FREE ESSAY ON FALSTAFF AND KING LEAR

FALSTAFF AND KING LEAR

Falstaff and King Lear
Shakespeare's tragedy King Lear is a detailed description of the consequences of one
man's decisions. This fictitious man is Lear, King of England, who's decisions
greatlyalter his life and the lives of those around him. As Lear bears the status of King
heis, as one expects, a man of great power but sinfully he surrenders all of this
power to his daughters as a reward for their demonstration of love towards him. (Cain)
Thisuntimely abdication of his throne results in a chain reaction of events that
send him througha journey of hell. King Lear is a metaphorical description of one man's
journey through hell in order to expiate his sin. As the play opens one can
almost immediately see thatLearbegins to make mistakes that will eventually result in his
downfall. (Neher)
This is the first and most significant of the many sins that he makes in this play. By
abdicating his throne to fuel his ego he is disrupts the great chain of being which
statesthat the King must not challenge the position that God has given him. This
undermining of God's authority results in chaos that tears apart Lear's world.
(Williams)
Leavinghim, in the end, with nothing. Following this Lear begins to banish those around
him that genuinely care for him as at this stage he cannot see beyond the mask
that the evilwear. He banishes Kent, a loyal servant to Lear, and his youngest and
previously most loved daughter Cordelia. (Nixon) This results in Lear surrounding
himself with peoplewho only wish to use him which leaves him very vulnerable attack. This
is precisely what happens and it is through this that he discovers his wrongs
and amends them.Following the committing of his sins, Lear becomes abandoned and
estranged from his kingdom which causes him to loose sanity. While lost in his
grief and self-pity the foolis introduced to guide Lear back to the sane world and to
help find the lear that was ounce lost behind a hundred Knights but now is out in
the open and scared like a littlechild. (Bradley) The fact that Lear has now been pushed
out from behind his Knights is dramatically represented by him actually being
out on the lawns of his castle. Theterrified little child that is now unsheltered is
dramatically portrayed byLear's sudden insanity and his rage and anger is seen through
the thunderous weather that is being experienced. All of this contributes to the
suffering of Lear due to thegross sins that he has committed. The pinnacle of this hell
that
is experienced be Lear in orderto repay his sins is at the end of the play when Cordelia
is killed. Lear says this before he himself dies as he cannot live without his
daughter. (Bradley)
All of this pain that Lear suffered is traced back to the single most important error
that he made. The choice to give up his throne. This one sin has proven to have
massiverepercussions upon Lear and the lives of those around him eventually killing
almost all of those who were involved. And one is left to ask one's self if a single
wrong turn cando this to Lear then what difficult corner lies ahead that may cause
similar alterations inone's life.
There has been many different views on the plays of William Shakespeare and definitions
of what kind of play they were. The two most popular would be the comedy
andthe tragedy. King Lear to some people may be a comedy because they believe that the
play has been over exaggerated. Others would say King Lear was a
tragedy becausethere is so much suffering and chaos. What makes a Shakespearean play a
comedy or a tragedy? King Lear would be a tragedy because it meets all
the requirements of atragedy as defined by Andrew Cecil Bradley. Bradley states that a
Shakespearean tragedy must have to be the story of the hero and that there is
exceptional suffering andcalamity slowly being wornin as well as it being contrasted to
happier times. The play also depicts the troubled parts in his life and eventually
his death that is instantaneous caused by the suffering andcalamity. There is the feeling
of fear in the play as well, that makes men see how blind they are not knowing
when fortune or something else would be on them. (Cain) Thehero must be of a high status
on the chain and the hero also possesses a tragic flaw that initiates the
tragedy. Thefall of the hero is not felt by him alone but creates a chain reaction which
affects everything below him. Henry IV is a very different composition. Falstaff
the main characteris clearly a prankster, and not nearly as many horrible things happen
to him. Falstaff is the character we laugh at, a mock King in Henry IV. Hal is the
ideal King and Falstaffis a Lord of Misrule. Up to certain point Falstaff is merely an
object of pure entertainment. His character is present chiefly for the humor that
arises by showcasing hisludicrous traits. Why should we laugh at a man with a huge belly
and an appetite to match, at the way he suffers on a hot day, his cumbersome
size and the liveliness of hisspirit. His timeless age and his youthful lightness of
heart show his true nature. Why do we find comedy in the enormity of his lies and the
suddenness of their exposure andfrustration. The contrast between his reputation and his
real character, seen most absurdly when, at the mere mention of his name, a
rebel surrenders to him. (Neher) Whatis it about Falstaff that caused us to laugh at
these and many such things? Here we have them poured out in endless profusion
and with that air of careless ease which is sofascination in Shakespeare. But while they
are quite essential to the character, there is much more than just fun in him.
These things by themselves do not explain why,besides laughing at Falstaff, we are made
happy by him and laugh with him. But while they are quite essential to the
character, there is an ugly side of Falstaff, but weoverlook it in light of his great
humor.
The two compositions have humorous parts in them but both are distinctly different. Henry
IV is clearly a comedy with almost all the traits of a comedy while King Lear
isnot as Clear cut but is definitely not either one. Falstaff and King Lear are somewhat
dissimilar. King Lear deals with all of the problems from one of his actions,
abdicationof his throne. Falstaff deals with the situations surrounding the prince and
the different paths he can take with his life. The two characters share a troubled
past and an evenmore troubling future but that is the extent of their similarity. 
What draws us in and makes us like Falstaff? If you ask what he enjoys, no doubt the
answer is first and foremost, eating and drinking, then relaxing at the inn with his
othermerry friends and companions. These things are what really matter to Falstaff.
Compared to King Lear who is extremely unhappy and is on a quest to regain his
happinesswhich is ultimately impossible. Falstaff indulgences cause him to slowly lose
his life and alienate the people around him. Like King Lear they both lose
possessions along theirjourney. They are alike in many ways but take different ways to
meet their ends. Their experiences are different but their end is the same.
Bibliography
Cain, Brian. King Lear Revealed. Rayback Publishing, 1992. Los Angelos, California.