King Lear-Feminist Lens

Today I would like to apply one of the critical lens to an insightful interpretation of King Lear.
This is one of the 4 options for our final analysis essay. I am going to be looking at King Learin the perspective of a feminist critic. The feminist lens examines the language and plot of
the story in order to find things that are gendered. Many of the female critics look at the
female characters and sees how they are stereotyped. The feminist lens looks at the
relationship between female and male characters and their different roles in society.
 Almost half of the main characters in this novel are
females. They include Cordelia, Goneril, and Regan. Overall, the females are represented
as evil and selfish beings. Goneril and Regan are portrayed as the two daughters that bring
Lear into the pitiful state he is in. However, at the end, these two are destroyed by their
own selfishness. On the other hand, Cordelia is portrayed as the pure and innocent one.
Like many of the women who were favored at that time, Cordelia stayed quiet and absent
for most of the play. She was introduced in the first scene and then banished from the kingdom,
absent for most of the play. Cordelia is finally brought back in the last few scenes of the play.
Although she was gone for most of the play, she played a major role in the play.
Cordelia was the one daughter was faithful to her father. Unlike the bad reputations
Goneril and Regan gave to the audience, Cordelia was shown as a very loyal daughter,
forgiving her father for all the wrong he did to her.
Feminist critics would be outraged while reading King Lear because the females are
portrayed as very wicked characters. The three daughters were forced to answer the
question of how much they love their father. Even when Cordelia answers truthfully,
she is punished for her honesty just because Lear does not appreciate her answer.
Two of the main characters are also portrayed as liars and selfish self-centered
beings. Goneril and Regan are two women whom Shakespeare described as daughters
that cannot satisfy with what they have. First they try to take over their father's kingdom.
They don't care if their father is killed or goes insane as long as they get what they
want. Regan also takes part in plucking Gloucester's eyes, characterizing her as
cruel and unforgiving. Later, these two sisters cannot satisfy with the husbands they
have, both eyeing the same guy, Edmund. They go as far as killing each other because
of him. Because most of the women are not shown in a positive light, Shakespeare is
portraying the females as very selfish people. The women who are honest and think
of others are either punished for their honesty or made to stay quiet. Cordelia, the only
"good" female in the play was ultimately put to death, symbolizing that the good
females do not always survive at the end.

King Lear-Ending

We finished King Lear in class last week. We also had a seminar last friday
discussing the final scenes of this play. I think that it went pretty well although
there was some controversy over some of the topics that we covered. One of the
biggest debate was about Lear and if he should be classified for evil or good.
At first, I thought that Lear should be classified as evil. In my critical article, the
author wrote that Lear deserved his daughter's betrayals because he was choosing
favorites among his daughters, he was rash, selfish, violent, and prideful. The author
of my critical article found the daughters' betrayals justifyable and thought that Lear
deserved the fate that he got although it was a little extreme. I also thought that same.
Although Lear was pitiful and I sympathized with him, I did think that choosing
favorites among daughters was unfair. However, after discussing about this with
my classmates, I started to think that Lear wasn't as "evil" and "selfish" as I thought
he was. I remember when I first started reading this play, I thought that it was
normal for a king like Lear to be prideful and live the way just as Lear did.
Lear was a typical king full of ego and pride. It's seems reasonable that the
ruler of a nation have some pride. I also found out that Lear didn't pick
favorites as much as I thought he did. He was going to split the kingdom
equally among his three daughters and the reason why he asked the question
to his daughters was just like a "game" to him; it didn't mean much. This made
me think that Lear wasn't evil nor good. However, he brought the consequences
to himself and even though his actions were reasonable for a king during that time,
it wasn't able to stop him from falling. One of the discussion questions were whether
banishment brought enlightenment or alienation to the character. I said that
thought the alienation Lear received, he was able to become enlightened to the
truth. Lear was able to finally see the truth even though he lost everything
he had.
I thought that the ending would be a lot more sad because it was a tragedy. However,
honestly I thought that it was kind of funny. (?) Every single character started to
die in the last scene, from Gloucester to Goneril and Regan, Edmund, Cordelia,
Lear, etc. The only three characters that seemed to survive in the entire play
was Albany, Edgar, and Kent. The three good guys. Even though everyone
died, at least the three good guys are still alive. That means that at the end,
the good was able to win the evil, which is basically all that matters. People's lives
were sacrificed, but at least the ending result is good. Even though it
seemed like Shakespeare stretched it a little by killing almost all of the characters,
I thought the ending was pretty good.

King Lear-Sight

In class today, we read Act 4 Scene 1 of King Lear. This scene was after Gloucester loses
both of his eyes by the cruel Cornwall. Gloucester is now blind and has no eyesight. However,
a very important line in this scene was when Gloucester said, " O dear son Edgar, the food of thy
abused father's wrath, might I but live to see thee in my touch, I'd say I had eyes again." (pg. 173)
This line shows that Gloucester desires to touch Edgar again, and be with him which would
make up for his lost eyesight. I thought that it was very ironic how Gloucester was able to claim that
he can see and understand the truth better without his eyes. He is able to concentrate more on
what people are saying and feel the truth instead of seeing it. King Lear is also a character who
was unable to find the truth among his daughters although he was able to directly see them tell him
either lies or the truth. In King Lear, there are many characters who are in disguise to either hide their
personalities or their identity. Kent and Edgar are two of the characters who disguise themselves
to keep their identity a secret from everyone else while characters such as Edmund, Regan, and Goneril
disguise their personalities for self-gain. As we can see, all these characters are hiding who they
truly are which shows that sight is fallible. By believing in only what you see but not what you feel or hear,
you are likely going to miss what the truth is. Although everyone was able to clearly see Kent,
Edgar, Edmund, Regan, and Goneril, they weren't able to know who what their hidden intentions were.
This is a lot like the saying, don't judge a book by it's cover. Just because you see the cover of the
book doesn't necessarily tell you if the novel will be a good novel to read or not.
Shakespeare tells us that we should not trust sight. Just like Gloucester, who was able to
understand what truth was more quickly when he wasn't able to see, maybe sometimes closing
our eyes to the worldly things and focusing only on one thing will show us what the truth is.
I thought that this point was very ironic while reading Act 4 Scene 1 of the play.
Another point I found interesting in this scene was why would Edgar not reveal himself to his father?
We are able to see that Edgar and Gloucester finally meet, and Edgar sees his father blind and in pain.
However, even when Gloucester cries that he would wish nothing more than to see his lost son,
Edgar doesn't go and reveal himself to Gloucester. I didn't completely understand Edgar's actions
but hopefully this point will be answered in the next few sections.
We are already 3/4 way through the novel and we are now reading the falling action of the play.
Although I know that this novel is supposed to have a tragic ending, I still hope in one part of my
heart that it would have a happily ever after. :( It doesn't make sense that the already-insane Lear
would wake up and go back to his senses, the blind Gloucester would find his eyesight, however,
I still don't wish for a tragic ending.