Welcome to Soul-stice Repertory Ensemble’s
Study Guide for William Shakespeare’s Tragedy of King Lear.
This study guide is designed to provide teachers with a broad base of
information in a single volume as well as a comprehensive listing of
other resources, thereby facilitating teacher preparation and increasing
the chances that teachers will feel they can confidently add this formidable
work to their curriculum. We share our research and passion for this
play in the hopes that the teacher can conquer with greater ease the
vital task of conveying to a room full of young minds an understanding
and appreciation for Shakespeare’s art. It is also an act of self-preservation.
As theatre artists, we recognize that teachers are our greatest ally
in not only exposing generations to great authors, but also in encouraging
them to experience the theatre. Our dream is that someday live theatre
will be embraced so thoroughly in the Atlanta community that attending
a play will become as commonplace as renting a movie or watching a Braves’
game. Thank you for your help.
The Play
King Lear is widely considered by scholars to be Shakespeare’s
greatest work. More than any other play or non-dramatic poetry in the
canon, King Lear captures the broad scope of Shakespeare’s imagination
and offers the full range of human emotion. Despite the overwhelmingly
universal recognition of King Lear’s significance as
a great work of literature, performance history and critical history
suggest that it is a less than adequate stage play. An example of this
paradox is most clearly illustrated in A.C. Bradley’s famous lectures
on Shakespearean Tragedy. Bradley writes, “King Lear
seems to be Shakespeare’s greatest achievement, but it seems
to me not his best play” (226). He suggested that, when considered
in the context of great art in western civilization, the play is worthy
of being grouped along side the Divine Comedy, the great symphonies
of Beethoven and the statues in the Medici Chapel, yet it is “…decidedly
inferior as a whole to Hamlet, Othello, and Macbeth,”
when viewed solely as drama. In 1812, Charles Lamb said boldly, “…the
Lear of Shakespeare cannot be acted” (107). Even contemporary
critics like Harold Bloom share Lamb’s sentiment that it is impossible
to view the play’s greatness anywhere but the theatre of the mind
(476, 512).
In support of the notion that King Lear is an inferior dramatic
work, Bradley pointed out the play’s rather peculiar stage history.
Up through the early 1900’s, King Lear was produced less
frequently and was certainly less successful on stage than the other
three major Shakespearean tragedies. But what is perhaps most interesting
is that it was presented on stage in an edited and altered form for
a century and a half. In 1681, Nahum Tate reworked the play by substituting
Edgar for the King of France as Cordelia’s love interest and by
giving the play a happy ending in which Cordelia unites with Edgar instead
of being hanged in prison. Samuel Johnson defended Tate’s version
by suggesting that the cruelty in Shakespeare’s version was often
offensive and Cordelia’s death was an outrage to divine justice
(224). In perhaps the ultimate example of censorship, Tate’s version
played on the stage until William Macready finally restored Shakespeare’s
text in his production of 1838.
But in the latter half of the twentieth century, King Lear
has emerged with a newfound significance in our modern culture. In the
decades following World War II, the play’s popularity and success
on stage have increased. The evolving mediums of film and television
also embraced the Lear story in at least a dozen adaptations since 1945
(Holderness 31-32). Ideological shifts in war-weathered countries injected
King Lear with new relevance. Johnson’s arguments of
offending divine justice seemed thin in the face of nihilistic interpretations
of the play. A generation who had witnessed the horrors of the Holocaust
and the destruction at Hiroshima, could no longer deny the reality of
the violence and cruelty in Lear’s world. Culturally, the world
was now ripe for this play. Strangely, Shakespeare’s three hundred
and fifty year old play now seemed a contemporary of the theatre work
of Samuel Beckett, Bertolt Brecht, and Antonin Artaud. In fact, the
influence of their work shaped many of the most famous and celebrated
stage and film productions of our day. In more recent productions, Shakespeare’s
theme of aging adults surviving in a hostile world in which the younger
generation wishes to push them aside has been highlighted by the increasing
anxieties of the Baby Boomer generation as they rapidly approach becoming
our largest Senior Citizen population ever. Now, more than ever, it
is clear that as Jan Kott asserts in his book, Shakespeare Our Contemporary,
King Lear is “…above all others the Shakespearean
play of our time” (162).
The Sources[1]
The following is a list of works that Shakespeare used as source material
and/or was influenced by while writing King Lear:
• Raphael Holinshed’s The Chronicles of England, Scotland,
and Ireland (1587 2nd Ed.)
This is a popular rendering of the story of Lear with which Shakespeare
was undoubtedly familiar. Shakespeare used this source several times
while writing many of his History plays. Holinshed’s account is
based in part on the only other previously recorded version of the story,
which is found in Geoffrey of Monmouth’s Historia Regum Britanniae
(circa 1100). Before Geoffrey’s version, the story existed as
ancient folk tales for many years stemming from Celtic mythology in
which Lyr is the god of the sea.
• Samuel Harsnett’s Declaration of Egregarious Popish
Impostures (1603)
This is a treatise attacking Catholic Priests for the fraudulent staging
of demon possessions and subsequent exorcisms. Harsnett’s vocabulary
and wild descriptions of possession and exorcism show their influence
in Edgar’s pretending to be Poor Tom, a bedlam beggar. Specifically,
Edgar calls out the names of devils (Flibbertigibbet, Smulkin) which
are taken directly from Harsnett’s essay. More vaguely, Gloucester
being bound to a chair by Cornwall and Regan resembles descriptions
of the treatment of possessed women. Also, Harsnett creates images of
fierce storms when giving accounts of the exorcists at work, which may
have had its influence on Shakespeare’s storm scenes.
• John Florio’s translation of Michel de Montaigne’s
Essays (1603)
The influence of Essays is not as concrete as other sources. The ideas
found in Edmund’s fake letter from Edgar, such as an able son
rightfully pushing aside an aging father, are found in this work. Also,
the general skeptical views of man’s understanding of himself
and Nature present in King Lear are found plentifully in the essay entitled,
“Apologie of Raymond Sebond.”
• The True Chronicle History of King Leir (circa 1590)
Published and acted in 1605, Shakespeare studied this source closely
and used many plot and relationship ideas found in this early dramatic
version of the Leir story. There are too many to examples to mention
here and perhaps, too many to accurately measure.
• Edmund Spenser’s The Faerie Queen (1590)
Shakespeare adopted Spenser’s spelling of Cordelia and used the
idea of her dying by hanging.
• John Higgins’ additions to A Mirror for Magistrates
(1574 Ed.)
Shakespeare used a few technical plot points from this work. Examples:
Leir first stayed with Gonerell and then Ragan. Gonerell dismissed half
of Leir’s knights and Ragan in turn reduced them to ten and then
to five. Higgins also paired Cordila with the King of France (a modern
term more recognizable to Elizabethan audiences) instead of the Prince
of Gallia.
• Sir Philip Sydney’s Arcadia (1590)
Although largely reworked and fleshed out by Shakespeare, many of the
basic plot points and the general setup of the Gloucester, Edmund, Edgar
subplot are found in this work. Examples: The bastard son betrays the
brother and father and sends the father forth blinded. The father begs
to be led by the son to a high rock to commit suicide.
The Date
The composition date of King Lear is generally accepted as
1605. Shakespeare scholars arrived at this date through a series of
educated guesses based on the availability of works Shakespeare used
as sources and the Stationer’s Register, which was a log of all
works authorized for publication. The information from this entry was
also included in the First Quarto of 1608 and it makes reference to
a performance of the play in the King’s court on December 26,
1606. This record provides a solid upper terminal date for the play’s
composition. The earliest date of composition was established as 1603,
based on the publication of Samuel Harsnett’s Declaration
of Egregarious Popish Impostures, from which Shakespeare had borrowed
material. The publication of The True Chronicle History of King
Leir in 1605 narrows the focus to somewhere in the years 1605 –
1606. Because this play had been previously published in 1594, there
is some argument that Shakespeare had access to it earlier and that
it was only published in 1605 to cash in on the success of Shakespeare’s
version, but there is no actual evidence to support this theory. Lastly,
because scholars have concrete evidence that Macbeth was written
in 1606, most agree that King Lear was most likely written
late in the year 1605.
The Text
If one were to randomly examine multiple editions of King Lear
from the local bookstore or library, they would inevitably stumble upon
some major textual differences. This is because we have no single authoritative
version of King Lear. The First Quarto of 1608 contains approximately
283 lines that are not in the Folio of 1623, and the Folio has about
100 lines not found in the Quarto[2]. For a
play with about 3,300 lines, this discrepancy of nearly 400 lines is
quite significant (Warren 45). A Second Quarto was printed in 1619 that
was apparently based on the First Quarto, but the corrections made were
offset by new errors. A large wing of Shakespearean scholarship is dedicated
to the research and discussion of these textual differences. The details
of the heated arguments over which version is Shakespeare’s “ideal”
text or whether an ideal text even exists are too vast and exhaustive
to discuss here. Generally, scholars believe the Folio text was based
on the Second Quarto text along with a prompt book from the theatre.
The validity of both texts is called into question for the same reasons.
There is no surviving copy on which any of the texts are based. Actors
may have relied on their memory to compile the Quarto text and the prompt
book used for the Folio may have been edited by someone other than Shakespeare.
Add to all this that Nicholas Okes, the printer of the Quarto text,
was inexperienced and considered less than competent, the questions
increase exponentially. This presents an obvious obstacle in choosing
an edition of the text for the classroom. Editors generally work from
the Folio text and go back to the Quarto where obvious errors exist
and when they feel a significant passage has been omitted. As always,
the Arden Editions of Shakespeare are widely respected for their scholarly
excellence, but the higher cost and the intimidating length of its introduction
and copious textual notes can be drawbacks for classroom use. The Signet
Classic Edition is perhaps the best fit. In addition to the text and
reasonably detailed footnotes, this edition has great resources in its
appendix. Relevant selections from Shakespeare’s sources (excerpts
from Holinshed’s The Chronicles of England, Scotland, and
Ireland, from Sidney’s Arcadia, and from The
True Chronicle History of King Leir), important critical work (Samuel
Johnson, A.C. Bradley, Harley Granville-Barker, Harry Levin, Maynard
Mack, and Linda Bamber), and a comprehensive stage history are all included,
which supplies teachers with wonderful and convenient companion reading
materials. All this combined with its reasonable price make it a valuable
and economical choice.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Endnotes
1. Any alternate spellings of character names in this section are indicative
of the spellings used by the particular source in discussion (Leir =
Lear, Cordila = Cordelia, Ragan = Regan, etc.)
2. A book in quarto form is created by a printing method in which each
sheet of paper is folded twice thereby dividing the sheet into four
leaves or sections. The text is printed in the four sections, front
and back, folded back twice and then the top edges are cut so that each
sheet forms eight pages that open like a book (approximately 9 x 12
inches). The folio is folded only once, dividing the sheet into two
leaves or sections. Text is printed in these two sections, front and
back, and then folded back to create four pages per sheet that open
like a book (approximately 12 x 15 inches). For either printing method,
when multiple sheets of paper are nested inside each other, printing
the proper page in the proper section so all pages fall consecutively
when the sheets are folded can become quite involved.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Works Cited and Referenced
Asimov, Isaac. Asimov’s Guide to Shakespeare. 2 vols. New York:
Wings Books, 1970.
Bloom, Harold. Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human. New York: Riverhead
Books,
1998.
Bradley, A.C. Shakespearean Tragedy. London: Penguin Books, 1991.
Foakes, R.A. Introduction. King Lear. By William Shakespeare. Ed. R.A.
Foakes. Surrey:
Thomas and Sons Ltd., 1997.
Holderness, Graham, and Christopher McCullough. “Shakespeare
On The Screen: A Selective
Filmography.” Shakespeare and the Moving Image. Ed. Anthony Davies
and Stanley
Wells. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1995. 18-49.
Johnson, Samuel. “King Lear.” The Tragedy of King Lear.
Ed. Russell Fraser. New York:
Penguin Books, 1987. 222-224.
Kott, Jan. Shakespeare our Contemporary. Trans. Boleslaw Taborski.
Garden City:
Doubleday, 1964.
Lamb, Charles. “On the Tragedies of Shakspeare, Considered with
Reference to Their Fitness
for Stage Representation.” The Works of Charles and Mary Lamb.
Ed. E.V. Lucas. London: Methuen, 1903.
Lowers, James K. Cliffs Notes on King Lear. Lincoln: Cliffs Notes,
Inc., 1993.
Rollins, Hyder E., and Herschel Baker, ed. The Renaissance in England:
Non-dramatic Prose
and Verse of the Sixteenth Century. Prospect Heights: Waveland Press,
Inc., 1992.
Rothwell, Kenneth S. “Representing King Lear on the Screen: From
Metatheatre to ‘Meta-
cinema’.” Shakespeare and the Moving Image. Ed. Anthony
Davies and Stanley
Wells. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1995. 211-233.
Warren, Michael J. “Quarto and Folio King Lear and the Interpretation
of Albany and Edgar.”
Modern Critical Interpretations of William Shakespeare’s King
Lear. Ed. Harold Bloom.
New York: Chelsea House, 1987. 45-56.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Classroom Exercises and Discussion Topics
1. Students can gain a better appreciation for the difficult and laborious
techniques involved in printing a book in folio or quarto form by performing
a simple exercise. Take a stack of about five sheets of blank or scrap
paper (all the same size), fold them (once for folio, twice for quarto)
and then write consecutive numbers on each page as if numbering a book.
When numbering the quarto example, don’t cut the top edges. After
numbering, unfold the pages and lay them out. Particularly in the quarto
example, notice the complex arrangement and orientation of page numbers
on each sheet. Printers had to plan each page. For a quarto, printers
had to set out four pages (one letter at a time) in order to print one
side of one sheet and then hang it up to dry. When you also consider
that the closest thing to Spell Check was an apprentice, then the printing
errors in King Lear or any other publication of the time period suddenly
become more understandable.
2. Before your students read King Lear, provide them with the initial
opening scenario of Lear and his three daughters. Present it to them
as a fairy tale and ask them to provide their own ending. Once your
students have completed the play, compare and contrast their stories
with Shakespeare’s and discuss their initial expectations and
final reactions.
3. Ask your students to locate references to sight and blindness. Discuss
this motif’s significance to both the main plot and the Gloucester
subplot.
4. For the sake of discussion, encourage your students to examine Edmund
and Edgar outside of the prejudged boundaries of black and white, good
and bad. Submit to them for their consideration that Edgar, through
no merit of his own, but merely by laws of birthright, was to inherit
his father’s land. Also, consider that once Edmund craftily obtained
Edgar’s birthright, and Edgar then occupied a comparable state
to Edmund’s (having no land and being out of favor with the father),
Edgar had to resort to violence to regain it. In this context, discuss
the early soliloquies that Shakespeare gives to Edmund and his actions
throughout the play. For advanced students, assign the excerpt of Sydney’s
Arcadia found in the Appendix of the Signet Classic edition and discuss
the opportunities Shakespeare gives Edmund to explain himself to the
audience as compared to the bastard son in Arcadia, who is indisputably
presented as wicked.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Resources on the Internet - Noteworthy sites on King Lear
(Note: The following information was gathered in the
year 2000. Consequently, most web address info is outdated.)
Furness Collection
www.library.upenn.edu/etext/collections/furness/
The Rutgers’ site is linked to the collections on this site.
Facsimile Texts on this site:
The Second Quarto of King Lear (1619)
The Folio Edition of King Lear (1623)
Nahum Tate’s Version (1681)
Alexander Pope’s Version (1723)
Excerpts from Holinshed’s Chronicles (1577)
Excerpts from Harsnett’s Declaration of Egregarious Popish Impostures
(1603)
Excerpts from A Mirror for Magistrates (1610)
Review: The only place to view original copies of these hard to find
texts.
University of Texas Site
ww2.cwrl.utexas.edu/~scoggins/britishprojects/kinglear/index1.html
The site has two scrolling boxes side by side and a menu below. The
left box hold a scene by scene summary that links to a scene by scene
online text. The right box is concerned with the context of Shakespeare’s
play and time. This site seems to touch on a little of everything.
Context Categories:
Shakespeare's Knowledge of Medicine
Shakespeare's Knowledge of Madness
Mothers
Treatment of Illegitimacy
Witchcraft and the Supernatural
Lear's Madness
Jesters and Fools
Evil Personalities
The Good, the Bad, and the Damned
Symbols and Ideology
Identity of Lear
Related Shakespeare WWW Sites
Canon Discussion
Message Forum Discussion: Cultural and Ideological Debates
Textual Production
Review: Although never particularly in-depth, the sheer number of context
categories and even more sub-categories (cross-linked with the online
text) make this site useful. Set aside a couple hours to sift through
all of it.
King Lear and Editing Shakespeare
www.st-johns.pvt.k12.dc.us/english/shakespeare/lear/ler.html
This is a page within Dr. Nighan’s Shakespeare Page. This page
discusses a few of the problems related to editing the Folio and Quarto
editions of King Lear. There is an interesting visual chart and some
example problems for anyone curious about further exploration of text
issues.
Review: For such a complex issue as text editing, this page is a bit
oversimplified. Perhaps it is a good place for inquisitive minds to
start, but be aware that the short bibliography means you are only getting
a limited view the argument.
A Teacher's Guide to the Signet Classic Edition of William Shakespeare’s
King Lear
By Leigh Ann Hern, M.A.,University of Georgia
www.penguinputnam.com/academic/resources/guides/shakes2/content.htm
This page is an invaluable resource for teachers. It was written by
an experienced high school teacher currently working on her doctoral
degree specializing in “students developing as readers and on
preparing teacher candidates for the classroom.” This guide is
specific to the Signet Classic Edition, but would be useful with any
edition. In addition to excellent Introduction and Overview sections,
the exercises and discussion questions are especially helpful because
they broken down for student ability levels.
Review: This well researched and intelligently written guide for teachers
should not go unread.
William Shakespeare’s King Lear
By Jeremy Bandini
www.netexplosure.com/kinglear/
This site is a student’s perspective created to provide other
students with a web resource upon the occasion of their first or second
reading. There is an online version of the text, a plot and character
summary, quotes page, image gallery, and links page.
Review: Overall, the content of this site is fairly elementary. What
is perhaps most interesting is Jeremy’s “Personal Narrative”
page in which he thanks his teacher for a newfound appreciation of Shakespeare
and describes his process in crafting his site.
Other Related Sites
A Compendium of Common Knowledge 1558 – 1603: Elizabethan Commonplaces
for Writers, Actors, and Re-enactors
Written by Maggie Secara
Designed by Paula Kate Marmor
renaissance.dm.net/compendium/index.html
Just about everything one would want to know about daily life in Elizabethan
England is on this site.
The Complete Works of Shakespeare
www-tech.mit.edu/Shakespeare/
This site holds the Web’s first edition of the Complete Works
of Shakespeare, well organized and easy to navigate.
The Internet Movie Database
us.imdb.com/
This massive resource has listings of over 200,000 movie titles in which
actors, writers and directors are all cross-referenced. Easy searches
can be done on “Shakespeare” or “King Lear”
to pull up information on existing films. This site is also linked to
Amazon.com for any movie titles you wish to purchase online.