FREE ESSAY ON KING LEAR

KING LEAR

Every situation in life has an appearance, and a reality. The appearance of a situation is
usually what we want to see. The
reality, what is really going on, is not always as obvious to the observer. People who
cannot penetrate through the superficial
appearance of a situation will see only what they want to believe is true; often, the
reality of a situation is unappealing to the
perceiver. These are the circumstances surrounding the conflict that occurs in William
Shakespeare's King Lear. As an
audience, you find that there is a major character flaw in the characters King Lear and
the Earl of Gloucester. In the story,
neither of these two men are able to establish the difference, in their minds, between
what people are saying and doing, and
what these people's true motives are behind their actions. This enables Lear and
Gloucester to be betrayed by their own blood,
and become isolated from those who have their interests at heart. It is the inability to
differentiate between appearance and
reality that causes Lear and Gloucester to fall. 
It seems, that in King Lear, appearance, or reputation defines character. Edgar says as
much in soliliquy, when he disguises
himself as Poor Tom. As soon as he changes out of his expensive clothing, and into his
beggar drab he decides Edgar I nothing
am.(II.iii.21). Although he is still Edgar beneath his disguise, when he is encountered
by his own father Gloucester and his
godfather Lear, neither of the two recognise him. It becomes apparent that as soon as
Edgar's costume changed, all
perceptions of his character did as well. This same situation is paralleled when Kent,
also banished, returns in disguise as Lear's
servant Caius. When Lear first sees his long time confident he asks How Now? What art
thou?(I.iv.9). One wonders how,
after forty years of service, Lear would not recognize his good servant Kent, even in
disguise. With this in mind, we can
conclude that Lear and Gloucester are both very quick to accept people at face value,
without any attempt to gain a deeper
understanding of them. Similarly, we learn in King Lear, that how we perceive ourselves,
may not be how we are perceived by
others. Lear, for example, believes himself to be a great and respected King, who is
wealthy and powerful. Nevertheless, he is
constantly reminded by the actions of Goneril, and Regan, that he is an old man who has
lost his kingdom, his only faithful
daughter, and his wits. O, sir, you are very old! Nature in you stands on the very verge
of her confine. You should be ruled,
and led by some discretion that discerns your state (II.iv.146-148.) this is reason and
way that Regan feels her father should
be removed from power. Lear, ever blinded, doesn't see that his two daughters are trying
to steal his kingdom. Consequently,
when Goneril and Regan are cutting down his train, he still believes that their love can
be measured in words and numbers Thy
fifty yet doth double five and twenty, and thou art twice her love (II.iv.261-262). Lear
believes that because Goneril will allow
him twice as many servants in her home, she must love him twice as much as Regan does.
This constant want of praise and
lauding makes Lear very susceptible to persuasion by his evil daughters, and ultimately
leads to his losses. Gloucester, also
perceives himself differently than the people around him. He sees himself as a loyal,
respected man holding some power and
status. On the contrary, Regan, and her co-conspirators decide in act three that
Gloucester is such a traitor (III.vii.36)
because he has warned Lear and his party to escape to Dover. Gloucester, however,
believes himself to be loyal, because he is
loyal to the King. But, at the same time, Edmund and his party believe allegiance to the
King is a betrayal to their cause. Hence,
when Gloucester admits to having warned Lear of the enemy's plans, his eyes are gauged
out by Cornwall and Regan as
punishment for his betrayal. It is interesting, however, that although Lear and
Gloucester were both blinded by their own
self-image, it was only in real blinding that Gloucester was able to see Edmund in his
true role as the bad seed. Lear,
unfortunately took much longer to make this realisation and suffered greatly for it. 
So much of the turmoil in King Lear, comes from nothing, that is, nothing being said or
done. In particular, we can look at how
Lear, in his desire to hear how well he is loved, makes the mistake of trusting the
substance of spoken words. Lear, vainly
asked each of his daughters to tell him how much they love him, planning to divide his
kingdom accordingly. King Lear basks in
the praise from Goneril and Regan which flatters him, and professes to love him more than
anything else in the world.
Cordelia's honest non-answer means nothing to him after being so wordily praised by
Goneril and Regan. Lear warns his
daughter that nothing will come of nothing(I.i.92.). Subsequently, because Lear is more
concerned with his ego than he is
concerned with the truth, he mistakes Cordelia's response for an insult. What Lear
doesn't know, however, is that the reason
Cordelia won't speak the words that Lear wants to hear is because they don't hold, and
cannot express the way she feels
about her father. She says this herself while Goneril and Regan are so busily praising
Lear What shall Cordelia speak? Love,
and be silent(I.i.63-64). It is Lear's inability to see past Regan and Goneril's deceit
and into Cordelia's honesty that pushes his
only faithful daughter so far away from him and isolates him from one who loves him so
much. In the case of the Earl of
Gloucester, it is ironic that if he had only trusted in words (the way that Lear did in
act one), his ruin never would have
occurred. This irony is evident when Edmund says the forged letter he holds is nothing
(truthfully). Gloucester will not trust the
truth of the words, The quality of nothing hath not such need to hide itself. Let's see.
Come, if it be nothing, I shall not need
spectacles (I.ii.33-35). Gloucester has to see the letter himself to determine that it
truly is nothing. Since Gloucester only trusts
in what he can see, and Lear will only believe in what he hears, both of these men will
be deceived over and over again until
they are able to get past these surface concepts and develop some understanding of
reality. From what has been said, it can be
seen that the fall of King Lear, paired with the subplot of Gloucester's betrayal by
Edmund provides many parallels which
reinforce one another. We watch, in King Lear, these two aging men fall from positions of
respect and power to being the
simple and abused nothings of society. Furthermore, we see these same two men believe
themselves to be one way, though
they are perceived by others quite differently. Lastly, we learn in watching the play
that valuing things by how much they appear
to be, not how much they truly are worth gives a false representation of the truth. On
the whole, Shakespeare's King Lear is
making a statement about appearances and realities; specifically, you can't accept things
at face value, you must search for
deeper truths and avoid deceit.