Morally chaotic world In King Lear

Shakespeare presents a variety of ways in which clean-living chaos is brought about, including the disruption of the immanent order and the fonts holdion of typically corrupted moralistics, even going as far as unbelieving the morals of his own society. However, having different principles in a modern sense of hearing, we ply to have a bun in the oven different interpretations of moral chaos to that of a contemporary auditory sense. In king Lear, Shakespeare arguably does compose a virtuously chaotic world, particularly trough the notion of the natural order being disrupted.The perfidiousness of the children against their fetchs illustrates a significant disruption of temper, as it was considered natural and necessary for children to have unfaltering obedience for their parents, particularly their fathers. When Cordelia publicly ref make use ofs to obey her fathers wishes, she goes against the true qualities of a 17th century daughter in the natural order and it is arg uably this sign rebellion that causes the suffering and tragedy end-to-end the rest of the play.According to feminist critics, Cordelias refusal to flatter Lear can be interpreted as an opposition to Lears authority and thus a direct challenge to the natural patriarchal order of the seventeenth century, the briefly emphatic sentence Nothing stressing this assertiveness. We also square off this betrayal of the father in the character of Edmund. By claiming I find it not reconcile for your oer looking, not only does Edmund feign innocence, and he also portrays himself with overt concern for his father, reinforcing his false virtue.Edmunds initial silence makes his soliloquy in the next scene in which he exclaims Legitimate, Edgar. I must have your land exciting and surprising to the audience. The audience is privy to the Edmunds scheming which creates a sense of dramatic irony, nevertheless in most wares the Machiavellian Edmund is played as a suavely intelligent, rather das hing figure, creating a paradox as he is clearly aversion yet alluring to the audience at the very(prenominal) time.Illegitimates were problematic for the rigid early modern social structure and were viewed as extras that society struggled to accommodate. Therefore to a contemporary audience, the poor handling of Edmund would sum up as no surprise however a modern audience would interpret such extreme views on illegitimacy as immoral. As modern critic Foakes comments, Edmund is the most dangerous and treacherous of the characters.Yet, he begins from a cause that we cannot identify as unjust, illustrating how to a modern audience, Shakespeare does create a morally chaotic world done the poor treatment of Edmund, as the seventeenth century societal norms are so strange from that of ours. Lears abdication can also be viewed as morally chaotic, as it was strongly believed in Jacobean society that Kings were chosen by divine right. In Lears pledge to express our iniquityer purpose the use of the adjective darker to describe his actions illustrates the unnatural nature of such a decision.In Jacobean society, a king was an agent of graven image, and so it was seen as Gods responsibility to decide when his reign should end. A kings handing power down the throne was against the divine order, and it was believed that Satan, through various evil spirits, was responsible for all attacks on the divine order. In Macbeth, a equal play, when King Duncan is murdered, the natural order is breached and chaos ensues the day becomes as dark as night, Duncans horses turn wild and eat each separate and a civil war breaks out.From a New Historicist stance, critics such as Tennenhouse argue that Shakespeare illustrates what happens when there is a catastrophic redistri thation of power, therefore promoting the oppressive structures of the patriarchal hierarchy. However, other critics suggest that the tragedies occur because of societys already faulty ideological structure, particularly emphasised in the David Farr production through the skewed girders, broken windows, sizzling strip-lighting and the eventual collapse of the weak kingdom walls.Moreover, Shakespeare appears to be presenting a morally chaotic world through the way in which the characters can be seen as possessing seen corrupted morals, do purely by materialism as opposed to moral values. We see this in the elegant and superficial speeches of Gonerill and Regan who claim to lovemaking Lear Dearer than eyeight, the overstatement in these statements highlighting their manipulative nature and greed for worldly beloveds. Their actions end-to-end the rest of the play prove the fabrication of these initial promises.Johnson comments that King Lear is a play in which the Wicked prosper and virtuous miscarry. I find this view accurate as the audience can image how the Machiavellian characters such as Gonerill and Regan are rewarded for their materialism, and given total rights over the kin gdom, whereas the virtuous characters such as Cordelia and Kent are punished for their honesty and moralistic values, consequently demonstrating a world of chaotic morals.Lear himself is presented as morally ambivalent, akin to Claudius in Hamlet, initially valuing riches and reputation, which were the very things that fuelled his disillusionment and moral blindness. The love test he uses to bribe his daughters with the largest bounty can be seen as an obvious attempt to buy their love and consequently boost his self-image. His snowstorm reaction to Cordelias refusal to perform, pledging to disclaim all paternal care illustrates how his hubris shekels him from being able to differentiate between his honest daughter and his two-handed daughters.It also demonstrates the way in which the antagonists exploit the hamartia of the protagonist, heightening the tragic nature of the play. However, towards the end of the play, Lears character undergoes anagnorisis and so he comes to posses s more virtuous principles. In Act 3, for the first time he recognises the plight of the Poor naked wretches that are forced to bide the throw of thepitiless storm, the alliteration in pitiless and pelting demonstrating the extreme suffering endured by those in poverty.Through Shakespeares emotive lexis, Lear is presented as regretful, empathetic, and compassionate, which promptly contrasts with his initial selfishness and fixation with worldly things, and it is this contrast that presents a sense of moral confusion. On the other hand, through employing moral characters that remain virtuous throughout the play, Shakespeare doesnt present a completely morally chaotic world.Cordelias character is the personification of virtue and faith, creating a direct juxtaposition with the immoral, Machiavellian characters such as Gonerill and Regan. When required to bargain her love for rights over the kingdom, she comments I cannot heave my essence into my mouth, portraying her honest nature . The idiom heart in your mouth, which suggests nervousness or fear, demonstrates that Cordelia does not see some(prenominal) reason to fear losing the land, emphasising her lack of materialism and strong moral compass.Expanding on this, Lear later describes her tears as The holy water from her heavenly eyes, the alliteration of holy and heavenly stressing her virtue and linking her to the Gods. Foakes comments The optimistic thrust of Edgars moralisation hints at the possibility of a happy ending. The play concludes with the moralistic character Edgar reigning over England, and although good characters such as Cordelia die, (which wasnt accredited well by Shakespeares original audience), evil is eventually eradicated whilst good triumphs.By the end of the play, Evil can even be seen to be eradicated by evil itself. Gonerill poisons Regan, and mentions in an aside after Regan feels the effects If not Ill neer trust medicine, the secretive nature of this aside presenting her mur derous and calculating nature. Shortly after, she commits suicide, which would have been seen as a great act of sin by a Jacobean audience, but ultimately evil defeats itself, evoking a rebalancing of morals and a move covert towards the natural order.The play clearly descends from the embodied values of medieval ethical motive plays, which was a popular form of drama in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. These plays present a direct conflict between good and evil, and ultimately the evil and chaos must be destroyed, and a moral lesson is learned. Overall, there are many aspects of King Lear that evoke a seeming moral chaos, however by the end of the play, as in all morality plays, the chaos is removed and moral order is restored, resulting in catharsis for the audience.