Feminism in Lear (1 Viewer)

[NickyP]

Does anyone know any scenes that are good references for a feminist reading apart from the opening? and any mad ideas for staging a feminist, new histrocist or family reading??

thank you for any pointers!

 

[mercurydrinker]

I suck at Lear, but I think the scene where Goneril and Regan refuse to let Lear have shelter, unless he gives up his knights, is a good scene.

For instance McLuskie sees a connection between female insubordination of male authority and anarachy and suggest that this link has a misogynist emphasis, or some shit...

 

[zemaj]

When Lear curses females with that "dry up your womb" speach.

Also generally quoting G or R being cruel to Lear showing how females are presented either as saints or devils.

-zemaj

 

[NickyP]

hey thanks a bunch for all this help....what acts and scenes are these though?

 

[Milly]

Yeah, like zemaj said, talk about the whore/virgin dichotomy. Eg. compare Lear's "sulphurous pit" speech and all the animal imagery with his quote about Cordelia: "Her voice was ever soft, gentle and low, an excellent thing in a woman." (That incorporates the techniques you were asking about too.)

 

[NickyP]

do you think I will need specific acts and scenes or can i jut bring up general points from throughout that make Lear look mean and G+R appear justified and logical..??

 

[mercurydrinker]

The question might ask you to do two specific scenes.

So yes you need to find specific scenes....

 

[NickyP]

can you pleaes tell me what scene the dry up your womb speech is in and that sulfurous pit one...
man m i really screwed?

 

[chanfky]

"Into her womb convey sterility, dry up in her the organs of increase" is in Act 1 Scene 4

 

[BlackJack]

Sulphurous pit - 4:5
This one is... well... harder to understand... but Lear's crazy anyway at this point.
edit: line 103 onwards.

 

[GlittaStar]

I didn't know we had to refer to specific critics until a little while ago... yeah i know....
I noticed that Mecurydrinker mentioned McLuskie...does anyone know of any others, particularly with feminist and freudian readings?......if you could please tell me some quotes from these critics....i hope i'm not asking too much, but i feel like i'm in some deep shit here!

 

[Jason]

Hmmm.... I'm not being very helpful here, but what new histrocist and freudian readings about? Kathleen Mcluskie's essay was "the Patrichal Bard" if that helps anyone.

 

[elfgal]

freudian is the weirdo psychoanalytical one where you crap on about how lear had a reverse oedipus complex about cordelia...new historicist, well they crap on about how you have to understand the context in which the play was produced before you understand the play...in other words it's evil and you have to read too much -don't do it

 

[Jason]

Thanks - I'll stick with my nihlist and christian readings!

 

[Milly]

In a sentence, new historicist is about how the state's power structure (ie. the chain of being) represses individual freedoms - it's actually quite good to compare to a traditional reading.

 

[BlackJack]

If it is ever possible this will be answered before the test:
Is new historicist like How Lear, representing the king, oppresses individuals because he can demand so much and is so powerful? Also, the indiviuals can't express their own opinions because of possible treason?

 

[Milly]

No, new historicism is about how all individuals (including Lear) who step out of their state-sanctioned role pay heavily for it. The state hierarchy is beyond any person's control (and this links up directly with the Elizabethan's belief in the "Chain of Being" - a hierarchy not even under the king's control but God's). Consider this:

- Lear as king has a responsibility to maintain stability. When he divides the kingdom, he causes instability. He dies.
- Cordelia fails to carry out her role as a subject and as a daughter when she refuses to participate in the love test. She dies.
- Gonerill and Regan usurp the throne and do all sorts of mean things. They die.
- Edmond does the same. He dies.

On the other hand:
- Edgar maintains his integrity throughout the play (although he has to resort to subterfuge, this is only because the order has been turned upside-down). He survives and is rewarded with kingship.
- Albany, although somewhat henpecked at the beginning, asserts authority over Gonerill and Regan and brings Edmond to account for his actions. He survives.
- Kent is loyal to Lear to the end, even when he is banished and undergoes a lot of suffering to serve his master. He survives.

A new historicist reading would sympathise somewhat with Gonerill, Regan and Edmond, traditionally damned characters, because the state-sanctioned order precludes them from getting power in any other way (although it would not openly support what they did).

Hope that helps

 

[BlackJack]

Thanks, I thought I had a critic somewhere deep in my notes that said this. Now I have another interpretation (that I can understand) to write about and maybe a critic to support it