Morrie teaches him live the life fullest. Mitch and fool place as an essential supporting role in the story, it supports and completes the story plot throughout the whole story. However, both main characters has polar opposite view of life initially, it teaches them lessons and acquire true wisdom by experiencing death.
Essay UK - http: If this essay isn't quite what you're looking for, why not order your own custom English Literature essay, dissertation or piece of coursework that answers your exact question? There are UK writers just like me on hand, waiting to help you.
Each of us is qualified to a high level in our area of expertise, and we can write you a fully researched, fully referenced complete original answer to your essay question. Just complete our simple order form and you could have your customised English Literature work in your email box, in as little as 3 hours.
This English Literature essay was submitted to us by a student in order to help you with your studies. If you are the original author of this content and no longer wish to have it published on our website then please click on the link below to request removal:.
Essay UK offers professional custom essay writing, dissertation writing and coursework writing service. Gloucester in a sense could only see when he became blind, much like Lear, who only became happy with life after he went mad. Both Cordelia and Edgar also see the fault and remorse in their fathers and forgive their misguided parents in order to fight a greater evil that resides in their separate siblings. The Fool The Fool serves the play in a great number of ways, though mainly the purpose of serving the King and story as a narrator and conscience to what is happening in the play.
It may also be recognised that as Lear becomes closer and closer to reaching madness, the fool uses stronger and stronger linguistic devices to interpret what is happening in the play. Kent Kent, in part, acts as a commentator in the play, displaying judgement upon most situations in an attempt to guide Lear back to what he believes is the right path in life.
The argument that Kent has with Lear at the beginning of the play is perhaps an image of what is to come after the argument, a battle between good and evil, for at this point in the play, Lear could be considered as a representative of evil, and Kent; good. Home Essays King Lear. King Lear 2 February We will write a custom essay sample on. And such, in a general way, is the emotional movement of the other two scenes in which Lear appears in Act III—they begin with Lear alarmingly agitated; the agitation mounts with the appearance of Poor Tom or with the prospect of arraigning his daughters in hell ; but in the enactment of the enormous moment he and we get some kind of emotional release for which undoubtedly there is some clinical term, not, however, known to me or to the Elizabethans or to most people who have felt that at the end of each of these scenes both they and Lear have been given mercifully an instant not untouched with serenity on the progress to chaos.
There are many tragedies of considerable magnitude the effects of which, however, are almost solely macrocosmic. The greatest of tragic writers built his macrocosms out of tragedy upon tragedy upon tragedy.
The third time that we shall consider Lear upon the heath will be the last, for the full art of tragedy has three dimensions, like anything with depth. The tragedy with depth is compounded out of a profound conception of what is tragic and out of action tragically bent, with characters commensurate to the concept and the act—and, finally, it is composed out of writing. The maximal statement of an art always makes it easier to see how many lesser artists there are and why; and thus the author of The American Tragedy could not write—a failing not uncommon among authors—and the author of Manfred , although a very great writer in many ways, was so concentrated upon his personal difficulties that he could form no clear and large conception of the tragic, and his tragic action is almost no action at all.
It is easy to understand why the moments of a drama usually singled out for discussion are those that are obviously important and splendid with a kind of splendor that gives them an existence separate from their dramatic context, like passages of Longinian sublimity; but this study is so committed to the tragic drama that it will forego the sublime—although few dramas offer more examples of it and concentrate, instead, upon an incident and a speech, the importance and splendor of which appear largely as one sees a tragic drama unfold about them.
On a technical level, this incident is a unit because it is a piece of dramatic business—in these lines, Shakespeare is engaged in the business of introducing a character:. Now, the business of introducing a character can be transacted quickly in brackets—[ Enter Edgar, disguised as a madman ]—and when the character is some straggler in the play or not so much a character as some expository information, like a messenger, then the introduction properly can be cursory.
And artistic size, as we said earlier, has qualitative as well as quantitative aspects. From the time Poor Tom first speaks until the end of this passage, his name is given five times, and it is given the first time he speaks.
Yet a complete introduction does more than fasten on a name, especially if the person is distinctive and we should be warned about him. Or, if confirmation is sought from literature, we may turn to the opening of the first scene of Hamlet and note how many times in the excitement the names of Bernardo, Marcellus, and Horatio are called back and forth and how often the ghost is referred to before he appears.
This introduction, then, has one of the qualities of all good writing, intelligibility, and in circumstances not favorable to understanding. Moreover, this is an introduction achieving a maximum of unexpectedness and suspense, effects desirable in themselves as well as qualitative signs that the character being introduced is dramatically important. When he does come forth, we have identified and awaited him, but unexpectedly and in consternation Lear identifies him—identifies him as himself.
Then, surely, it is unexpected that the alter Lear goes into the singsong of a mad beggar whining for a handout. As merely unexpected, the entry of Poor Tom is a diversion and serves a purpose: The art of tragic relief is itself worth a study, although all its highest manifestations are governed by two conjoined principles—the moment of relief should be psychologically needed, but the moment of relief should be a momentary illusion which as it is dispelled, only deepens the tragedy.
Mere unexpectedness thus becomes consummate unexpectedness, with what seems to be a turning from tragedy an entry into darker recesses; and the entry of Poor Tom, viewed first as a piece of technical business, is the appearance of greater tragedy. At first the multiple identification is scarcely noticeable, since it depends only upon similarity in immediate and outer circumstances—others besides Poor Tom are led through fire and flood.
Then the similarity becomes both more inclusive and deeper as tragic flaws and tragic courses of action become parallel—Lear and Gloucester, in pride of heart, are also trotting over four-inched bridges and coursing their own shadows for traitors. Given the confines of this paper, the speech to be considered must be short, for the focus finally is upon the smallest unit of drama, a speech, and the smallest unit of speech, a single word. Moreover, given our other commitments, the speech should also be in essence dramatic and tragic.
Let us take, then, the speech in which Lear first recognizes his identity with unprotected nakedness scarred with self-inflicted wounds:.
This is not one of those speeches, somewhat detachable as sententious utterances or lyric poems from which are collected The Beauties of Shakespeare ; yet upon the heath it is one of the great moments. It is tragic drama contracted to its essences—fear and pity. The question is asked in consternation and commiseration; and it arouses in us, who are more aware of implications than Lear, fear and pity in some ways more enormous than his.
These two qualities of the speech—its shortness and its enormousness—at the outset may be considered as somewhat separate and paradoxical qualities. Well, as a simple beginning, it is easy to understand, and the moment demands understanding. Then, too, just as language, it is unexpected.
This is a great deal of dramatic dialogue for forty lines, and perhaps might be contrasted to certain modern schools of writers who have found the essence of drama and reality to be iteration and reiteration of monosyllables. Ultimately, the kind of verbal contraction here being considered is right because the immediate moment of tragic impact is a contraction—abdominal, in the throat, in the mind impaled upon a point. The vast tragic speeches of Shakespeare are anticipations of impending tragedy or assimilations of the event after its impact, like scar tissue after the wound.
It is the task of the artist to give the enormous its proper dimensions, even if, as in this instance, the illusion has to be preserved that only some little thing was said. Our task, therefore, is to look again at these few, short, ordinary words to see how they add up to what our feelings tell us is something very big.
Here, as elsewhere, there can be but the suggestion of a complete analysis; and, in respect to words, the accomplished writer lifts this one and this one and this one and listens to both sound and significance.
Rhythmically and metrically, Lear has asked a tremendous question. A seven-foot mounting question is a big question. Grammatical mode of utterance brings us closer to significance. Some dimension, some significance, goes out of the speech if it is not a question but a declaration: Yet there is one big word within this speech—the one right word, the one word that is not a touching-up of another word which could itself have remained with out the notice of aftertimes.
There are moments, moreover, which have a size that is unmentionable, moments which cannot, at least at the instant, be fully faced or exactly spoken of by those who must endure them. There is always a test that should be made of such matters—can we, after searching, find something at least as good?
King Lear literature essays are academic essays for citation. These papers were written primarily by students and provide critical analysis of King Lear.
Free King Lear papers, essays, and research papers.
Essays and criticism on William Shakespeare's King Lear - Critical Essays. This free English Literature essay on Essay: King Lear is perfect for English Literature students to use as an example.
King Lear is first presented in the first scene as an egocentric man who is ignorant of the many flaws in his personality. Lear has formed himself a personality and defined himself as an individual and utterly refuses to give up this vision of himself, one can only imagine the figure that Lear must have [ ]. critical essays and papers on King Lear by William Shakespeare.