King Lear: The Parallel Journeys Of Families

Sarah Phillips
Ms. Moriconi
AP English Language and Composition
June 10, 2014

The Parallel Journeys of Families The infamous playwright, William Shakespeare’s, King Lear relays the story of a tragic hero and his family while paralleling it to the sub-plot within the tragedy. The story of these two reflecting groups of characters displays the obliteration of once potent characters’ power, and the inversion of social order. King Lear, the father of Goneril, Regan and Cordelia experiences a digressing journey comparable to that of Gloucester, the father of Edmund, his illegitimate son, and Edgar. Both Lear and Gloucester make a reprehensible decision in confiding in their children that they thought were the most honorable, but were faced with
deleterious consequences because of their bigot and selfish choices. Along with this theoretical venture is that of their children. Throughout the faulty occurrences of the power-seeking offspring, the truly loyal children protrude and are praised by the fathers. Their acclaimed actions went unnoticed for quite some time, and when they were finally acknowledged, it was a bit too late. Throughout the novel, the parallel plot between the families expresses the plummeting journey of the characters from omnipotence to helplessness, from power-seeking to tyrannical, and the withstanding loyal member. Beginning Act I is the scene in which King Lear has decided to step down and divide his kingdom amongst his daughters. Before bestowing his property, he asked “which of [them] shall we say doth love [him] most” (I, i, 56). His expectations were that they love their father more than their husbands. Beginning with Goneril, she spewed a series of blatant lies about her “love” and admiration for him and how “[she] loves [him] more than word can wield the matter” (I, i, 60). Regan followed with a similarly syrupy response. To feed her father’s ego and hedonism she continued to talk about how she will make “an enemy to all other joys” leaving her only source of enjoyment arising from his majesty. Though the responses lacked credibility, King Lear did not mind for he required the flattery. After bequeathing the land to the two daughters King Lear asked for his obsequious spiel from his final daughter, Cordelia. Having trouble generating a response, Cordelia told her father that she “[could] not heave [her] heart into [her] mouth” (I, i, 100-101). She expressed that she had been a faithful daughter by demonstrating “the virtues of constancy or loyalty, generosity or love, plainness or honesty and courage or patience and fortitude” (Papprill 3). Even with this, her inability to comprise such a compliment engendered King Lear to be outraged leading to immediate disownment. Cordelia attempted to explain that she was “obliged to transfer, upon marriage, much of her love from [her father] to her husband” (Papprill 3). Gloucester’s similar experience with his son leads him to trust his evil offspring and reject his loyal son. Edmund, being known as the bastard son, causes him to have a vengeful attitude from the very beginning. His ultimate goal is rid of his family members, leaving him to be in power. Edmund schemes against his brother Edgar by writing a fake letter talking about the dowry he would receive if his father were dead, signing it from Edgar. When Gloucester gets a hold of this letter, he aquires an abhorrence for his son. Having gained his father’s respect, Edmund is instructed to find his brother and “frame the business after [his] own wisdom” (I, ii, 103-104). Soon following, Edmund sets Edgar up to make it seem as though he had injured Edmund and posed an abrasive threat on him. This sets their father over the edge leading him to have him searched for so they can ensure that he would never return. Edmund was also given permission by the Duke of Cornwall to “make [his] own purpose, how in [his] (Cornwall’s) strength” (II, i, 130-131). Edgar is ostracized from the kingdom because of Edmunds treachery. In both families, the fathers are too quick to judge when it comes to what is going on. This creates very large problems and difficult situations for their children who deserve it least. Both made the decision of confiding in their children who are the most appealing, oblivious to the fact that their truly honorable family are those that are not obnoxiously flaunting their “good” aspects. Cordelia and Edgar were cut off from their families when they were the ones containing the moralistic values. Continuing their journey, Lear and Gloucester experience a new attitude towards the status quo. Having experienced some psychologically altering events, both King Lear and Gloucester attain as sense of compassion as the play progresses. This is a large jump in their venture, for both are usually known for their callousness. Lear was livid when neither of daughters were willing to house him and his knights. Out of anger, he left and headed outside during a large storm. Because of the chaos that is occurring within his life, he is slowly descending to madness. Through his realization of his instability, he also shows his first sign of consideration of someone else. He asks the fool if he is cold and says that “[he has] one part in [his] heart that’s sorry yet for [him], inquiring his concern for other people (III, ii, 79-80). Gloucester’s new found kindness comes from his encounter with his son Edgar disguised as Poor Tom. Gloucester has just had a life changing experience, of becoming blind, giving him a very different attitude toward people. Deciding to have Poor Tom be his guide, Gloucester kindly offered him clothing. Along with this giving gesture, he also makes a humble comment that there should be a better distribution of wealth. This should be done by “the superfluous and lust-dieted man, that slaves [their] ordinance that will not see because he doth not feel, feel [their] power quickly” (IV, i, 76-78). Both situations show the characters first growth in their humility. Through these life changing and moral altering experiences, Lear and Gloucester develop as a result of their suffering. Both King Lear and Gloucester developed a different persona as a result of their miserable experiences.
Both characters suffered from a psychological blindness. Lear were unable to see his two daughters deceiving him, along with being unable to see Cordelia’s true love. He also portrayed this inability to see when he banished his loyal follower, Kent. When he was unable to realize that it was Kent in disguise as his servant, it only reinforces the theme. The consequences of his condition were that “tragedy id inevitable”, his blindness did not allow for him “to recognize the errors of his decisions” this is the direct cause for the kingdom being “torn apart” (Pappril 3). Gloucester also was seriously affected by this blindness. This caused him to not be able to see the true and honorable man that Edgar was, and not see the truly evil person that Edmund was. A part of these two heroes’ journeys was Lear and Gloucester’s ability to overcome this blindness, and regain a true sense for the moral flaws of themselves. Luckily, they began to see the true qualities of the people that they once trusted, or the people that they once rejected. Lear’s “eyesight” began to recover as the play progressed. He began to see the true colors of Goneril and Regan after they refused to let him live with them and locked them out of his castle during the perilous storm. He was faced with the fact that their eulogies that were given at the beginning of the play were nothing but lies to benefit their own selfish causes. Most importantly, Lear was gaining the aptitude to get passed Cordelia’s inability to adulate her father and see that her love truly was so vast that it was indefinable. Lear is able to overcome his haughtiness and results in him begging for forgiveness from Cordelia. Gloucester’s sight begins to make a reappearance in Act IV when he realizes that Edgar was Poor Tom and it was his son who saved his life. He then comprehends that Edmund was completely dishonest and that it
was he who was truly attempting to take his father’s power. Gloucester realized that “[he] stumbled when [he] saw”, that when he had physical sight, he didn’t always see the full picture, but with his blindness (Physical) he is no longer spoiled and can see things for how they truly are rather than how he wants them to be. Given the power he had, he obtained the ability to make things how he wanted them, but without that ability he is at an advantage for he sees reality (IV, i, 20-21). Gloucester was not able to see the authenticities of his sons when he that the ability to see, he was morally blind. The tragic journey of these characters has to lead to an unfortunate end. Both King Lear and Gloucester die at the end of the play. Their causes of death are overflows of psychological and mental emotions that are overwhelming to their bodies. Lear died essentially because of a broken heart. In the last scene, Lear is peering over his deceased daughter, Cordelia in remorse. He is experiencing an immense amount of guilt. He feels as though he “might have saved her” (V, iii, 283). Not only did he feel the guilt from not saving her, but from being an active perpetrator in her life. Cordelia’s death is a result of him being a “foolish old man” (IV, vii, 59). Lear dies because he lacked a sense of emotion and selflessness in the beginning which is what causes his death. Gloucester dies due to similar causes. Gloucester dies of a mixture of joy and extreme sadness. After realizing that Edgar was his truly loyal son, Gloucester’s only wish was to see his son again, and if he were able to “[He’d] say [he] had eyes again” (IV, i, 27). Once Edgar had saved him, he revealed himself to his father before he went to fight. Upon hearing the stories of his son’s journey, Gloucester’s “flawed hear-alack, too weak the conflict to support-‘twixt two extremes of passion, joy and grief, burst smilingly” (V, iii, 208-211). These experiences led to these character’s own understanding that their own madness which did allow for some hope in restoration after their deaths. Though deaths are very tragic, they were also very relieving deaths. Both characters were suffering from psychological defeat and physical defeat. Their deaths were their release from the cruelty of the world. The journeys of Lear and Gloucester are clearly very comparable; those of their children have many parallel aspects as well. Goneril, Regan and Edmund all have similar personalities, for they both have selfish desires and are willing to go to all extents to serve those needs. Initially, Lear’s eldest daughters play their father into giving them his land and proceed to not allow him to live there with them. In trying to get her father to leave, Goneril instructs her servants to “put on what weary negligence [they] please” so that Lear no longer wants to stay there (Act I, iii, 12). Regan reacts similarly when Lear opts to reside with her, leaving their father with no place to live. To cater to his own needs, Edmund was focused on getting his brother out of the picture, leaving him as the heir to his father’s revenue. Edmund is unhappy that he is the illegitimate son and grants “himself permission to behave any way he likes because this wrong has been done to him” (Daniels 3). When acting in spite of his family, he feels no sense of “compunction” because he is only illegitimate for someone else’s bad “moral judgment made in his case” (Daniels 3). The actions of these children also eventually led to the betrayal of their fathers. Goneril and Regan turn on their father during the war and fight against him and later have him and their other sister captured. Edmund betrays his father by turning him in to the duke of Cornwall which leads to him getting his eyes gouged out. On the latter side of the families, Cordelia and Edgar share many similarities with their unconditional love for their fathers. These characters are unwavering in their loyalty to their fathers. Regardless of the numerous times they had been wronged, their love and devotion remained constant. A clear message is shown throughout the play that consistent and unfailing love is victorious over the conditional and restricted love.
Shakespeare’s King Lear takes a different approach on the idea of a hero’s journey. Rather than the progression of a character, it shows their declination over time. It is quite obvious that the play was written with a plot parallel to that of the sub-plot, reinforcing this descending journey. After a moral revival, the characters of the coinciding plots lead the head of the family to death. The consequences of this renewal lead to some positive outcomes, but the parasitical characters are overpowering and beat them down. The suffering and carnage in the play is necessary to restore a moral order that Lear initially violated.

WORKS CITED
Appignanesi, Richard, Ilya, and William Shakespeare. King Lear. New York: Amulet, 2009. Print.
Daniels, Anthony. Diagnosing Lear. The New Criterion. June 2007. 1-6
Papprill, Alan. “The Stoic Universe of Lear: The Role of Kent in Lear’s Court”