The complexities of Lear …show more content…
If Lear was not loved by these virtuous characters, the audience would perceive only his flaws. The catharsis in tragedy necessitates a protagonist who will eventually acquire sympathy; therefore it is vital Lear is not a figure of evil. Accordingly, his decision to trifurcate the kingdom works to portray him as an archetypal king; instinctive and in control of his power. Nevertheless, it is difficult to see Lear in this glowing light after the first scene, his acts of “…hideous rashness” (I, i: 150) illustrate the very moment when his flaws are most apparent. Politically and practically, his action of splitting a kingdom in two is foolish, Kent contends that Lear “…dost evil” (I, i: 166), an accusation which proves to be prophetic. Lear is unable to comprehend the consequences of his “…poor judgement [and] unconstant starts” (I, i: 290-299), a flaw which resurfaces when he first banishes Cordelia, then Kent. Lear is also superficial in …show more content…
As Lear descends into madness his flaws become gradually less apparent. He perceptibly changes, his suffering “…bound upon a wheel of fire” (IV, vii: 46-47) serves to forge a new Lear. When the retribution for his actions becomes exceedingly unjust he recognises his mortality and attempts to right his wrongs. The restoration of his bond with Cordelia makes his transformation unquestionably evident. He humbly offers to “...kneel down and ask of thee forgiveness” (V, iii: 10-11), undeniable proof he has cast aside his hubris in exchange for values of humanity. Cordelia’s death offers the final chance for Lear to accept responsibility for his flaws, his outpouring of grief and remorse highlight his transformation from an egocentric to an altruistic character. Shakespeare is demonstrating how Lear could only be transformed through great loss and crisis, charging the play with an affirmation of human values in its final cathartic