Martyn Smith

Like any work of fiction, the opening of King Lear (1608) by William Shakespeare attempts to obtain the audiences attention whilst simultaneously conveying the necessary functional information to explain the situation. Shakespeare chose to write a dialogue between minor characters to begin this play. Shakespeare uses this convention in of all his tragedies with the exceptions of Troilus and Cressida (1601) and Romeo and Juliet (1597), where a chorus is employed. These two techniques, dialogue and a chorus, affect the audience differently. Shakespeare notably uses a chorus for the opening to Henry V (1599) to directly address the audience. This speech is indicative of being taken on a journey, like the soldiers are with Hal. In this way, the unmitigated pleading of Chorus towards the audience mirrors Hals numerous attempts to get what he wants. This opening by the Chorus is an inspiring monologue which is notably similar to the St Crispin Day speech. One of the significant themes revolves around the power of words and the art of persuasion, including at the end when King Henry wins the Dauphins daughter, Katharines heart through his rhetoric. In contrast, the use of dialogue used in King Lear echoes the significance of conversation. The dynamics of the dialogue allows the values of each character to be understood. The moments which alter the course of events arise through these different values being at odds with one another; most importantly in Act I Scene 2, between Lear and Cordelia. King Lear also begins with dialogue because the audience is able to feel like voyeurs. In the same way of overhearing a conversation that no one else is supposed to hear, the audience cannot help but listen. The audience is learning knowledge which would get Kent, Gloucester and Edmund arrested, possibly even killed, by the King if he heard them. In Shakespeares time, when England was ruled under a monarchy this was a very real possibility, and the audience he wrote for would have identified with this. The audience at this point are thinking they know the make-up of Edmund too. He is directly comparable to Shakespeares earlier creation, Iago in Othello (1604). Both characters are seemingly subservient and are eager to please everyone they come into contact with whilst 1

Martyn Smith secretly enacting a malevolent plan. Edmunds duplicity in Act I Scene 2 is all the more potent because the audience has been fooled in a similar way to Edgar. Using dialogue in the opening compliments the underlying themes of the play miscommunication and misunderstanding, deceit and deception. Shakespeare has the effect of portraying the kings presence with an intimidating display of power. The group of people entering the stage creates a visual spectacle. The line uttered by Gloucester: The King is coming creates a sense of urgency, whilst informing the audience the reason for the fanfare. Lear asserts his authority by immediately ordering Gloucester out of the room. Interestingly, Edmund also leaves, even though he is not told to. Shakespeare does not want to give him too much focus yet, he will unfold his character in the next scene. Depending on interpretation of the performance, Edmund could be played to silently acknowledge the King, or even Gloucester. Lawrence Olivers film, King Lear (1982) has the exit of Gloucester not acknowledging anyone. This has the effect of not noticing Edmund, all the focus is on the presence, the power and the authority of the king. If I were to direct this scene for the stage, I would have Gloucester exit through the crowd. This would create and causing discord for the benefit of his fancy. It would tacitly reveal that Gloucester is an inferior man, a subject, and the audience are too. This would define that Lear owns this stage and he wishes to play his game. There is deliberate misdirection employ where all the focus is on this play where Edmund would exit into the dark on the stage like a sinister ethereal spirit. The intention is for most people to forget that he was even there in some sense. Edmund exit to the wings of the stage which represents the royal palace in this scene. This action is a contrast which conveys a belonging to the royal court, even if it is from a disconnected position.

Martyn Smith

The initial exchange between Gloucester and Kent provides the set up of expectations that will rupture Cordelias decision not to placate her father. Samuel Taylor Coleridge comments: They let us know that the trial is but a trick; and that the grossness of the old kings rage is in part the natural result of a silly trick suddenly and most unexpectedly baffled and disappointed.1 This trick is a game to fuel the kings ego, but as A.C Bradley points out, Lear also wants to confirm his daughter will welcome him into his home of her own volition. Lear was supposed to live with Cordelia alone. Although he carries out an unreasonable action when he banishes her; his hurt and anger is manifested from what he sees as his favourite daughter not loving him and so he feels he must reject her. Bradley predicts that if Lear did not make this decision ...it would have had no such consequences as followed its alteration2. Lear would not have gone mad and, of course, the battle with France would never have occurred. Ultimately, this is the set up for the end of the play when the two reunite and make peace. This is all crystallised in Lears final decision: Let it be so!3. Shakespeare likes these butterfly effect moments which rest on a single decisive action. Lear wields what Alexander Legatt calls a massive, undisciplined power4. This highlights that the people within a monarchy are also irrational human beings who are no different in regards to their characteristics than the common man. This is directly comparable to Richard II when King Richard decides the fate of Thomas Mowbray and Henry Bolingbroke himself, rather than allowing them to battle it out for themselves. In both plays the audience can observe the germination of their downfall. As G.K Chesterton observes, Shakespeare is challenging the
1 2

Samuel Taylor Coleridge. Shakespearian Criticism Vol. 1. (J.M Dent and Sons, 1967), p.50 Kermode (ed.). Bradley, p.86 3 William Shakespeare. G.K Hunter (ed.). King Lear. (Penguin, 1996), Act I, Scene 1, p.64 4 Alexander Leggatt. Harvester New Critical Introductions to Shakespeare. King Lear. (Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1988), p.74

Martyn Smith idea of The King5. The kings decision affects the lives of the people around them and ultimately how if they use their power unreasonably, like a fairytale this will be their undoing. This can be seen equally in the characters King Henry V, Marc Antony, and Macbeth. All of these monarchs expect to be obeyed without challenge. So when Cordelia disobeys King Lear, his demeanour changes: The psychological shock of being denied it is so great that he can only turn himself into a Dragon, which cannot feel love and therefore feel relief.6 This is tied up with Lears emotional involvement with being the patriarchal figure that everybody expects, including himself. In the same way the Christian God was viewed at this time, Lear is feared by his daughters as well as loved. The set up of a game to obey him is similar to the scene when Lear asks Cordelia to compete in his game by asking: what can you say to draw a third more opulent than your sisters?7 This question, which is the crux of Lears concern, is immediately followed by a declarative: Speak!. Lears forcible demand is expected to be obeyed for two reasons because, as John Lawlor suggests, there is a double authority of King and father8 . This dual role brings complexity to nature of being king, as Alvin B. Kernan notices, because personal affairs are always tied up with affairs of state...9. Lear and his familys dirty laundry is shown to the entire royal court, including nobles guests and results in embarrassment for everyone in the scene, increasing the dramatic tension. The defining moment culminates in the use of the word nothing, which is repeated five times in four lines. This rapid exchange uses the double meaning of the word, Cordelia

5 6

G.K Chesterton. Dorothy Collins (ed.) Chesterton on Shakespeare. (Darwen Finlayson, 1971), p.87 S.L. Goldberg. An Essay on King Lear. (Cambridge University Press, 1974), p.27 7 Shakespeare. Hunter (ed.), Act I Scene 1, p.64 8 John Lawlor. The Tragic Sense of Shakespeare. (Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1960), p.18 9 Lawrence Danson, (ed.) On King Lear (Princeton University Press 1981). Alvin B. Kernan. King Lear and the Shakespearian Pageant of History. pp.9-10

Martyn Smith

does not wish to play his game and has no words for him even though she will not get her share if she persists. Lawrence Oliviers rendition of Lear provides a contrast in emotional states. The king is greatly angered in the line: Let it be so! Thy truth then be thy dower! 10. This is shocking in Oliviers performance as the audience are exposed to the veracity of Lears wrath. This is because of the disparity to the delivery of the immortal words: Nothing will come of nothing11 is presented in a jovial tone. This also helps to reveal the wonderful irony in this proclamation. This is the turning point and the cause of Lears descent because, as already stated, everything in the play happens because of this moment. This is effectively commented upon when the line is repeated by Lear to Fool later in the play in the guise of nothing can be made out of nothing12. Lear acknowledges when he has lost his power: LEAR [...] Thou hast seen a farmers dog bark at a beggar?

GLOUCESTER Ay, sir.

LEAR And the creature run from the cur? There thou mightst behold the great image of authority: a dogs obeyed in office.13

Ironically it is the father and daughters similarity in their characteristics which is the reason why they clash. Animal imagery is a common theme throughout the work of Shakespeare but this particular metaphor echoes Hamlet when he is in the churchyard: The cat will mew, and
10 11

Shakespeare, Hunter (ed.). Act I. Scene 1, p.64 Shakespeare, Hunter (ed.). Act I. Scene 1, p.64 12 Shakespeare, Hunter (ed.). Act I. Scene 4, p.83 13 Shakespeare, Hunter (ed.). Act IV. Scene 6, p.156

Martyn Smith dog will have his day14. A dog having its day was a proverb even in Shakespeares time but was popularised through Hamlet (1603). According to Shylock in The Merchant of Venice (1597), Antonio has insulted him by saying he is a cut-throat dog15, which is one of the reasons why he insists on having his pound of flesh. Shylock would have his day if it was not for Portia dressing up as Balthazar, an apparent doctor of laws16. Portia and Cordelia are similar in how they are both independently minded, clever and defy the expectations of the patriarchy. The rule of three is used in the opening scene of King Lear with precision to fully highlight Cordelias plight: It is impossible to reach a proper understanding of unconscious structures of storytelling without recognising the archetypal significance of certain numbers.17 In accordance to Christopher Brookers classifications, Cordelias break in the pattern would qualify as the opposite to a contrasting three, where the first two are inadequate or wrong (essentially in the same way) and only the third one works or succeeds18. This is what happens in the fairytale Cinderella. However, because this is the opposite, it is the third one which fails. In this case, Goneril and Regan come before her. The formula still works for defying the audiences expectations and providing the maximum amount of impact. King Lear initially begins with three characters until Lears arrival. This is to complement the land is divided up into three among the sisters. Olivier and Kurosawa in the film Ran (1985) use a physical map made from a parchment-like material which is spread on the floor. If I was to direct the play, the lighting would be choreographed as such so that there would be a
14 15

William Shakespeare. Robert S. Miola. Hamlet (W.W Norton and Company), Act 1 Scene 5, Line 270, p.115 William Shakespeare. John Russell Brown (ed.). The Merchant of Venice. (The Arden Shakespeare, 2006), Act I Scene 3, p.28 16 William Shakespeare. John Russell Brown (ed.). The Merchant of Venice. (The Arden Shakespeare, 2006), Act IV Scene 1, p.110 17 Christopher Brooker. The Seven Basic Plots. Why We Tell Stories. (Continuum International Publishing Group, 2006), p. 229 18 Brooker, p.231

Martyn Smith representation of division of three. Two thirds would be lit, and the other third dark, signifying Cordelias part. Cordelia is destined to receive the south east, the most desirable part of the kingdom because of the wealth. This is inspired by the moment in the animated Hamlet adaptation, The Lion King (1994). Mufasa says to Simba: Everything the light touches is our kingdom. The darkened part in this scene in the movie is the outlands (which include the Elephant Graveyard), represent danger and the forbidden land. In this same way the dark part on the map would signify the prohibited area. The map would then be entirely dark when Cordelia exits the scene and is banished from the kingdom, symbolising that she cannot return. The other threes in this scene are the dynamics between Lear, Cordelia and Kent, and France, Burgundy and Cordelia. These threesomes allow for interesting power plays. Kent is seen to have the most integrity by defending Cordelia, despite his coarse manner, he actually foresees what will unfold: Be Kent unmannerly/ When Lear is mad. What would thou do old man?19. However, everybody is attempting to be courteous to Lear but attempting to be true to themselves and their own interests, with the exception of Goneril and Regan. The events turn increasingly sinister for the other three as France and Burgundy are asked by Lear to take Cordelia. Better thou/ Hadst not been born than thave pleased me better20. This is shocking, especially to a contemporary audience. Cordelia who was moments before Lears favourite daughter is treated like a slave. Burgundy would only accept Cordelia as his wife if the kingdom is also promised. Burgundy is patronising when he is sorry that Cordiela has lost a father and also a husband. The feisty and independently minded Cordelia responds in a passive aggressive manner: Peace be with Burgandy!21. Cordelia purposely leads

19 20

Shakespeare, Hunter (ed.). Act I Scene 1, p.66 Shakespeare, Hunter (ed.). Act I Scene 1, p.69 21 Shakespeare, Hunter (ed.). Act I Scene 1, p.70

Martyn Smith

Burgundy (and the audience) down the garden path with her false respect for him. Her subsequent lines show her biting wit and the idea that she has a choice in her destiny: Since that respect and fortunes are his love. I shall not be his wife.22 France, the most honourable gentleman takes her as his wife despite her being dowerless. This is the best situation she can hope for. When Cordelia returns in Act IV Scene 7 it is reasonable to suspect that France has treated her well. She has presumably been allowed to return to seek her father and she is forgiving towards him, even seeking his blessing: O look upon me, sir, And hold your hand in benediction oer me.23 However, it is Lear who proceeds to fall to his knees. This makes for a very emotional display as the roles are reversed. The dual authority of both father and the king were stripped away when he disowned her, this is the moment where he is not good enough to be either. The first scene ends with Regan and Gonerill discussing how they will look after Lear. They both expose Cordelias concern that they will not treat their father with care as true. After all the events that have transpired throughout this opening scene, they are simply concerned with the resulting other third. Gonerill suggests: We must do something, and ithheat24. This emphasises the active greed in both characters. This line which ends the scene shows that they will both be acting on this. This is the first overt instance for their desire for receiving as much power as possible, which will eventually lead to their demise. In poetic justice, at the end of the play this is reported by the previously banished Kent to Lear: Your eldest
22 23

Shakespeare, Hunter (ed.). Act I Scene 1, p.70 Shakespeare, Hunter (ed.). Act IV Scene 7, p.164 24 Act I Scene 1, p.72

Martyn Smith daughters have fordone themselves, / And desperately are dead25. This plotting against the king nicely sets up the next scene, Act I Scene 2 which begins with Edmunds monologue, all about greed, deception and manipulation, which will conversely affect both Goneril and Regan.

Bibliography Brooker, Christopher. The Seven Basic Plots. Why We Tell Stories. (Continuum International Publishing Group, 2006) Coleridge, Samuel Taylor. Shakespearian Criticism Vol. 1. (J.M Dent and Sons, 1967) Chesterton, G.K. Collins, Dorothy (ed.) Chesterton on Shakespeare. (Darwen Finlayson, 1971) Collick, John. Shakespeare, Cinema and Society. (Manchester University Press, 1989) Goldberg, S.L. An Essay on King Lear. (Cambridge University Press, 1974) Danson, Lawrence. (ed.) On King Lear (Princeton University Press, 1981). Kernan, Alvin B. King Lear and the hakespearian Pagent of History. Flower, Celeste. King Lear. Cambridge Student Guide. (Cambridge Univeristy Press, 2002) Kermode, Frank. (ed.) Shakespeare. King Lear. (MacMillan, 1985) Lawlor, John. The Tragic Sense of Shakespeare. (Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1960)

25

Shakespeare, Hunter (ed.). Act V Scene 3, p.182

Martyn Smith

Leggatt, Alexander. Harvester New Critical Introductions to Shakespeare. King Lear (Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1988) Salgado, Gamini. King Lear. Text and Performance. (Macmillan, 1987), p. 77 Shakespeare, William. Ioppolo, Grace. (ed.) King Lear. A Norton Critical Edition. (W.W. Norton and Company, 2008) Shakespeare, William. Hunter, G.K (ed.) King Lear. (Penguin, 1996) Shakespeare, William. Miola, Robert S. Hamlet (W.W Norton and Company) Worthen, W.B. Shakespeare and the Authority of Performance (Cambridge University Press, 1997)

10