King Lear context:

• Play is set in Pagan England, but Shakespeare wrote it in Jacobean England

• King at the time was James VI

• The Jacobean society was that of a hierarchy, where status, wealth, and bloodline determined social standing

• There had been succession anxiety following the death of Queen Elizabeth I as she had no male heir, however in 1603 King James I ascended the throne

• The Guy Fawkes plot in 1605 also caused intrigue about what would happen if the King were to be killed. It was a plot to blow up parliament however it was foiled

Critical overview:

• Samuel Johnson said he found the outcome for Lear, Cordelia, and Gloucester shocking and unjust

• AC Bradley suggests that Lear attribute all his problems to his obsession with the ingratitude of his daughters

• Lawrence Rosinger, suggests that Lear and Gloucester use others selfishly for self-gratification but their self-discovery leads to insight and an end to selfishness

• AC Bradley refers to the fool as being the soul of pathos in a comic masquerade

The great chain of being:

It is a hierachial view of the world where God is at the top followed by Angels, humans, animals, plants, and inanimate objects. The King being God’s representative on Earth and believed to be chosen by God (divine right of Kings). Therefore Lear’s actions and the play’s events cause this order to be disrupted, resulting in chaos and suffering.

King James VI (England James I):

• United England and Scotland

• Wrote a book called Daemonologie which discussed the persecution of witches and the justification for it

• Wrote another book name Basilikon Doron (essentially a political handbook) which was addressed to his Son and warned him of the dangers of dividing land and separating kingdoms

Origins of the play:

• draws upon the legend of King Leir and Geoffrey of Monmouth’s ‘History of the Kings of Britain’

• Geoffrey’s presents a story about a legend of a king of Briton who had three daughters and divided his kingdom

• Shakespeare made many changes to the plot in order to make the tragedy we know today, however these two stories may have been influences

Notable staging of productions (the effects/emphasis on parts of the play):

Sam Mendes, National Theatre, 1990s -

• set in a decaying modern monarchy: military uniforms, concrete backdrops, and industrial lighting - modern dress to show the timelessness of power struggles and familial integration, emphasis on collapse of order and state power

• Lear is initially in a business suit but is then stripped down to a hospital gown in his madness - Lear’s costume descent showing a loss of identity and authority

Nancy Meckler, Globe, 2017

• intended to view the play from the perspective of the poor but many critics noted that it didn’t maintain this central theme or exploration throughout

• suggests economic inequality and societal collapse as the central backdrop

The fool:

• inverts the natural order, entitled to speak to power with little fear of consequence

• double-casting between Fool and Cordelia allows for deeper exploration of thematic connections between the two characters - shared honesty and love for Lear

Lisa Hopkins - ‘A divided kingdom’

• shows how contemporary concern about who would succeed the throne, fed a renewed interest in pre-roman British rulers and influence Shakespeare’s King Lear (an other dramas)

• Geoffrey of Monmouth’s History of the Kings of Britain was dicredited by many, due to there being no written evidence for the history of Britain, before the Roman invasion. But the stories of Geoffrey’s book remained to be continually told

• Geoffrey’s depiction of Lear suggests Cordelia survives and rules as queen, until Goneril and Regan’s sons join forces to dispose her. Then once imprisoned she commits suicide. Therefore despite Shakespeare’s bleak ending, his was less cruel than her traditional suffering, as suicide was a sign of despair and a lack of faith in God’s providence leading to damnation. Whereas Lear’s ending sees her as an innocent victim destined for heaven.