George Washington University

King Lear: The Disguised and Deceived

Author(s): Marcia Holly
Source: Shakespeare Quarterly, Vol. 24, No. 2 (Spring, 1973), pp. 171-180
Published by: Folger Shakespeare Library in association with George Washington University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2868855
Accessed: 18/09/2010 08:31
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=folger.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

George Washington University and Folger Shakespeare Library are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to Shakespeare Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

KingLear:The Disguisedand Deceived

MARCIA HOLLY

S everyreaderof Shakespeareknows by now, King Lear is

an irrationalfigmentof critics'imaginations."The thingitself"is as lostas Gloucesterat Dover-but thereis no Edgar
*
to ""hearthe beaten drum" and bestow us with a friend.
7i3
"Fortune,thatarrantwhore,"has inveigledcriticsinto compromisingpositions,has set them in opposingtentsso that
instead of becomingreconciledwith each other,they become diametrically
opposed. At the moment,thereare two respectablecamps of "Learists"-to
changethe metaphorand coin a word.Many recentcriticsare aligningthemselveswith one of the two fundamentalphilosophicpositionsin interpreting
Lear: one camp holds that essence precedesexistence(Maynard Mack and
Virgil Whitakermightbe called its leaders),the other(led by Walter Kaufmann,David Horowitz,and thePolishcriticJanKott) is certainthatexistence
precedesessence.Hardly so presumptuous
as to thinkI have heard the beaten
drum,I hope merelyto suggesta possibledirectionfromwhich the beating
mightbe coming,althoughadmittedlymy ears are more closelyattunedto
theexistencethanto theessencecamp.
"The moral content[of drama] is thematicmaterial,which, like everything that entersinto a work of art, has to serve to make the primaryillusion and articulatethe patternof 'felt life' the artistintends."' Arnold
Kettle's commentson the novel are similarto Susanne Langer's on drama.
He writes,"It must be emphasized that the two elements-life and pattern-are not separate.If we ask of any particularnovel that 'lives' the
question, 'what is it that gives it vitality?'we shall find that the vitalityis inseparablefromthenovelist'sviewof life."2
Kettle'sthesisis not confinedto the novel: its implicationsfor drama are
evident.Althoughhis termsdiffer,he is writingabout that ineffable"moral
order" which A. C. Bradley suggestsis the common substanceof Shakespeareantragedy,or the orderof natureand grace to which Virgil Whitaker
finds"Shakespeare'sview of tragedycompelledhim . . . to relatehis fundamental action,"' or the "motive-force
of artisticenergy. . . which perhaps
Keats was seeking to expresswhen he referredto Shakespeare's'negative
capability."'
It is because Kettle's thesisis so fundamentalto artisticjudgmentthat
criticscontinueto discussShakespeare'sview of life. If the end of criticism
SusanneK. Langer,Feelingand Form(New York,I953), p. 326.
ArnoldKettle,An Introduction
to the EnglishNovel (New York, i960), I, I4.
3 VirgilWhitaker,The Mirrorup to Nature(San Marino,Calif.,i965), p. I54.
4 Kettle,p. I 83.
1

I72

SHAKESPEARE QUARTERLY

is value judgment,the criticalprocesscan then be likenedto a trial and the

various analyses approximate prosecutingor defending testimoniesdesigned to reveal knowledge leading toward understanding.The basis of
and precedentforjudgmentis then,as I see it, the vitalityof the world view
presentedin a creativeendeavor.
in what we may be forgivenforcalling
This paper is one more testimony
"the trial of Shakespeare."In no way am I attemptingto be definitiveor
conclusive.My intentionis merely to suggest that there is a neglected
elementin King Lear which,if studiedat lengthin connectionwith Shakespeare'sotherplays,may contributeto an eventualjudgmentabout Shakespeare'sworld view and vitality.In my opinion,Shakespeare'stragicvision
which in turnis
in Lear is integrallyrelatedto deceptionand self-deception
inseparablefromhis use of the device of disguise.My assumptionis that
in the plays;
thereis an inverseproportionbetweenmasks and self-deception
i.e., characterswho don masks most frequentlypracticethe least amount of
and in general are characterswho see themselvesmost honself-deception
estlyand clearly.
This relationshipbetween the disguised and deceived is, I believe, an
element of Shakespeare'sexistentialhumanism.5Existential humanism is
not irreconcilablewith the traditional"Elizabethan world picture" which
ordereduniverse.Horowitz, for example, shows that
assumes a structured,
in Shakespeare'swork the dichotomies(of trothand truth,faith and cognition,values and reality,etc.) disruptnaturalorderand bring about chaos
which can only be rectifiedby the reasonedwill of the individualto bring
toward
himselfinto unity,to make of himselfa Being, to act authentically
and acceptanceof Self as part of a communityand a unity.
self-recognition
WalterKaufmannexplainsthathe viewsShakespearefroman unconventional
but thatShakespeare'sworld view is similarto the humanismof
perspective,
the Greek tragedianswho also recognizedthat "Life is its own reward; and
if death should be the wages of sin, it still need not be ignominious.Courbetweendeathand death."6
age will notsaveyou,butthereis a difference
close to
The psychologywhich seems to be impliedin Lear is remarkably
that articulatedby Jean-PaulSartre. One of Paul Tillich's statements,in
conjunctionwithRollo May's comments,gives us a clue to reconcilingthe ir5 The term"existential
humanism"is used here in the sense definedby David Horowitzand
An ExistentialView (New
ArnoldKettle,and forthe reasonstheygive. Horowitz,in Shakespeare:
. . . I mean simplya view that proves itselfin the
York, I965), writes:"By 'existentialism'
or theologicaldiscourse.. . . I have
realityof livedexistence,not in theprinciplesof metaphysical
chosen to stressthe 'existential'ratherthan the 'humanist'characterof Shakespeare'soutlook,
becausethe word 'humanism'oftencarrieswith it overtonesof an easy optimismthat is absent
in a
to the collectionShakespeare
fromShakespeare'swork" (p. ix). Kettle,in his Introduction
ChangingWorld (New York, i964), writesthat"The humanisttradition. . . implies,rather,an
evolvingoutlook which has developed with man's increasingknowledgeand controlof the
and the
both [the sixteenthworldhe lives in and henceof his own destinies.What distinguishes
humanist]and bringsthem into the same tradition,is a fundamentaltough
twentieth-century
confidencein the capacityof men (though not necessarilythe individualman) to master-with
errorand tragedy-theparticularproblemsand challengeswith which, at
whateverdifficulty,
stagetheirworldhas reached,theyare faced"(p. II).
theparticular
6 WalterKaufmann,
(Boston,I959), p. 4.
FromShakespeareto Existentialism

KING LEAR: THE DISGUISED AND DECEIVED

I73

rational chaotic world dramatized by contemporaryplaywrightsand the

chaosofLear's world.May quotesTillich'scomment:
doctrineof freedomdoes Sartre's
Only on the basis of an essentialist
natureis his powerto createhimself]
[thatman's particular
statement
can existenhave any meaning.Neitherin theologynor in philosophy
elementwithinan
tialismlive by itself.It can onlyexistas a contrasting
framework.
essentialist
May thenexplains:
or a freeindividualwithout
In otherwords,you cannothave freedom
againstwhich)theinin which(or in thecase of defiance,
somestructure
dividualacts.
all throughSartre. . . thatthereis a meanThere is an assumption
in lifeand evenin Westernbourgeoissocietyto make it
ingfulstructure
againstthem.7
so powerfully
thatsucha oneas Sartrecanfight
possible
Thus the initial discredenceabout comparing the psychologyof Shakespeare and that of Sartremight be allayed if we accept this fundamental
insightof Tillich and May.
Mythic,traditional,"essentialist,"and Marxist critics agree that Lear
createschaos.8 They disagree,however,as to what motivatesthe disintegrated,chaotic world dramatizedin the tragedy.My position is that the
world view dramatized in King Lear, particularlymeaningfultoday beand social disintegracause it treatsdramaticallythe personalfragmentation
tion which is so evidentin the twentiethcentury,can be illuminatedby applyingSartre'spsychologyto Shakespeare'suse of the device of disguise.
Sartre's psychology-is based on his notion of nmauvaisefoz, or "bad
faith,"as it is usuallytranslated:
of a personthathe showssignsof bad faithor that
We say indifferently
grantthatbad faithis a lie to oneWe shallwillingly
he lies to himself.
the lie to oneselffromlyingin
self,on conditionthatwe distinguish
will agreeto that.But thisnegawe
attitude,
general.Lyingis a negative
itself;it aimsonlyat thetranscendent.
tiondoesnotbearon consciousness
The essenceof thelie impliesin factthattheliar actuallyis in complete
possessionof the truthwhichhe is hiding.A man does not lie about
of; he doesnotlie whenhe spreadsan errorof which
whathe is ignorant
is
the
dupe;hedoesnotliewhenheis mistaken....9
he himself
nor a philosopher,dramatizedthis phase
Shakespeare,neithera psychologist
in
various
plays by using the device of disguise.
of Sartrean psychology
Writingof TwelfthNight, JosephSummersremarkson the importanceof
and that Antonio
masks. He findsthat Viola's mask is for self-preservation
trans. Hazel E.
to Jean-PaulSartre'sExistentialPsychoanalysis,
7 Rollo May, Introduction
quoted by May on p. 7, is from"ExistentBarnes(Chicago, i962), pp. 7, 8. Tillich'sstatement,
and Psychiatry.
Psychology
ReviewofExistential
tialismand Psychotherapy,"
Papers
Frye,"The Tragediesof Nature and Fortune,"Stratford
8 See, for example,Northrop
on Shakespeare,ed. B. A. W. Jackson(Toronto,i96i), pp. 38-55; A. C. Bradley,Shakespearean
Tragedy (New York, i965), pp. 200-74; Whitaker,p. I37; MaynardMack, King Lear in Our
Time (Berkeley,Calif., i965), p. 85; and Kettle,"From Hamlet to Lear," in Shakespearein a
ChangingWorld,pp. I46-72.
9 Jean-PaulSartre,Beingand Nothingness,
trans.Hazel E. Barnes(New York, i956), p. 48.

SHAKESPEARE QUARTERLY

I74

almost loses his life because he fails to assume a disguise.Those who assume actual disguises-Viola and Feste-do not confusethe mask with the
person. Both are knowledgeableabout themselvesand penetratethe appearancesof the others.Viola, Summers writes,differs"from Orsino and
to blindnessand passion,but in the clarity
Olivia not in any invulnerability
and accepts her state.Reason is
she
recognizes
and simplicitywith which
The disguisedhere
irrationality.'0
her
admits
rationally
not abandoned: she
are like Sartre'sliar who is in fact "in completepassessionof the truth
whichhe is hiding."
been recognizedthat Kent and Edgar-the two characIt has frequently
in the sense which
tersin Lear who don actual masks-are self-transcending
Sartreintends.They do in factnegatetheirbeingsand become transcendent.
They achievethe greatnessof soul examinedin Shakespeare'sSonnetXCIV.1"
Kent and Edgar do not need mediatorsto become identicalwith theirtotalities. They are able to disguisethemselvesto othersbecause theythemselves
know exactlywho theyare; theyalso understandtheirunitywith natureand
Edgar knows intuitively,
remainconstantto the purposestheyset themselves.
or immediately(i.e., withoutthe need fora "mediator"in Sartre'sterms),that
Menmustendure
Theirgoinghence,evenas theircominghither:
Ripenessis all: comeon.
(V. ii. 9_-II)

The ripenessof whichEdgar speaks is readinessto act, to avow one's Being

throughaction, and thereforehe insiststhat Gloucester"come on." Moving others,Edgar remains unmoved,knowing that "matterand impertinency [are] mix'd,"and thatthereis "reasonin madness"(IV. vi. I78-79). Nor
does he lose sightof the fact that "Bad is the trade that must play fool to
sorrow"(IV. i. 40).
Edgar also faces that anguish which, accordingto Sartre,is the apprehensionof the Self as freedom,the realizationthat nothingrelievesthe authentichuman being from the necessityof continuallychoosing. Yet he
is able to confrontthe anguish in order to transcend-theprocesswhereby
one goes beyondthe given in a furtherprojectionof himself.Edgar's transcendenceis evidentin the followingsoliloquy:
ourwoes,
seebearing
Whenwe ourbetters
ourfoes.
thinkourmiseries
We scarcely
mosti' themind,
suffers
Whoalonesuffers
Leavingfreethingsandhappyshowsbehind:
10 JosephH. Summers,"The Masks of TwelfthNight," Univ. of Kansas CityReview,XXII
(AutumnI955), 29.
"Shakespeare'sunchristian
11 This sonnetwas quoted by Kaufmann(p. 4 ff.) to exemplify
ideal, which was also the ideal of Nietzsche,"which the latterexpressedas "the Roman Caesar
of this
with Christ'ssoul," in The Will to Power. I am indebtedto Kaufmann'sinterpretation
to a greatnessof soul which can be traced,as
sonnetand agree that Shakespeareis referring
Kaufmanndoes, fromAristotleto Nietzsche.It also expressesSartre'sconceptof transcendence,
however.
works are fromthe Hardin Craig editionof The Complete
12 All citationsto Shakespeare's

Works(Chicago,196i).

KING LEAR: THE DISGUISED AND DECEIVED

175

Butthenthemindmuchsufferance
dotho'erskip,
Whengriefhathmates,andbearingfellowship.
How lightandportable
mypainseemsnow,
Whenthatwhichmakesmebendmakesthekingbow,
He childedas I father'd!
Tom,away!
Markthehighnoises;andthyself
bewray,
Whenfalseopinion,whosewrongthought
defilesthee,
In thyjustproof,
repealsand reconciles
thee.
Whatwillhapmoreto-night,
safe'scapetheking!
(III. Vi. 109-21)
the anguish of mental suffering,
Afterconfronting
Edgar negates himself
forthetimebeingand devoteshiscompassionto theKing.
Like Edgar, Kent is undeceivedabout himselfand his motives.He exfromthefirstscene,tellingLear:
hibitsforesight
Think'stthouthatdutyshallhavedreadtospeak,
bows?To plainnesshonour'sbound,
Whenpowerto flattery
Reversethydoom;
Whenmajesty
stoopstofolly.
check
And,in thybestconsideration,
Thishideousrashness:
answermylifemyjudgement,
doesnotlovetheeleast;
Thyyoungest
daughter
Norarethoseempty-hearted
whoselowsound
nohollowness.
Reverbs
(L. i. 149-56)

and
Kill thyphysician,
andthefeebestow
Uponthyfouldisease.Revokethydoom;
Or,whilstI canventclamourfrommythroat,
I'll telltheethoudostevil.
(I. i. i67-70)
Edgar dons his disguise for the stated purpose of self-preservation,
but
in the same soliloquyin which he gives his reasonhe makes it evidentthat
he is temporarily
negatinghimself(the firststep toward Being in Sartre's
philosophy):
I heardmyself
proclaim'd;
Andbythehappyhollowofa tree
Escapedthehunt.No portis free;no place,
Thatguard,andmostunusualvigilance,
Does notattendmytaking.WhilesI may'scape,
I willpreserve
andam bethought
myself:
To takethebasestandmostpoorest
shape
Thateverpenury,
incontempt
ofman,
Brought
nearto beast:myfaceI'll grimewithfilth;
Blanketmyloins;elfall myhairinknots;
Andwithpresented
nakedness
out-face
The windsandpersecutions
ofthesky.
poorTom!
... PoorTurlygod!

SHAKESPEARE QUARTERLY

I76

That'ssomething
yet:EdgarI nothing
am.
(II.

iii. I-I2,

20-2I)

Kent, who masks himselfbeforeEdgar does, also accepts the negationof

himselffora particularpurpose:
Ifbutas wellI otheraccentsborrow,
Thatcanmyspeechdefuse,
mygoodintent
Maycarrythrough
itselfto thatfullissue
ForwhichI razedmylikeness.

(I. iv.1-4)

He becomesthe disguisedprotector,
a role whose implications,
as well as its
are pointed out by M. C. Bradbrook: "the father who
conventionality,
pitieshis children,like the husbandwho pitiesand succourshis erringwife,
must have had a Biblical origin,and Shakespearerecalledthis old tradition
to its firstsignificance."'3In the same essay, Bradbrookpoints out that
"therecould be no such thingas a merephysicaltransformation.
As the body
revealedthe soul, so appearanceshould reveal the truthof identity.A character could be really changed by the assumptionof a disguise" (p. i66).
Thus Kent, as well as Edgar, becomes transcendent
and in harmonywith
himselfwhenhe putson hisdisguise.
Horowitz notesanotherimportantaspectof identitywith respectto The
Tempest: "The sourceof the transformation
of affections
lies in the factof
common humanity,a sense of identitybetween judge and judged, executionerand victim,and a tendernessspringingfromit.""4 His remarkson
The Tempest are equally applicableto Lear. Horowitz notes that Prospero
shares his "kind-ness,"feels afflictions
as othersdo as well as the compassion which he calls a "noblerreason."The compassionjoins with "a grace
of control,subduing flesh,nurturingnature,refiningits savageryand tuning its sense to harmonizewith reason; and thereis a grace of compassion,
an attunementto the passion of others,abandoningvengeancein the face
of atonementand for the sake of at-onement[atone, Horowitz writes,
equals at-one,'to achieveunityor concord'],a gracewhichtunesthe harmony
by which men can prosper"(p. 88.). Both Edgar and Kent achievethis "atonement": the formerwithin the natural order of heredity,the latterin
thesocio-political
orderby beingunitedwithhis King. Kent's King, however,
has committedtoo grave an errorto reach atonement."Amid the turbulence of Lear's last days, Shakespeareso contraststhe substanceof what
Lear actuallywas with the fitfulshadows of what Lear or any man, any
father,any king should be, his almostwillfulmutilationof his identityas a
personis conspicuous."'5
Kent's commentto Lear, "sith thus thou wilt appear" (I. i. i83), is revealing.Lear's "appearing"is part of the King's self-deception,
since he attemptsto be unawareof his appearing.Throughoutthe play,one has the feel13

M. C. Bradbrook,"Shakespeareand the Use of Disguise in ElizabethanDrama," Essaysin

II (April1952),
Criticism,
14

15

i63.

Horowitz,p. 87.
WarrenTaylor,"Lear and theLostSelf,"CollegeEnglish,XXV (April i964),

513.

KING LEAR: THE DISGUISED AND DECEIVED

I77

ing that Lear is aware of his attemptto deceive himselfand that his selfbecausehe actsin bad faith:
deceptionis successful
can notbe thesameforbad faithif this,as we havesaid,is
The situation
bad faithis hidindeeda lie to oneself.To be sure,theone who practices
Bad faith
as trutha pleasinguntruth.
truthor presenting
ing displeasing
of falsehood.Only what changes
thenhas in appearancethe structure
thatI am hiding
is thefactthatin bad faithit is frommyself
everything
the truth.Thus the dualityof the deceiverand the deceiveddoes not
impliesin essencethe unityof a
existhere.Bad faithon the contrary
This does not mean thatit can not be conditioned
singleconsciousness.
of humanrelike all otherphenomena
by theMit-sein[i.e., being-with]
itself
ality,but the Mit-seincan call forthbad faithonlyby presenting
bad faithdoes notcome
surpassing;
whichbad faithpermits
as a situation
One does notundergohis bad faith;one is
fromoutsideto humanreality.
withit;itis nota state.16
notinfected
enableshimto maintainhis sanity.He
ofLear's self-deception
The constancy
becomesmad only afterhe is no longer able to act in bad faith,afterhe
admitsthatif anythingwere to "cracknature'smoulds,all germens[would]
spill at once" (III. ii. 8), and afterhe giveshimselfup-not to transcendencenorthefear"(III. ii.
but to despair:"man's naturecannotcarry/ The affliction
and thisescapeproorder
to
responsibility,
in
escape
lies
to
himself
He
48-49).
vokes his tragedy.Lear's firstspeech is indicativeof the King's deliberate
After Gloucester and Edmund leave to attend Burgundy
self-deception.
and France,Lear says:
ourdarkerpurpose.
we shallexpress
Meantime
... 'tisourfastintent
fromourage;
To shakeall caresandbusiness
whilewe
themon youngerstrengths,
Conferring
crawltowarddeath.
Unburthen'd
(I. i. 37,39-42)
From the startof the play,Lear's intentionis to escape the full meaning
of Being, which is central to Sartre's concept of bad faith. Lear exists
withinthe play as a being in his own right.Althoughthe audiencegains init sees him also as he revealshimsightsinto him throughothercharacters,
selfthroughhis own acts. This point would be irrelevantif it were not for
psychologywith which we are dealing
the fact that the Shakespeare-Sartre
writersadhere.A second
is not the only psychologyto which contemporary
world view is one which Nabokov summarizessuccinctlyin his i965 fore. . . may distinguishthroughmy
word to The Eye: "A seriouspsychologist
soul
dissolutionwhere poor Smurov
a
world
of
crystograms
rain-sparkling
other
in
brains,which in theirturn are
only existsinsofaras he is reflected
placed in the same strange,specularpredicamentas his.""7
in the chaos of his world: a world as
The dissolutionof Lear is reflected
irrationaland upside down as thatof Jonesco'sBald Soprano, for example.
16Sartre,Beingand Nothingness,
p. 49.
Nabokov,The Eye (NewYork,i966), pp. ix-x.
Vladimir

17

SHAKESPEARE QUARTERLY

I78

King Lear is unique in the Shakespearecanon as a studyof chaos, a chaos

Furthermore,
the confusion
which is total and which includes irrationality.
betweenrealityand illusion in Lear is particularlyclose to deceit and deare
ception. The implicationmight be that deception and self-deception
rampantin a chaoticworld-a worldin whichthe chain of being has broken.
The world of the brokenchain is analogous to the post-Nietzschean
"God
is dead" world in which identityis equally confusing.The individualwho
is easilydupedand readilydeceiveshimself.
has losthis identity
Lear's abandoningresponsibility
for himselfand his kingdom and giving up his will to Regan and Gonerilis far more than folly.In i Henry IV,
boththe King and PrinceHal recognizethatthe positionis the man, thatthe
two are inseparable.King Henry rejects his unkinglikebehavior,saying,
"I will from henceforthratherbe myself,
/ Mightyand to be fear'd,than
my condition" (I. iii.5-6). Prince Hal also recognizesthat majestyrefers
my
equally to self and positionwhen he tells his father,"I shall hereafter,
thricegracious lord, / Be more myself"(III. ii. 92-93). By analogy,Lear's
wish to deny his kingshipis a wish to deny Self,to deny his Being. Abandoning Self leads, in Sartreanterms,to subjugation:to being an object to
be manipulated.
The theme of deception and self-deception
'is introduceddramatically
throughdisguiseswhich are not limitedto the wearingof physicalmasks.
In the singlemostimportantwork on the use of disguisein the Renaissance,
BradbrookbroadensV. 0. Freeburg'sconceptionof disguise.She acknowledges that Freeburg'swork has not been superseded,but his concentration
was on disguiseas a dramaticdevice; he conceivedof it only as a change of
personalappearance.His discussionis limitedto disguise as a plot device.
overBradbrook,however,prefers"to define disguise as the substitution,
laying or metamorphosisof dramaticidentity,wherebyone charactersustains two roles. This may involve deliberateor involuntarymasquerade,
mistakenor concealedidentity,
madnessor possession."18
This extendeddefinition
enablesher to treatthe moral-ethical
implications
in
the
concealment
humble
of disguise,and she notes that
garb
heavenly
was the forceopposing infernaldeceit. By analogy,Lear opposes his own
in the Heath Scene, when he achievesthe self-knowledge
that
self-deception
comes with the willing negationof delusion. In that crucial scene, "even
inanimatenatureparticipatesin the confusion,and the stormon the heath
is, for Shakespeare,at once symbolof the tempestwithinLear's mind and
of the agony of outraged nature."'
manifestation
Lear assumes a non-physicaldisguise at the same momentthat he recognizes reality.And so long as he retainshis disguise (in termsof Bradbrook's extendeddefinition),he accepts the truthof his status.He insists,
when still mad and bedecked fantasticallywith flowers,"I am the king
himself."He also accepts the realizationthat "Nature's above art in that
respect,"and knows that he had been flattered"like a dog." In the same
scene (IV. vi.) he recalls that he is "everyinch a king," and accepts his
royalpositionjust as he acceptsthe truthof himselfas old and foolisheven
18

p. i6o.
Bradbrook,

19 Whitaker,
p.

2I2.

KING LEAR: THE DISGUISED AND DECEIVED

I79

when his sanityreturns.Thus when he is rid of his disguise (his madness),

of himself.
he retainshisunderstanding
Althoughhe stilllacksinsightintoCordelia,
Ifyouhavepoisonforme,I willdrinkit.
I knowyoudo notloveme; foryoursisters
donemewrong:
Have,as I do remember,
You havesomecause,theyhavenot.
(IV. vii.72-75)
he does statehis clear awarenessthat he divestedhimselfof his kingdom:
Lear. Am I in France?
In yourown kingdom,
sir.
Kent.
Lear. Do notabuseme.
(IV. vii.76-77)
In termsof the thesisstatedhere, Lear attains self-knowledge
which goes
along with his intangibledisguise. He does not assume a real mask, nor
does he become transcendent.
And althoughhe fails to achieve Being as
king,he achievesit as a man, learningnot only what he has done, but who
he is. His most significant
lesson is "to bear affliction
till it do cryout itself"
(IV. vi.76). As Harriet Dye writes,"Lear's anxietywhen faced with reality
(both anxietyand realitysymbolizedin thestorm)is excruciatingly
intense,yet
he seeksno physicalrefugein thehut.The agonyin Lear's soul would findno
shelterthere;he mustcometo gripswiththetruth."20
The truthLear grasps involves the nature of personal realityand enables him to achieve some human transcendence.
But for Gloucester,who
has neverassumed a disguise,thereis neitheratonementnor redemptionin
terms of transcendence.He is motivated,after being blinded, only by a
death wish,and refusesto accept any responsibility
even for his desiredsuicide:
That thingyou speakof,
I tookitfora man;often'twouldsay
'The fiend,
thefiend:'heledmetothatplace.
(IV. vi.77-79)
Further,he expressesclearlythe wish for non-beingwhich Lear has acted
out:
The kingis mad: howstiff
is myvilesense
ThatI standup,andhaveingenious
feeling
Of myhugesorrows!
BetterI weredistract:
be sever'dfrommygriefs,
So shouldmythoughts
Andwoesbywrongimaginations
lose
ofthemselves.
The knowledge
(IV. Vi. 286-9i)
Although both Lear and Gloucester wish for natural harmony,the
restorationof order is broughtabout by Edgar, Kent, and Albany-primarilyby Edgar, who is most in attunewith the natural,creativeflowand
20

i964),

Theme in King Lear," College English,XXV (April

HarrietDye "The Appearance-Reality
517.

i8o

SHAKESPEARE QUARTERLY

might
mostof theplay.Psychology
who assumesan actualdisguisethrough
betweendisguiseand dehelpexplain,justas thenotionof therelationship
but
of themeand structure;
theconjunction
ceptionmighthelpilluminate,
the tragedyof man'sfragmendramatized
thatShakespeare
it is sufficient
whichleads to personaland social
and renunciation
tation,self-deception,
of our
witnessto theconsequences
chaos.King Lear is indeeda trustworthy
moralchoices.
College
Quinnnipiac