Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Everybody is dead.

The finale of King Lear leads to a not-so-surprisingly morbid conclusion- Just about everyone dies. That seems pretty par for the course for Shakespeare, who likes to knock off characters left and right. Just when we think that we’re about to get a happy ending where the good guys can skip off into the sunset with the promise of a new tomorrow, good old Shakespeare brings in his literary machete to cut down a few more good souls and yank some tears from the audience. But why does he do this? What's the moral?

I think we can all deal with the “villains” of the play being killed, but why does Shakespeare choose to kill off Cordelia, or the heartbroken and insane Lear? The main plot of the story, the struggle between Lear and his daughters, as well as the subsequent battle for control of his kingdom, ends on a rather confusing note. The King is dead, as are the complete trio of his daughters, and not just the wicked ones who we’ve been waiting to see die for five acts, but the honest, pure Cordelia as well. The future is unclear; Albany, Edgar and Kent are understood to be taking over the government, but it’s difficult to put much thought into the future of the kingdom when the reader is still recovering from the sudden murder party that just took place.

Shakespeare’s choices in the final act of the play may seem random or unnecessary at first, but it is easy to see how the tragic end fits in with the common themes throughout the play of hopelessness and false justice. In King Lear, there is no good versus evil, at least not one in which there is a clear, triumphant winner, a champion who rides home to the parade and fanfare fit for the victor. Gloucester cries out in 4.1.37-38 “As flies to wanton boys are we to the gods; They kill us for sport.” A dark thought to consider, but the death and bloodshed that consumes the play can’t be chalked up to much more than chaos. Characters betray each other, only to be betrayed by others. Goneril and Regan give false affection to their father so as to usurp command of his empire only to end up killing each other over a common lover. The final battle scene leaves the vast majority of important characters in the plot dead and the kingdom in shambles.

Does Shakespeare implement justice into King Lear? Or is the lack of justice the very point of the tragedy? Shakespeare seems to be implying that not everything happens so as to fit into a grand battle of light and dark, good and evil, but rather sometimes things happen for no reason but the jealousy and greed inherent in people. It could be said that justice killed the two wicked sisters, but what of King Lear or Gloucester, both of whom sought to repent for their way, only finding truth in their failures (Lear in his madness comes to face what he has done to Cordelia, whereas Gloucester only comes to regret his treatment of Edgar after being led blind by his illegitimate son), and what of Cordelia, who had done wrong to nobody?

To me, this is the most tragic of Shakespeare’s plays simply for the fact that there is no true moral here, no governing theory to the madness that overtakes Lear’s empire. There is no God in King Lear to seek guidance from, or to fight in the name of. There are only foolish, jealous people, and Shakespeare shows us the terrors that fools can lead us to.

3 comments:

Eric G said...

As I finished reading Lear, I had the same question why does Cordelia have to die. I was able to justify everyone elses death in my mind but Cordelia's. I feel the play ends with the mood of hopelessness with the most moral, pure character dying. The play says much about humanity in which humans do not make a good name for themselves. I have a similar question Kevin had: What does this say about our world when even the innocent are killed?

Hannah said...

I agree that justice does not seem to be a lesson learned in this play; either Shakespeare ignored the idea of justice all together or chose for Cordelia to die to highlight the lack of justice in Lear's world. I do not have an answer to that question, and am curious to hear other people's thoughts.

Cyrus Mulready said...

I think it an amazing testament to the craft and power of this play that we can come to the end and still find ourselves shocked and saddened by the events. Shakespeare's audience, yesterday and today, had an expectation about what it meant for a story to be a tragedy, and yet the inevitability of the events don't change their emotional power.