Not All is Cheerless, Dark and Deadly in Shakespeares King Lear Essay

Not All is Cheerless, distressing and Deadly in fairy Lear Alls Cheerless, Dark and Deadly Are Kents Words a Fair Summary of The Tragedy of King Lear? Samuel pratson asserted that the blinding of Gloucester was an act too horrid to be endured in a hammy exhibition, and that he was too shocked by the death of Cordelia to read the play again until he was given the task of editing it.1 Nor was Dr Johnson al oneness in finding himself unable to remain firm the violence and app arent injustices that unfold in King Lear. The 18th century certainly found the play all cheerless and preferred Nahum Tates 1681 watered-down version of Shakespeares original. King Lear is a injustice play, with the near triumph of the malcontent Edmund, the intense sufferings of Lear and Gloucester, and the seeming lack of justice at the pieces conclusion. Shakespeare locates his tragedy in an extreme and entropic universe that makes his reference uncomfortable, and indeed is hypothetic to. On its own, the sheer violence of Act III.7 bears witness to Kents nihilistic utterance at the plays close. However, Lears universe, as I have just stated, is one of extremes, and not just now negative ones. As A.C. Bradley notes There is in the world of King Lear the same abundance of extreme good as of extreme evil. It generates in profusion self-less obedience and unconquerable love.2 The play contains a cluster of characters that are unequivocally good. Kent, for instance, is a paradigm of devotion. In Act I.I he is publicly insulted and humiliated. In spite of Lears threats, Kent ashes determined to serve his master, even braving the storm to be near him. Cordelia too, is traduced and punished by Lear, and yet she is the... ... condemned to short lives - nor live so long. Edgars apogee words are disturbingly equivocal. They allude to the antithesis constantly at work in the play a mixture of hope and despair. Perhaps the couplet is lastly nihilistic, and the play as a whole e qually so. Redemption remains unattained. However, while I would agree that Kents words that Alls cheerless, dark and deadly may be the overthrow message of the tragedy, I do not believe that King Lear can be simply summed up in such(prenominal) a comment. To do such a social occasion would be to see the drama two-dimensionally to ignore the world of polarities, of good as well as evil, which Shakespeare creates in which to hold his play. Works Cited 1 Johnson as Critic, ed. John Wain, Routledge & Kegan Paul 1973, pp. 216-217 2 A. C. Bradley, Shakespearian Tragedy, Macmillan 1908, pp. 304 -305 Not All is Cheerless, Dark and Deadly in Shakespeares King Lear EssayNot All is Cheerless, Dark and Deadly in King Lear Alls Cheerless, Dark and Deadly Are Kents Words a Fair Summary of The Tragedy of King Lear? Samuel Johnson asserted that the blinding of Gloucester was an act too horrid to be endured in a dramatic exhibition, and that he was too shocked by the dea th of Cordelia to read the play again until he was given the task of editing it.1 Nor was Dr Johnson alone in finding himself unable to stomach the violence and apparent injustices that unfold in King Lear. The 18th century certainly found the play all cheerless and preferred Nahum Tates 1681 watered-down version of Shakespeares original. King Lear is a dark play, with the near triumph of the malcontent Edmund, the intense sufferings of Lear and Gloucester, and the seeming lack of justice at the pieces conclusion. Shakespeare locates his tragedy in an extreme and entropic universe that makes his audience uncomfortable, and indeed is supposed to. On its own, the sheer violence of Act III.7 bears witness to Kents nihilistic utterance at the plays close. However, Lears universe, as I have just stated, is one of extremes, and not merely negative ones. As A.C. Bradley notes There is in the world of King Lear the same abundance of extreme good as of extreme evil. It generates in profu sion self-less devotion and unconquerable love.2 The play contains a cluster of characters that are unequivocally good. Kent, for instance, is a paradigm of devotion. In Act I.I he is publicly insulted and humiliated. In spite of Lears threats, Kent remains determined to serve his master, even braving the storm to be near him. Cordelia too, is traduced and punished by Lear, and yet she is the... ... condemned to short lives - nor live so long. Edgars closing words are disturbingly equivocal. They allude to the antithesis constantly at work in the play a mixture of hope and despair. Perhaps the couplet is ultimately nihilistic, and the play as a whole equally so. Redemption remains unattained. However, while I would agree that Kents words that Alls cheerless, dark and deadly may be the overriding message of the tragedy, I do not believe that King Lear can be simply summed up in such a comment. To do such a thing would be to see the drama two-dimensionally to ignore the world of po larities, of good as well as evil, which Shakespeare creates in which to hold his play. Works Cited 1 Johnson as Critic, ed. John Wain, Routledge & Kegan Paul 1973, pp. 216-217 2 A. C. Bradley, Shakespearian Tragedy, Macmillan 1908, pp. 304 -305