King Lear and The Wombats

Until now, the only time I have encountered King Lear is in the lyric of an older song by The Wombats called Lost in the Post. The song is a about a relationship that failed at least partly due to the narrator’s anxiety and depression. The lyric is “she wanted Mary Poppins and I took her to King Lear.” Initially, I did not particularly care for this song and I paid no attention to the deeper meanings in this lyrics. As I am beginning to understand King Lear better, is it easier to see the specific differences Murph, the Wombats’ front man and main songwriter, was drawing on in his song between Mary Poppins and King LearMary Poppins is one of the happiest and easiest plays to watch. As a metaphor for the relationship, the girl was expecting a fun, easy relationship. King Lear is a tragedy wherein most of the characters die in the end and it is very hard to walk away from feeling happy and romantic, compared to Mary Poppins. Maybe the use of King Lear shows how the relationship was doomed from the start.

 

As for Act I itself, Shakespeare allows the most important characters to be introduced and starts the drama that will ultimately lead to the untimely ending for most of the characters. I want to put emphasis on Cordelia’s part in this play, specifically when King Lear turns to her so that she may express her love for him and try to obtain the largest portion of the kingdom. Cordelia says “Nothing” when asked (line 89). This is a carefully crafted response, since Cordelia wants to be honest rather than extravagant like her sisters. She says her love for her father is “more ponderous than my tongue” meaning she already does not believe she can describe her love for her father accurately. A few lines later, Cordelia criticizes her sisters for their praises to their father that cannot possibly be true since they have husbands. It is interesting how Cordelia adheres to her moral code and is consequently punished for it. In this first Act, Shakespeare establishes Cordelia as the most morally sound daughter, and you could even say she is more moral than her father who is inviting this false praise that is obviously not genuine. Many stories I am used to hearing are a parable in some way. Act I is very much not a parable. After Cordelia spoke, some part of me was expecting King Lear to understand her meaning and turn to Goneril and Regan to punish them rather than Cordelia. Of course, this is not what occurs, but this display of morals sets the tone for the remainder of the play. Perhaps if King Lear had realized the true meaning of Cordelia’s words from the very beginning, at least some of the tragedy and death could have been prevented.

King Lear’s dangerous pride

Shakespeare is an author that students are either excited for or dread with all they’ve got when they see his name up next on the syllabus. I have always enjoyed his works and therefore was intrigued to begin reading King Lear.

I was very interested that the basic framework for the start of the play considers the issues with medieval inheritance guidelines. In those days, it was typical for the patriarch to pass his fortune down to the eldest male of the family. As someone who loves history and has taken a European history course, I have read a lot about this and it immediately caught my eye.

King Lear runs into a problem with this task because he has three daughters. Of the three, only two of the three have married. Okay, no big deal, he decides that he will divide his fortune up based on how well his daughters can proclaim his love for them.

This is where I started to question Lear’s decision making and ability to handle authority. It seems to me that pride clouds his capability to make informed and productive choices.

To start, he decides to divvy up his kingdom because he wants to remain king but doesn’t want the work. It is pride that prompts the idea to selfishly keep his title without the duties and responsibilities of actually being king. Instead of passing the title or keeping any of the work, he has too much pride to lose the position that places him as a leader.

He then orders his daughters to declare their love for him to determine how much of the kingdom they get. There is no other excuse for this than King Lear wanting to hear how loved and wonderful he is. In this way, his pride plays a major role again. It backfires because all of his daughters understand that this contest is to determine their future power and two of the three play into it as much as possible. Goneril and Regan both exclaim how they love Lear as much as life or how he gives them the most happiness they could imagine. Both of these declarations play right into Lear’s desire and need to boost his ego and play into his prideful nature.

It isn’t until his third daughter, Cordelia, makes a notion that she understands the game and isn’t willing to play into the prideful characteristics that Lear gets unsettles. She recognizes that she will never be able to declare her love with words as well as she can act on it every single day. When she refuses to contribute to this game, Lear goes so far as to completely banish her from his kingdom. He also banishes a loyal helper, Kent, for trying to show Lear what his youngest daughter meant.

Lear is unable to understand the magnitude of his actions because he is so overwhelmed with his damaged pride. We know his decision to banish his youngest daughter and loyal helper are outlandish because Shakespeare makes a point to include some reactions of other characters, including the two Princes battling for Cordelia’s love when the incident occurs.

This battle between King Lear’s ability to make sound decisions and option to side with his Pride will be very interesting to pay attention to as the play progresses!

The Countess of Pembroke’s Arcadia, Book 2 (Chapter 1)

When first reading the summary surrounding Sir Philip Sidney’s Countess of Pembroke’s Arcadia, I was genuinely surprised to find that it sounded like a mere Shakespearean comedy. You have disguises, as Pyrocles masks himself as a woman named Zelmane, and you have a wacky twist, in which the mother and father have both fallen in love with him. An example of this could be found in Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night, a tale of disguise as well as misleading love. The adaption of this that so many of my generation know is the movie, She’s the Man, in which Amanda Bynes plays a girl, Viola, who dresses up like her brother and plays on the male soccer team at his school in order to prove others wrong.

In correlation to the Arcadia, where the father (of Pyocles desired love) falls in love with the fake female identity, in She’s the Man, a girl named Olivia falls in love with Viola’s impersonation as her brother. At the end, Viola has fallen in love with one of the male soccer players, who believes she is truly a man and is confused about his own feelings for her. In in the Arcadia, the daughter, Philoclea, is also confused about her feelings for someone she perceives to be a woman. Why are readers so fascinated by this wacky love turned upside down? While in real life these could be highly unrealistic, these stories have always entertained readers, presumably because you don’t really expect what is going to happen next.

Although on a more serious note, what is interesting about the Arcadia, is that the mother, Gynecia, sees through the disguise. In She’s the Man, rarely anyone knows the truth until the end. What I believe to be significant about this, is that it is possible that Gynecia is truly falling in love, rather than the false love which plagues her husband. Gynecia talks of the “passion of love” to “Zelmane” and accuses him of disguisement (Sidney 1043). In my eyes, I see this as a cry for the truth, in which she just wants to affirm her love to him, as would anyone so distraught with their own feelings. By seeing both the hilarity of the disguise, and the love that plagues mother and father, the reader can infer that while love can be cause for laughter, it can also be cause for deep internal troubles.

Sir Philip Sidney and Lady Mary Roth

The Romance form is characterized by the three phases of integration, disintegration, and reintegration. This form is simple enough so that it can be used and tweaked to fit many different narratives. For example, Sir Philip Sidney uses the form to create humor and entertain the reader. The selection we read was from the disintegration phase and was filled with dramatic irony used for comedic effect. Mary Roth also uses the Romance form but to a different effect. We read a part of the disintegration from The Countess of Montgomery’s Urania which played off of what her uncle’s earlier work The Countess of Pembroke’s Arcadia. Since when Roth and Sidney were writing the Romance would have already been an archaic form, it would apparent that Roth’s work was playing off of her uncle’s work.

Even today, the Romance form is used as the basis for many modern narratives. One way is through children’s movies and cartoons, such as Finding Nemo or The Spongebob Squarepants Movie. The Romance form is simple enough that it can be used to tell simple stories that hold moral truths (both movies teach children to believe in themselves and the power of perseverance albeit through different means), but also can tell a complicated or more mature story and hold complex meanings as in the work of Roth and Sidney.