King Lear is my third academic encounter with Shakespeare, coming at me after Julius Caesar in my sophomore year of high school and Othello in my senior. (I wrote a decent paper in ENGL1102 last year on Antony & Cleopatra but, I confess, did not actually read the play.)
Personally, I've always been on good terms with the Bard. The literature of his era is not, generally speaking, what really piques my interest (though I certainly do not consider myself a time-period-specific reader), but Shakespeare -- both his drama and his poetry -- still intrigue me. I think this is the case for the same reason that he has endured so well and is taught (with varying degrees of reluctance or enthusiasm from those on the receiving end) so widely across the board, on so many levels in the world of academia.
King Lear the character seems to be very polarizing. The reader either sympathizes with him, or hates him. I would say something similar to a comment I remember making in class about The Moviegoer -- that it is precisely that ambiguity and that ability to make the reader feel strongly in one of a number of ways that is Shakespeare's strength. It's not a sign of weak writing. That ambiguity is more true to life, then as it is now.
Also, it's interesting in the fact that, besides being the achievement of Shakespeare, the feelings of the reader towards Lear often says more about the reader than Lear or Shakespeare.
And, really, that is what [enduring] literature does: it shows us ourselves.
1 comment:
I don't know if I necessarily agree with the fact that Lear is polarizing. I have to admit that I feel extremely sympathetic to the character itself, but I developed no true attachments to ANY of the characters. However, I did see a lot of myself in the character of Cordelia, but at the same time her death in the end didn't really affect me as much as I suppose it should have.
Ambiguous is definitely a great way to put Shakespeare's writings. As someone who has been in one of his plays, it is truly left up to a director's perspective when it's time to put the words into action. However, because of the lack of true stage directions, it can also become confusing if you don't bring a clear image into your head of what you want to see. It's hard to tell whether or not Shakespeare did this on purpose, or if he simply found it unnecessary given that he would be involved in the production of the play itself.
Post a Comment