed by various fiends and demons. We know Shakespeare read this essay, because the names of all of these demons come from Harsnett. 3. In King Lear possession madness is clearly marked as faked (Edgar is not actually insane or possessed), so the audience is being reminded that possession is literally a theatrical performance. Later in the play, after Edgar deceives his father into thinking that he has jumped off the cliffs at Dover, and somehow survived through a miracle, he tells his father that Tom o’Bedlam was actually a demonic fiend. He continues to lie to his father until the very end, yet he is the "good" character. [4.6. 85-97, p. 201] D. Primogeniture as the structural motivation for the Edgar/Edmund plot It is the system of primogeniture that sets up the murderous competition between Edmund and Edgar (whose names are nearly interchangeable). 1. What is primogeniture? a. The custom that in order to keep the family property intact, you bequeath it all to the eldest son, leaving the younger sons to fend for themselves. The law of primogeniture structurally precludes brotherly love. 2. Works this way in Ran as well. II. Late tragedies by Shakespeare: King Lear, Macbeth, Othello A. From King Lear onward, Shakespeare stops providing any back-story for most of his characters, a back-story that might explain their actions. It is clear he does this on purpose, since there is usually a motive provided in the source Shakespeare used to write his play. 1. Macbeth and Lady Macbeth 2. Why does Iago hate Othello so much? 3. What did Lear do to Goneril and Regan for them to hate him so much? 4. Even if Edmund has reason to resent his brother, why does Edmund hate his father so much he is willing to let Cornwall gouge his eyes out? B. Effect of the lack of psychological motivation: NEXT WEEK III. Is Shakespeare following the conventions of tragedy, or flouting them? A. My position: Shakespeare expects you do know the conventions of tragedy, and he uses that knowledge to manipulate you. WIKIPEDIA ON TRAGEDY: “Tragedy must maintain a balance between the higher optimisms of religion or philosophy, or any other beliefs that tend to explain away the enigmas and afflictions of existence, on the one hand, and the pessimism that would reject the whole human experiment as valueless and futile on the other.” “As to the Classical unities, Shakespeare adheres to them only twice and neither time in a tragedy, in The Comedy of Errors and The Tempest. And through the mouths of his characters, Shakespeare, like Aristotle, puts himself on both sides of the central question of tragic destiny—that of freedom and necessity. Aristotle says that a tragic destiny is precipitated by the hero’s tragic fault, his “error or frailty” (hamartia), but Aristotle also calls this turn of events a change of “fortune.” Shakespeare’s Cassius in Julius Caesar says, “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, / But in ourselves,” and, in King Lear, Edmund ridicules a belief in fortune as the “foppery of the world.” But Hamlet, in a comment on the nature of hamartia, is a fatalist when he broods on the “mole of nature,” the “one defect” that some men are born with, “wherein they are not guilty,” and that brings them to disaster (Act I, scene 4).” B. The convention of exposition: that as quickly and smoothly as possible in the first act the playwright is supposed to give us our bearings, to let us know who's who and what's what, who we're supposed to root for, and who we're supposed to be booing. 1. Does this happen in King Lear? Will look at opening scene. C. Will look at questions of belief, skepticism, the meaninglessness of existence etc. next week. IV. Belief and skepticism in King Lear (DISCUSSION QUESTIONS FOR WEEK 7) From a modern perspective, King Lear seems to be asking the question: is there a god or gods who care what happens to human beings? Is there such a thing as justice in this world? This is a difficult question to ask straightforwardly in Shakespeare’s time because it would have been considered blasphemous. A. Not long before King Lear was written, using the lord’s name in vain or any kind of blasphemy (especially implying that there is no God) on stage was outlawed. How does setting the story in a prehistoric Britain allow Shakespeare to get around this? B. In King Lear two basic world views are represented (skepticism vs. faith) about the question whether suffering is caused by forces outside ourselves or within ourselves. (In Ran we will see the conflicting views of skepticism and Buddhism.) 1. World View 1: The "faith" position: those who believe that the gods /fortune's wheel/ astrology determine our fate -- and that the gods will punish those who are bad, and reward those who are good. 2. World View 2: The skeptic's position: that human suffering is caused by humans, and that fortune or the gods or astrology have nothing to do with it. WIKIPEDIA ON THE WHEEL OF FORTUNE (Rota Fortunae, not the game show!): "The Wheel of Fortune, or Rota Fortunae, is a concept in medieval and ancient philosophy referring to the capricious nature of Fate. The wheel belongs to the goddess Fortuna, who spins it at random, changing the positions of those on the wheel - some suffer great misfortune, others gain windfalls. Fortune appears on all paintings as a woman, sometimes blindfolded, 'puppeteering' a wheel." See also images of the Rota Fortunae NOTE: A belief in "Nature" (with a capital "N") is more ambiugous -- the word itself is generally used to mean " the natural world" or "one's natural disposition." If the character believes that Nature and Society are distinct, then they tend toward the skeptical position. If they believe that events in Nature reflect events in Society (eg. eclipses = bad omens about social relations), then they tend toward the first position (faith in gods/fortune/astrology). For these characters the "pathetic fallacy" (that nature can be a reflection of our emotions) is not a fallacy at all. Another common idea about tragedy is that the experience of suffering is a "journey of self-discovery"; that the main character learns something about themselves (and the world) in the course of the play. For example, a very simplistic reading of Macbeth would be that at the end of the play he has learned a lesson about the futility of ambition pursued at the cost of human relationships. DISCUSSION QUESTION 1: As you read keep a list of characters and lines where they express their world view: a. Which characters take the first position (belief in gods or fate that rewards good)? b. Which characters take the second position (skepticism)? c. Does what happens to each character support their beliefs about the way the world is or challenge those beliefs? For example, are their prayers answered? d. At the end of the play do any of the characters still believe in the existence of benign deities who care about what happens to human beings? Cite scenes/lines to support your position. DISCUSSION QUESTION 2: Choose EITHER Lear or Gloucester and answer the following questions: a. How do Lear or Gloucester understand themselves at the beginning of the play? That is, how do they view themselves, positively or negatively and why? b. How do the characters around them view them? For example, how do Goneril and Reagan view their father? How does Cordelia view him? How do Edmund and Edgar view their father? c. Do you think Lear and Gloucester have learned anything at the end of the play? Can we "moralize" Lear's and Gloucester's experience --that is, is there any lesson to be learned from their suffering/ experience? Why or why not? Cite scenes/lines to support your position. It will be helpful to also think about how some of the minor characters, particularly Kent, Albany, and the Fool, understand Lear and Gloucester, but you don't have to consider them in writing. V. Class Presentations on imagery in King Lear FOR WEEK 7 I'd like you to think about imagery in King Lear. Pick ONE of the following kinds of imagery in the play and note all the instances you can find (lines and page numbers). Pick two of the images you've found (not just the first two you run into please!), quote the lines in which the image appears, and discuss what you think the image means in that specific context and in the wider context of the play. c. Clothing and nakedness: how do clothes "make the man" in King Lear? How are clothes related to power? Why does Lear take off his clothing when he goes mad? d. Nothing and nothingness: When Cordelia replies "nothing" to her father's request to tell him how much she loves him, he says "Nothing will come of nothing. Speak again." From this moment onward, the idea of nothing, nothingness, naught, zero (a mathematical concept which had only just been introduced) appears repeatedly. What is the effect of all this nothinginess? e. Animal imagery: used to describe Goneril and Regan, especially. How are traits attributed to the characters, positively and negatively? Are they gendered? Do they change over the course of the play, and how does that indicate a change in attitude voiced toward that character?
|