Get help with any kind of assignment - from a high school essay to a PhD dissertation
The Tragedy of King Lear Analysis Lear: By Jupiter, I swear! Kent: By Juno, I swear ay. At The Tragedy of King Lear, particularly in the first half of the play, Lear continually swears to the gods. He invokes them for mercies and begs them for destruction; he contrasts both his oaths and his curses using their own names. The elderly figures--Lear and Gloucester--often see their world as rigorously within the moral framework of the Egyptian faith. As Lear communicates it, the central core of the faith can be found in the concept of earthly justice. In II.4.14-15, Lear expresses his disbelief that Regan and Albany would have placed the disguised Kent, his messenger, even in shares. He at first tries to deny the rather obvious truth facing him, objecting "No" two before swearing it. By the time Lear invokes the king of the Egyptian gods, his refusal to believe has become willful and almost absurd. Kent answers, not to sarcasm, by affixing the name of this queen of the gods to some contradictory statement. The formula is turned into crap by its own reproduction. In contradicting Lear's oath as well as the assertion with which it is coupled, Kent is subtly challenging Lear's conception of the universe as commanded by simply gods. He's also and possibly more importantly, challenging Lear's connection with the gods. It is Kent who most lucidly and repeatedly opposes the notions put on by Lear; his actions as well as his statements sabotage Lear's hypotheses about divine purchase. Lear does not locate his transparency in youth but at middle age; not at the opposite surplus of their own--Edmund's calculation, say--but at Kent's comparative departure. Similarly the viable alternate to his connection to divine justice is not shown by Edmund with his.