Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), volume 152

International Conference on Social science, Education and Humanities Research (ICSEHR 2017)

Critique of the Political Philosophical Interpretation of King Lear

Xu Zhen
Humanities College
Xi’an Technological University
Xi’ an, China
e-mail: arogon@126.com

Abstract—Discussion of Shakespeare’s tragedy within political “Shakespeare’s mightiest tragedy is now colonized by most
theory has been largely dominated by the followers of Leo kinds of poststructuralist, new-historicist, cultural-materialist,
Strauss, who tend to read Shakespeare as affirming ancient feminist, and psychoanalytic criticism.” [2] We could not
conceptions of virtue and natural right. Most critics ignored deny that Shakespeare’s inner world is a universe, although
the basic premise which has been hidden behind Lear’s “we know almost nothing factual about the inner life of
behavior of division: the conception of modern nation-state has Shakespeare.” [3] According to Harold Bloom, “Shakespeare
not been shaped and accepted by most people. We will be is the center of the embryo of a world canon, not Western or
found that there is no necessary connection between Lear’s Eastern and less and less Eurocentric.” [4]
division and male heir or the eldest son of the principle of
II. THE PREMISE OF DIVIDING THE LAND
inheritance system. Critics pay more attention to the
phenomenon of morality or ethical issues of the dram. They Lear divided his country into three parts and assigned to
didn’t have a good grasp of the problem: the destruction of his daughters by the means of love-test. Both Coleridge and
moral ethics was the direct consequence of the alienation of Bradley say that the first scene in King Lear is a nursery tale.
political power. Many critics have also opined that Lear is a vain and foolish
king, rash in his judgment and incapable of controlling his
Keywords-King Lear; Political Philosophy; Love Test; Power emotions. Lear learned the emptiness of worldly glory when
Alienation he has lost his power, at the same time, he began to embrace
the love of Cordelia and he realized that his youngest
I. INTRODUCTION
daughter’s love is the one true value in his life. [5] So, we
Tragedy King Lear has always been considered as the
could say that the play charts the growth of Lear’s wisdom.
best of all Shakespeare’s plays. [1] According to Allan
According to Harry V. Jaffa, King Lear is the greatest of
Bloom, political philosophy provides a necessary perspective
all Shakespeare’s kings, because we could see that the old
on the problems of Shakespeare’s dramas. He believed that
monarch at the head of a united Britain not merely England,
any discipline of modern universities can not enjoy the
and at peace not only with all domestic factions, but with the
spiritual wealth left by Shakespeare alone, because the
outside world as well in the first scene of King Lear, both
university has not been divided into so many different
France and Burgundy are suitors for the hand of Cordelia. [6]
academic disciplines in the Renaissance, but Shakespeare’s
Harry V. Jaffa’s review was considered to be “turning point
thought has exceeded the discipline barriers. Therefore,
in the criticism of King Lear.” [7] But it is full of
modern university literature department does not enjoy the
contradictions in Harry V. Jaffa’s argument. On the one hand,
privilege of understanding Shakespeare’s works. Alan
Lear was a great king. On the other hand, Lear divided the
Bloom’s interpretation has also received response from
kingdom in order to keep a balance of power, because Lear’s
literary critics, for example, Kiernan Ryan pointed out that
problem is complicated by the fact that he had three

Copyright © 2017, the Authors. Published by Atlantis Press. 97

daughters but no son, this is the only way to maintain British is still a feudal dynasty but never a modern
national unity. We all known that monarchy’s highest goal is nation-state. The judgment is the basic prerequisite of
national unity, but Lear imputed the crime of dividing the critiquing the drama. Lear is neither stupid nor wisdom, and
kingdom. Lear’s actions can be regarded as seeking stability the question is not the focus of the drama, only the power
but no unity. Even if Lear is the greatest king, and we alienation formed its theme.
admitted that “to perpetuate such a rule is an even greater
III. THE ALIENATION OF THE POWER
task than to establish it”, [8] obviously, Lear destroyed the
reunification but no maintain it, he is just trying to get In the history of western thought, it seems established
stability. Harry V. Jaffa’s interpretation based on that Hegel, Ludwig Feuerbach, and Karl Marx were the three
imagination, in his opinion, “a balance of power can be thinkers who first gave an explicit elaboration of alienation
better preserved where there are three distinct forces, no one and whose interpretation is the starting point for all
of which can overmatch the other two, than where there are discussions of alienation in present-day philosophy,
only two forces.” [9] Jaffa’s explanation secretly affirmed a sociology, and psychology. [13] According to Marx’s
premise: the battle between Lear’s daughters will inevitably Economic Manuscripts of 1857-1858, alienation is the
arise. The so-called “number two is for strife and the number necessary development of human society: “Relationships of
three is for unity”, the argument seems nonsense. As a father, personal dependence (which originally arise quite
Lear must known Goneril and Regan’s collusion, the balance spontaneously) are the first forms of society, in which human
of power between his daughters can not be sustained at all. productivity develops only to a limited extent and at isolated
In fact, most critics ignored the basic premise which has points. Personal independence based upon dependence
been hidden behind Lear’s behavior of division: the mediated by things is the second great form, and only in it is
conception of modern nation-state has not been shaped and a system of general social exchange of matter, a system of
accepted by most people. In the context, Lear’s dividing is universal relations, universal requirements and universal
no matter with male heir. Even if there are male heirs, the capacities, formed. Free individuality, based on the universal
country will be divided into four parts in accordance with development of the individuals and the subordination of their
dynasty’s tradition. Because “Lear’s unification of the communal, social productivity, which is their social
kingdom was in part due to his ability to secure the adhesion possession, is the third stage. The second stage creates the
of the lords of these outlying districts through marriage with conditions for the third. Patriarchal conditions and those of
the royal house.” [10] But in the time of modern nation-state, antiquity (likewise feudal ones) therefore decline with the
the concept of unity has been deeply rooted in many people’s development of trade, luxury, money, exchange value, in the
heart. Dynasty country’s sealing system has been exceeded, same measure in which modern society grows with them
even if the country has no male heirs. For example, the step by step.” [14] We need to understand that the second
concept of nation-state has been formed in Elizabeth era, so stage is alienation, and alienation creates the conditions for
the queen could not be foolish enough to divide the country. free individuality. Marx’s Manuscripts turned into the
Lear does not suffer any resistance in the division of the headstream of western critical theories. His thought was
kingdom. For example, Kent and Gloucester pay more extended to such as politics, economy, culture, morality,
attention to the division and its equalities. [11] According to psychology, art field by Western Marxist. In one word,
Bradley, Lear’s original plan was not as absurd as it has been alienation has become a universal states, nobody can get rid
taken to be. For example, Lear never intended to live with of the survival of alienation.
his three daughters in turn, but with Cordelia alone. [12] Power alienation is the typical problem in King Lear,
Anyway, we must see that Lear’s original plan is still under nobody could resolve the problems and it could not be
the premise of dividing. So we could conclude that the conquered in a long time. Paul A. Cantor has been concerned

98
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), volume 152

with the phenomenon, as he said, “Precisely what makes him The so called abdication is never abandoned the crown in
powerful as a king incapacitates him for seeing the truth King Lear, he retained the name of king when he divided his
about himself and his kingdom”. [15] We have to ask why. coronet to his sons in law. Harry V. Jaffa guessed that Lear
Cantor believes that there is something dangerous in royal might have just delegated his “business” to Cornwall and
power, but he couldn’t explain the reason. He also admitted Albany in the original plan, but never completely gave up
that Lear’s gains in wisdom come at the expense of his initial power. [18] His greed is the result of power alienation. As
grandeur and hence his ability to rules, [16] and he couldn’t Paul A. Cantor said, “When Lear is in power, he is blind to
offer the reason again. In fact, in the political field, power his own limitations, not just out of stupidity, senility, or
alienation is everywhere, and politics is essentially an simple error, but because, as Shakespeare shows, there is
alienated field. Lear is an old king and he has been holding something in the very nature of kingship that blinds even and
the supreme power for so many years. The royal power was perhaps especially a successful ruler to fundamental truths
a tool to perform king’s duty. But now the tool became about his situation. When Lear finally gains access to those
control the king in turn. That is the reason of Lear’s arbitrary truths, it is only through a process that disillusions him about
speech act. In the field of power alienation, Lear had been politics in general and shatters the very spirit that made him
equivalent to absolute authority, in fact, Lear is just a tool for a commanding figure.” [19] Power is so tempting that Lear
absolute authority but he couldn’t realize the truth. Lear’s became its slave. Tool rose as the main body while man
extreme character was also shaped by power alienation. Lear gradually lost his rational agent. Even if he offered his power
has lost himself in power alienation. Cordelia’s sincerity and affairs to heirs, Lear is still on the shadow of power.
triggered Lear’s hatred, as he said, “Better thou Hadst not Most critics believed that Lear’s confession in the
been born than not t’ have pleased me better”. [17] Lear was wilderness is the manifestation of his realization, he
willing to be flattered by the flattery and refused to face the recognized that “Poor naked wretches, whereso’er you are,
fact. The flattery could highlight the absoluteness of That bide the pelting of this pitiless storm, How shall your
authority, but sincerity will challenge the absolute authority. houseless heads and unfed sides, Your looped and windowed
Lear became a slave of absolute authority, which is the raggedness, defend you From seasons such as these?” [20] It
inescapable result of power alienation. seems Lear’s wisdom returned again. According to Harold
Bloom, Lear is “Shakespeare’s most passionate character”
IV. LEAR'S PAINFUL DECISION
[21], the so called passion is actually his performance. The
Why should he have to divide his country by the means purpose of Lear’s “dramatic self” is to make everyone and
of love-test in King Lear? It looks like a childish scheme or everything witness a king’s tragedy. For example, Cordelia
an absurd fairy tale. But love-test is actually the most died, Lear said: “Howl, howl, howl! O, you are men of
profound thing of the text, which is the foundation of the stones!”[22] “Howl” became Lear’s glory, all the thing
tragedy. Before love-test, the land has been divided into proved Lear’s personality. He indulged in pain in the storm
three in Lear’s heart. He needs his daughters give in order to obtain the noble sense of morality.
protestations to gratify his hunger for assurances of devotion
in public. But we known that love-test was a pretense from
REFERENCES
its beginning. Love-test is typical “do things with words”, we
[1] Kiernan Ryan, “King Lear”, in A Companion to Shakespeare’s
all known that the occasion of the power transfer is very Works, Volume I: The Tragedies, Richard Dutton and Jean E.
Howard, Eds. Malden: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2003, p.375, 376.
dangerous, Lear has no choice, love-test is the only method
[2] Kiernan Ryan, “King Lear”, in A Companion to Shakespeare’s
he could choose, he has tried his best to maintain the balance Works, Volume I: The Tragedies, Richard Dutton and Jean E.
Howard, Eds. Malden: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2003, p.375, 376.
of power between his daughters but failed miserably. [3] Harold Bloom, The western canon: the books and school of the ages.
New York: Harcourt Brace & Company, 1994, p. 51, 62-63, 68.

99
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), volume 152

[4] Harold Bloom, The western canon: the books and school of the ages. [13] See G. Petrovit, “Alienation”, in Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Vol. 1,
New York: Harcourt Brace & Company, 1994, p. 51, 62-63, 68. Donald M. Borchert, ed. Detroit: Thomson Gale, 2006, pp. 120-127.
[5] Paul A. Cantor, “King Lear: The Tragic Disjunction of Wisdom and [14] Marx, “Economic Manuscripts of 1857-1858”, in Marx & Engels
Power”, in Shakespeare’s Political Pageant, Joseph Alulis and Vickie collected Works, Volume 28, Jack Cohen and James S. Allen, Eds.
Sullivan, Eds. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 1996, p. New York: International Publishers, P.95.
189, 191, 191, 192, 199. [15] Paul A. Cantor, “King Lear: The Tragic Disjunction of Wisdom and
[6] Harry V. Jaffa, “The Limits of Politics: An Interpretation of King Power”, in Shakespeare’s Political Pageant, Joseph Alulis and Vickie
Lear, Act 1, Scene 1”, in The American Political Science Review, Sullivan, Eds. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 1996, p.
vol.51, No.2, 1957, p.405, 406, 411, 412, 409, 413. 189, 191, 191, 192, 199.
[7] Paul A. Cantor, “King Lear: The Tragic Disjunction of Wisdom and [16] Paul A. Cantor, “King Lear: The Tragic Disjunction of Wisdom and
Power”, in Shakespeare’s Political Pageant, Joseph Alulis and Vickie Power”, in Shakespeare’s Political Pageant, Joseph Alulis and Vickie
Sullivan, Eds. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 1996, p. Sullivan, Eds. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 1996, p.
189, 191, 191, 192, 199. 189, 191, 191, 192, 199.
[8] Harry V. Jaffa, “The Limits of Politics: An Interpretation of King [17] William Shakespeare, King Lear. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Lear, Act 1, Scene 1”, in The American Political Science Review, Press, 2008, p. 3, 11, 64, 119.
vol.51, No.2, 1957, p.405, 406, 411, 412, 409, 413. [18] Harry V. Jaffa, “The Limits of Politics: An Interpretation of King
[9] Harry V. Jaffa, “The Limits of Politics: An Interpretation of King Lear, Act 1, Scene 1”, in The American Political Science Review,
Lear, Act 1, Scene 1”, in The American Political Science Review, vol.51, No.2, 1957, p.405, 406, 411, 412, 409, 413.
vol.51, No.2, 1957, p.405, 406, 411, 412, 409, 413. [19] Paul A. Cantor, “King Lear: The Tragic Disjunction of Wisdom and
[10] Harry V. Jaffa, “The Limits of Politics: An Interpretation of King Power”, in Shakespeare’s Political Pageant, Joseph Alulis and Vickie
Lear, Act 1, Scene 1”, in The American Political Science Review, Sullivan, Eds. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 1996, p.
vol.51, No.2, 1957, p.405, 406, 411, 412, 409, 413. 189, 191, 191, 192, 199.
[11] William Shakespeare, King Lear. Cambridge: Cambridge University [20] William Shakespeare, King Lear. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2008, p. 3, 11, 64, 119. Press, 2008, p. 3, 11, 64, 119.
[12] Harry V. Jaffa, “The Limits of Politics: An Interpretation of King [21] Harold Bloom, The western canon: the books and school of the ages.
Lear, Act 1, Scene 1”, in The American Political Science Review, New York: Harcourt Brace & Company, 1994, p. 51, 62-63, 68.
vol.51, No.2, 1957, p.405, 406, 411, 412, 409, 413. [22] William Shakespeare, King Lear. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2008, p. 3, 11, 64, 119.

100