It has been a while since I has posted anything so mostly out of guilt more than having anything particular to say about King Lear, I will take a few moments to make a few remarks.
Firstly, regarding my final paper:
Admittedly, and most Shakespeare scholars might call this sacrilege, I find myself more attracted to the sonnets than to the plays. As such, I am going to try to gear my final paper towards the sonnets; more specifically, I want to look at the rhetoric of the sonnets, mostly from an Aristotelian view of logic with perhaps a few more contemporary sources. Then, hopefully I will be able to take Hugh's essay, and perhaps Turner's (though this one doesn't immediately come to mind with regards to language) and make some comments/connections with regards to the sonnets, rhetoric, and language.
Preliminary commentary on Lear:
"Nothing comes of nothing; mend your reply or mar your fortune." (Maybe not exactly right; but again, working from memory)
I can't help but to jump right into to Turner's "School of Night": "A plague makes nothing matter..." Cordelia is the the victim of nothing throughout Lear. Her words seem to constitute "nothing" and everything at the same time. "Nothing, my Lord." We literally see nothing escape from her mouth and this is what initiates the conflict of the entire play. I feel like this is exactly what Turner meant when he talks about nothing being able to balance a Globe on a scale.
This commentary seems superficial, but it is just what is on the top of my head, I'll certainly have to spend some of Easter Weekend reading over some critical thought on the play with regards to language.
Also, another thought that for some reason just came to mind was the setting of the play: England before the Aristocracy. I just must ask: why this date? why not anywhere else? why not any other time?
No comments:
Post a Comment