The grand works of Shakespeare are, in part, natural think pieces. Watching Shakespeare or reading him won't take long. The story is entertaining enough to leave it at that, if you so choose. (Although I must admit: as the years pass since I read and watched Romeo and Juliet, I can't help but look back on it as unbearably boring.) This person has designs, this person dies, this person ends up with this person, this title, this land, etc. Comedy, tragedy, romance, history, all of it is there. But let your entertainment impulse down for just a second and you'll start to see revelations and questions come up out of nowhere. King Lear is no different, of course.

I have had a good amount of experience with Shakespeare’s 2-3 most “known” plays, as far as high school education is concerned. Romeo and Juliet, Macbeth, and Hamlet. The problem with these teachings, however, has always been a lack of enthusiasm on the part of the teacher. The first and the third were ruined by soporific, monotonous rants by underpaid teachers who would rather have taken part in quite literally anything else. The Scottish play was lucky, as it was taught to me by one of the most formative teachers in my academic career. God bless his love for the subject, that which truly makes all the difference. My overall point is this: there is often a lack of logic behind why students need to read and discuss these plays. Why is this crucial? What does it teach me? I remember discussing the importance of Shakespeare with a poor, sad, lost soul who was looking to get her MA in drama/theatre. She refused to read any Shakespeare out of hand. She had not read or watched a single one. Why? Because he was a “Dead White Man” TM, and she just knew that he would not have much to contribute to her life today. I don't blame her or her logic for reaching this conclusion and refusing to acknowledge the single most important figure in her field, perhaps even across all literature. I blame the false and empty reverence that follows the introduction of these plays by teachers who themselves had a selection of 5-10 “Shakespeares” drilled into them senselessly. The cycle continues. The Wheel of Fortune continues to turn.

I am at a new beginning of my studies of Shakespeare. This time, the introductions are done in an autodidactic manner. Enthusiasm, as I mention, is key. As a beginner, if it is enthusiasm I seek, I don't have to look much further than Harold Bloom. I have been reading his essays on Shakespeare on and off for quite some time now, and while he often waves away perfectly valid challenges to the works of Shakespeare with non-arguments and non-sequiturs, he does give me crucial background and interesting comparisons that I may otherwise never have had the chance to entertain. His writings on King Lear helped me sound out the revelations and questions that I mentioned, and so credit has to be given. Here are some of my thoughts \\n  and if spoilers matter to you for Shakespeare, here is a warning\\n:

- I don't know why it doesn't sit well with me that Edgar saw his father, blind, struggling, searching, and decided that it was best to continue the pantomime of Tom O’Bedlam. I don't have an adequate answer for why Edgar’s obvious and overwhelming love for the father did not pour out in a stream of sympathies for Gloucester. Instead, he later revealed his identity to Gloucester off-stage (post many conversations and a suicide-attempt by his father), and this ended up being all for naught. I suppose naught is a recurring theme in the play. Why the self-restraint?

- We seem to have either an excess of love or excess of hate. The excess of love can be superficial, in the cases of Goneril and Regan, or pure and unyielding in the face of wrath, like that of Cordelia. Lear himself has an excessive need for love, a bottomless pit that cannot be filled. Hate is also strong, concentrated in the strange character of Edmund. He is evil! What drives him but a will toward destruction of all?

- The juxtaposition of the Fool and Lear is a touch of genius by Shakespeare, as Lear has already proven that he is more than capable of banishing anyone that does not bow down to his needs and requests. A designated court jester, however, is seemingly safe from his fury. He is the one that speaks all of the wisdom in this play, there with almost no will but to drive Lear further into insanity. I think Gloucester’s famous quote applies here as well: “Tis the times’ plague, when madmen lead the blind.”

- The most surreal scene of the play for me is the meeting of the mad Lear and the blind Gloucester. What a climax. Lear rants about scorn and hatred for the necessity of sexual reproduction and his fear of the feminine in humanity and nature, a scene that holds so much gravity and threatens to come loose at every line.

It is a testament to how beautiful and human this work is that the characters are not far-fetched. We can see ourselves in Lear, if we allow ourselves to think of when the road of ambition may come to an end. We can see ourselves in Gloucester and Kent, punished for doing right. We can see ourselves in Cordelia, whose intimations and hints at purity are misread and turned against her as weapons. And of course, we all know a few Gonerils, Regans, and Edmunds. Not reading Shakespeare is truly a miss, and I believe that we owe it to ourselves to ensure we do so, if no more than even once in our lives. After all, “nothing will come of nothing”.

King Lear is a renowned play that has captivated audiences for centuries. In it, Lear, an aging king, decides to divide his kingdom among his three daughters. However, his judgment is clouded by their flattery. The eldest two, Goneril and Regan, shower him with false praise, while the youngest, Cordelia, refuses to play the game and speaks the truth. As a result, Lear disowns Cordelia and gives his kingdom to the other two.

But as the story unfolds, it becomes clear that Goneril and Regan are only interested in power and wealth. They treat Lear with disrespect and drive him out into the storm. Meanwhile, Cordelia, who has married the King of France, returns to England to try and save her father.

Tragically, their efforts are in vain. Lear goes mad, and Cordelia is hanged. In the end, Lear dies, holding Cordelia's body in his arms. The play is a powerful exploration of themes such as loyalty, betrayal, power, and madness. It shows how easily we can be deceived by flattery and how important it is to speak the truth.

The quote from Bobo, "Não mostres tudo o que tens nem digas tudo o que sabes. Não acredites em tudo o que ouves, não arrisques tudo o que tens," sums up the lesson of the play perfectly. We should always be cautious and not trust everything we hear or see. We should also be careful not to give away too much of ourselves or take unnecessary risks.

Overall, King Lear is a masterpiece of literature that continues to resonate with audiences today. It is a must-read for anyone interested in Shakespeare or in exploring the human condition.

King Lear, William Shakespeare

King Lear is a renowned tragedy penned by the great William Shakespeare. It vividly portrays the tragic downfall and gradual descent into madness of the titular character. King Lear, in a fateful decision, divides his kingdom among two of his three daughters based solely on their flattery towards him, while unjustly disinheriting the youngest and most honest daughter. This act sets in motion a series of events that bring about tragic consequences for all involved. The story is derived from the legend of Lear of Britain, a mythological Pre-Roman Celtic king.

In Iran, this play has been published under various titles such as "شاه لیر" and "لیر شاه". It has been translated and published by different publishing houses like the National Library and Archives of Iran, Vojavan, and Parsa. The first performance of the play took place in 1973 AD and again in 1995 AD.

The play has had multiple translations and editions in Iran. For example, one translation by Javad Paiman was published by the National Library and Archives of Iran in 1960. Another translation by M.A. Beh-Azine was published by Vojavan in 2003. The play has also been translated into Arabic and published in Kuwait.

The plot of the play is divided into five acts, each with several scenes. The first act sets the stage as King Lear makes his fateful decision. The subsequent acts follow the consequences of his actions, as his daughters betray him and he descends into madness. The play culminates in a tragic ending, with King Lear holding the lifeless body of his beloved daughter Cordelia in his arms.

King Lear is a powerful and poignant play that explores themes such as love, loyalty, betrayal, and the consequences of pride. It is a timeless classic that continues to be studied and performed around the world.

Date of update: 12/06/2020; 25/05/2021; A. Sharbiani

A very simple story about an old king who wants to bequeath his kingdom to his three daughters and asks each of them a silly question: Which of you loves me the most?

The most hypocritical were Goneril and Regan, who quickly pleased their father. But the youngest, Cordelia, could not flatter her father, and he became angry with her and banished her from his heart. And if it were not for the King of France who married her, she would have been thrown onto the street.

As the days pass, the daughters turn against their father, and only the youngest daughter saves him. But things change, and the story ends in a tragedy in which the three daughters die, and only the proud old king remains, who could not recognize the truth and sincerity and was defeated by hypocrisy and lies, so he lost everything.

I enjoyed this wonderful play that, like others, enlivens the theater and returns the simple audience to the theater. It also does not lack drama.

Yep, still far and away my favorite Shakespeare play. It has always held a special place in my heart. The characters are so vivid and complex, each with their own unique personalities and motives. The plot is full of twists and turns, keeping me on the edge of my seat from start to finish. The language is simply beautiful, with its rich vocabulary and poetic expressions. It's a play that I can watch or read over and over again and still discover new things each time. I love how Shakespeare explores themes such as love, hate, jealousy, and revenge, making it a timeless classic that is relevant even today. Whether it's the tragic love story of Romeo and Juliet or the political intrigue in Macbeth, there's something for everyone in Shakespeare's plays. And this one, in particular, will always be my absolute favorite.

I was young and we had gone for the Nowruz holidays to the "resort" run by my father. The rooms were small and by the sea. The rooms on the edge were also full of the other two-legged colleagues of my father and their families. We would play together and in the afternoons, we would line up with a bowl through a small window set in the wall to receive our share of lunch. Everyone praised the cooking of the resort's cook. In the afternoons, some of the employees would open volleyball games on top of the rooms. The current situation was such that staying in Tehran and not traveling was an honor.

The TV had shown the film "King Lear" for the holiday. Black and white. My mother excitedly called us to watch. That we could freely encounter a high culture seemed to be a kind of achievement for my mother. During and after the film, she would be busy with her review and would go over the moral lessons of King Lear for us. The most important one was that before our death, we should not divide our property among our children. It has its own appointed time. This small pleasure of King Lear was buried in the black soil. At the same time, one of my mother's nieces had made this mistake. She had put her apartment in the name of her son. Her son-in-law also pushed his mother-in-law out of her house until she softened. A similar story to King Lear in Tehran in the 1970s.

Years later, I saw Kurosawa's "Ran" which is an adaptation of King Lear. I was myself captivated by it. That scene where the half-mad old man comes down from his castle. Behind him, the castle is burning. I also took the film for my father and watched it with him once. He wanted me to make a copy for him on a CD. I didn't understand why I was captivated by the film and didn't understand my father's interest. Especially since most of the time he would watch my recommended films half-heartedly. As if with his indifference, he could also color his relationship with me.

A little later, I saw the BBC theater. It was of the 1980s and was closely committed to the text.

Lear doesn't understand the words of his daughters. He doesn't understand the words of his two naughty daughters and not that of Cordelia who is kind. It soon becomes clear that the love of his two eldest daughters was a lie and Lear didn't understand. He also didn't correctly understand the loving words of his youngest daughter, thought she was worthless and expelled her because of those words and deprived her of the inheritance. This "not understanding" is two-sided. Lear gradually goes crazy. The connection between the two generations, the connection between him and his children, is completely severed from beginning to end. There is no connection.

Even Lear's regret for expelling his youngest daughter is completely "internal". No word is exchanged between them to clear the air. Lear only realizes his mistake at a certain place, on that dark stormy night when his two eldest daughters have not given him a way. Regarding my relationship with my parents, which I think I also see a similar situation. Our words never turned into a connection and understanding. Every youth must have this feeling. With the aging of parents too, when the conditions get worse. Lear is the epitome of this drama, the display is also the story of his aging and the decline of his mind and the subsequent complete disappearance of the connection. I think what attracted my father to Kurosawa's film was the same. He saw himself in Lear. Surely he also saw us in the place of Lear's children, now not as cruel, but a wide ocean of "not understanding" was spread between us and him.

The two cruel daughters who have taken the property and driven the old king out of his house are also in cahoots in their mischief. They both have husbands but gradually both fall in love with the bastard Edmund. The two sisters with their devilish plans have led the entire army of the country into a war and in the meantime, Goneril's monologue with herself is shocking: "I prefer to start a war until this sister of hers [Edmund] separates her from me." This single sentence is one of Shakespeare's unique insights into the human soul for me. A clever and appropriate reminder about the displacement of human desires on the triangle of "power-love-wealth".

It is not clear where Edmund the bastard's problem is. His bastardy partly justifies his stinginess and meanness but not all of it. All this stinginess and meanness in one "human" is not real, it is unrealistic. Like Iago in Othello. However, his existence is necessary for the progress of the drama. As if more than being a "real" person, he is a symbol of absolute evil. His father too probably should be punished for the crime of this old pleasure, that is, conceiving a bastard son. Shakespeare also does not yield to anything less than the most intense, oldest, and most symbolic taboos: gouging out two eyes. A kind of literary tribute to Sophocles. Of course, a little "more earthly"; Oedipus became blind for his unknown sin, but Shakespeare blinds Gloucester, that is, the father of the criminal Edmund, for the crime of adultery and breaking the holy matrimonial bed.

For me too, the charm of Lear is mostly this drama of aging and decline. From here I say that I didn't have a specific plan to read Lear. At the end of Proust's novel, when I encountered the description of the aging of one of the characters (Prince de Guermantes), I involuntarily remembered Lear and his glorious downfall. This translation was also free and available on the Internet. It seemed to be translated from French. It wasn't bad either. Now, we take it that all its English nuances have not been transferred, which of course probably bringing all of them in is an impossible task.

This is one of my favorite Shakespeare plays.

In college honors English at U. Tennessee Knoxville, I unexpectedly came across a dissertation that compared the epic and the tragic, using Lear and Milton's Paradise Lost as templates.

Among all the papers in English class, there might never have been a more blatant example of pure nonsense and far-fetched logic. I think I received a B-, perhaps because my instructor was concerned about whether my medications had taken effect.

Nevertheless, in the process of writing the literary testimony of my ignorance, I had to read Lear and have been captivated ever since. I have read it several times and seen it performed whenever possible, most notably Ian McKellan's magnificent rendition.

For me, Edmund remains an archetypal villain who rivals Darth Vader and Satan. In my opinion, any list of the greatest villains is incomplete without Gloucester's bastard.

I might as well tell you right away that it's a crazy story. In this story, the psychological depth of the characters is absent. King Lear, feeling old, decides to share his kingdom with his three daughters. In exchange, he demands that they tell him which one loves him the most. His two eldest daughters, Goneril and Regan, comply without hesitation. They flatter the king, saying they love their father more than anything else. Oh, how convenient for their husbands! But Cordelia, the youngest daughter and the king's favorite, refuses to play along. She limits herself to saying that she loves the king, but perhaps, the day she gets married, her love will be divided. As a result, she is disinherited and driven out of the kingdom. The way is now clear for the ambitious Goneril and Regan to take over.

It is a play about power, about love, about whether love can be bought or not. It is a play full of twists and turns and unexpected events. The characters' actions and decisions lead to a series of tragic consequences. King Lear's blindness to the true nature of his daughters and his own pride ultimately cost him his kingdom and his sanity. Goneril and Regan's greed and ambition lead to their downfall as well. Cordelia, on the other hand, remains true to herself and her values, but at a great cost.

This play explores the complex relationships between parents and children, between power and love, and between truth and lies. It shows how easily people can be deceived by flattery and how quickly power can corrupt. It is a powerful and thought-provoking play that has endured for centuries.

Dear friends, hello.

Today we are going to talk about "King Lear", the work of the greatest playwright in the world, "William Shakespeare"; an absolutely unique and unparalleled work in terms of form and content.

Form:

In my opinion, Shakespeare did not write "King Lear" for the theater. This work was written for literary reading and cinema. Because only the human mind and cinematic techniques can express and perhaps overcome the acting difficulties of this work to some extent. I don't think in the context of a play, anyone can properly present this volume of character processing for each of the characters (especially King Lear).

The form of "King Lear" may be different from other works of Shakespeare. In terms of:

The number of characters (in this work, the number of characters is relatively large).

The cuts that are made from one scene to another.

The number of one-page scenes (which is more in this work than in other works).

The plot line.

The genre of the story.

The type of prose chosen for the work.

The presence of the most diverse characters among all the plays (the character of Cordelia).

And perhaps other aspects that I have overlooked.

All of these aspects help to create a more accurate content than what we have in mind.

Content:

Perhaps the content of this work is such that it led the famous French writer "Honoré de Balzac" to write a play called "Père Goriot" about a hundred and seventy years later and achieve fame and reputation in literature with that work.

Remember "Père Goriot" and the sacrifices he made for his unknown daughters, and now remember the forgiveness of King Lear and his immoral daughters.

How much similarity? I believe there is definitely a reason.

We are not saying that it is a copy or a quote. Absolutely not. As I mentioned before, "inspiration" is different from "copying and quoting".

The content of "King Lear", unlike other tragedies of Shakespeare, does not have a murder and revenge as the beginning of the story.

The story is told entirely in the context of fatherhood and the world of fathers, and is based on this pillar.

•°• One tragedy? Or three tragedies?!

Is this really one tragedy or three tragedies?!

In my opinion, it is three tragedies.

We see the first tragedy in the very first scene on the first page. The moment Cordelia is banished by her father.

Well, this scene has the power to be the beginning and the last scene of the play to be the end of this first tragedy.

The second tragedy is the story of "Gloucester", "Edmund" and "Edgar". The story of these three characters is completely a tragedy and a real tragedy.

And the third tragedy is the story of "Edmund's wife and Regan and Goneril", who dies in a tragic and unfulfilled love.

All three tragedies, in the form of one story, artistically, and with a rhythm, move forward so that you do not lose the plot line of any of them.

In conclusion, the tragedy of "King Lear" by "William Shakespeare" is a precious work that should be read and will remain eternal.

Undoubtedly, this work will take its place among the best plays in the history of mankind.

It is not easy to avoid the parallel between King Lear and the inner king who mediates for us. When the (inner) king decides to abdicate his kingdom, then the most insidious insecurities that seek validation emerge. What is a king without his kingdom after all? Those who tell him the truth are those who seem threatening in the eyes of the king. They are the ones who undermine the fantastic edifice. Facing the threat of losing this edifice, the "king" chooses the eulogies (personified by two of his three daughters) that validate his past self. In this fabricated validation of his past self, the king gives away parts of his kingdom to the forces that maintain this falsehood. These parts that maintain the false world begin to be filled with emotions that shatter the inner world. Jealousy, envy, intrigues, grief, pain, and disappointment take the place of unity that hears in the name of love. The past self demands validation and finds it only in the past. When all is lost, the jester appears as a faithful exponent of the truth. Humor as a transformative power comes to fill the void. In a parallel action, the Earl of Gloucester, in a moment of intense intrigue, loses his eyes. His enemies pluck them out (perhaps it was better for him), and then he manages to recognize the truth with the eyes of his soul this time. The deception of the senses emerges as a stepping stone to the revelation of the truth. Against the obvious again, the intense symbolism of the work that is added even through the filters of today leads thought to the inner depths. Beyond the superficial perception of phenomena, such texts give the impulses for the reexamination of the reader's inner kingdom and prompt him - against divide and rule - to govern what is within him with wisdom.

One day, perhaps, I will manage to find the time and summon the energy to pen some exquisitely thought out, gracefully composed, and profoundly insightful and informative reviews of Shakespeare's greatest plays. I will strive to afford them at least a modicum of the respect that they so richly deserve.

In the meantime, I am presenting a few very hastily conceived ideas regarding what are undoubtedly the greatest (English language) literary works for the stage ever penned.

The majority of Shakespeare's 37 or 38 plays (depending on whom you ask) are imbued with sheer brilliance. However, if pressed to select the greatest, I would proffer the following:

Hamlet, King Lear, Richard III, Macbeth, Much Ado About Nothing, Othello, and Merchant of Venice.

These plays are all transcendent in their splendor and should be witnessed by all. I emphasize the word'seen' because although these plays are widely read, studied, analyzed, and pored over, ultimately, all works for the stage are not written to be merely read but to be performed, watched, and relished.

So, why are these plays great?

All of human thought is encapsulated here. Everything concerning the subtleties of the human condition, in all its majestic glory and awful hideousness, is captured, expressed, and delineated. Shakespeare traverses the gamut from love to hate, from life to death, and everything in between – revenge, jealousy, avariciousness, ambition, vanity, mercy, passion, lust, deceit, humor, gluttony, pride, sorrow, despair, wrath, sloth, vainglory, religion, superstition, bravery, and cowardice – to name just a few. And he does it with such clarity, such power, such poetry, and such perfection.

When I was 'taught' or rather 'force-fed' Shakespeare at school, I understood very little and enjoyed even less. For instance, the purpose and effect of the iambic pentameter only become evident in performance and when performed well, as opposed to being read poorly and taught tiresomely within the sterile confines of the English literature classroom. To delight in and be carried away by the rhythm and poetry of Shakespeare, one doesn't even need to be cognizant of the concept of the iambic pentameter. Nor does the learning and reciting of often quoted (and misquoted) stock Shakespearian lines serve any real purpose other than as a memory test. While I'm sure this isn't everyone's experience of Shakespeare at school, for me, it certainly had the effect of completely alienating me from not only Shakespeare but from any classical literature/drama whatsoever.

It was only when, at the age of 18, I found myself inexplicably in the theatre at Stratford upon Avon, watching the RSC brilliantly perform 'Much Ado About Nothing', and was utterly absorbed and transported to I know not where, that my perspective was utterly transformed. Since then (and it has taken me around 30 years), I have now finally watched all 38 of Shakespeare's plays – some as many as a dozen or more times.

The utter perfection of a play like 'Hamlet' means that it can be witnessed countless times in countless ways and can be so very different depending on the direction, the actors, the interpretation – and yet still remain faithful to the original brilliant play that Shakespeare wrote. There is simply so much life in all of Shakespeare's plays – as timeless and relevant today as they were when first written so very long ago.

Shakespeare holds up a mirror to our very existence and challenges us to look, to see, to feel, to hear, to think, to enjoy, to be transported, to be part of something, to laugh, to cry, to be excited, to be invigorated, to wonder…

To anyone who has had a similarly discouraging and alienating experience of Shakespeare's written word – don't give up. Try again. Go and watch a live performance if you possibly can.

Quite simply: These plays are towering poetic works of truly unassailable and staggering artistic and literary genius.

A live, abridged dramatization of the Shakespearean classic tragedy 'King Lear' brings this timeless tale to life. The character of King Lear was a medieval adaptation inspired by Leir of Britain from Geoffrey of Monmouth's 'Historia Regum Britanniae'. In reality, Monmouth's Leir lived in Celtic or Pre-Roman Britain.

The story of King Lear is a deeply human one, encompassing love, honor, loyalty, deceit, jealousy, fragility, and despair. In the opening act, when King Lear abdicates his kingdom among his three daughters, he unknowingly sets in motion a series of events that seal his fate in ways he could never have imagined. Confident in his legacy and believing he has secured a comfortable retirement by strengthening his bond with his children, he instead reveals his arrogance and ignorance of the intense sibling rivalry that will soon endanger his life.

The actors in this audio drama are truly outstanding. The actor who portrays King Lear delivers a highly theatrical and stellar performance. If you have a penchant for old movies with British or Aristocratic accents, you are sure to love this adaptation. In conclusion, King Lear is a must-recommend for all. It has been adapted countless times in various formats, proving its enduring popularity and status as a truly timeless tale.

\\n  \\n
Edwin Austin Abbey (1852–1911) Cordelia's Farewell, King Lear, Act I, Scene I [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons
(Cordelia, stands at the center, abandoned by her father. King Lear exits at the right, with entourage. The king of France (supportive of Cordelia) kisses her hand. To the left Cordelia's sisters Regan and Goneril stand defiant in their conspiracy against Cordelia and their father.)