King Lear - Victim Of Love

In his blind egocentricity, Lear has broken the bonds of state, family and fri destinationship. By breaking these bonds, Lear transforms from a billetful, item-by-item individual to a vulnerable, weak, desperate hu art objectity. Is this solely his fault? Although around would be quick to theorise yes, I would befuddle to say no. Lear was a victim. He was a victim due to his immense compassion and trust. Lear is the perfect typesetters case of the saying good guys manage in last. wherefore should we burden the man for having a big nerve center? wherefore should we criticize him for pleasant and trusting his family? He deserves every(prenominal) of our sympathy and pity. in that location atomic number 18 numerous suits why he deserves our pity, but a a couple of(prenominal) very unbendable cases stand step forward.         The catalyst that sparks the beginning of the end for Lear is his altercation with Cordelia during the ceremony. He asks his 3 daughters to profess their crawl in to him. certain(a) this is sh exclusively in all(prenominal)ow considering its through words, but every adept deserves to feel discernd, and Lear, append the simple man that he is, is content with words as proof of admire. His 2 octogenarianer daughters, Regan and G nonpareilril do a gaga job of appeasing him, delivering immaculate, embellished speeches that meet and exceed what his simple engage/write head would be satisfied with. Upon his most treasured Cordelias turn, all she mountain say is naught. That skillful there is a harp because we all know she loves him to a greater extent than the other(a) dickens sisters. True she does not requirement to lie to her founder and exposit him with false warmth, however nohing is a lie. She definitely loves him. She and so goes on to claim to love him check to my bond. She is fundamentally saying she precisely loves him because he is her father. That is a blatant lie, and still though she is trying to nurture him ! by saying this, she truly crushes his heart. Who can blame Lear for the focusing he reacted to this. How is one suppose to feel when ones most loved kidskin confesses that theyve still loved you according to family bond? It wasnt requisite for Cordelia to deliver an elaborate, fallacious speech like her sisters however she should confound come clean intimately her love for him, because she did love him substantialheartedly. notwithstanding a simple, short justification of love would contain do him happy. I loved her most, and intellection to set my rest on her patient of nursery. he says. By trying not to lie to him, she lied to him even worse, and that is why Lear cant be blamed for what he did as a result.          Lear holds a world of trust in his family. He loves them so deeply that he believes anything they say. Innocently, he bestows upon his three daughters all of his power only to be mercilessly backstabbed by his protest roots. He was so bli nd by his genuine love for his daughters that he couldnt perhaps imagine their ulterior motives. What kind of a cold, selfish, diabolical father would think such things of his daughters? disrespect how he may come across when he give tongue tos, Lear is a softy deep down. At the whim of their rubbish words, Lear imparts his power to them. He trusts them with his life, for he go away have no power after giving it all up. Unfortunately, his daughters turned out to be demons. In the absence of their mother, he ran a whole empire to make life reform for his daughters. He risks everything on the strength of receiving love and business organisation from his daughters. He doesnt care about the power; he gave it all up in a second. He only emergencyed to be loved, and Goneril and Regan took reward of this compassionate trait of his to steal his power.         In a portentous attempt to get Lear to hold back things for what they unfeignedly are, Kent gets himself b anished. Although his intentions are kind, Kent mus! tiness realize that Lear has just had his heart shattered. He is in pieces. When one is overcome by such elicit emotion, as is warrant by what Lear had to endure, then its unsufferable to think in a rational manner. Furtherto a greater extent, Kent doesnt reason with Lear in a careful way. When nearone has been so devastated, they must be dealt with delicately. Kent says, Be Kent rough when Lear is mad. What wouldst thou do, old man? By calling him mad, and old man, Kent further aggravates Lears emotion, adding angriness and frustration to his already lean state. This causes Lear to act even more irrational, and banishes Kent.

If one just had their heart broken by the one they loved most in this world, the last thing they occupy is for psyche to step in and call them an idiot. As Lear shed it, Come not surrounded by the dragon and his wrath Kent should have approached Lear in a calmer, more soothing manner, perhaps asking him to step outside and speak privately. Instead Kent verbally embarrasses Lear in front of all the royalty, and adds abuse to the injury. Kent brought his banishment upon himself.         Yes, Lear is the one who in the end breaks the bonds of state, friendship, and family. Was it his fault? No. Cordelia lied to him. She told him she had no love for him other than their family bond. Not only that, but she also says she would love some husband that she hasnt even met yet as such(prenominal) as she will love him. He loved her more than anything, and she took his heart and tore it into pieces without cerebration of the consequences. He loved and s ure his two elder daughters, Goneril and Regan as wel! l, handing them over two thirds of his empire, only to be deceived. Is it a aversion to love and trust someone so much that you have sight of the truth? Its especially hard to see the truth when its something so horrid that its unthinkable. Kent fuelled the flames, and for it he was burned. As a loyal, long-time friend, he should have known how Lear would react, and should have taken wiser actions. Kent acted rashly and inconsiderately towards Lear, making a scoff of him in public. Lear had no natural selection but to cede face and whatever ounce of hauteur he had left field by banishing Kent although he surely didnt want to. Lear is a naïve man indeed, but all of his intentions were good. Who are we to blame him for loving his family and trusting them? Dont we all? How can we blame him for being naïve, its like blaming a rock for being dumb, thats just the way hes always been. In the end, Lear neglect victim because he was a kind, loving man, in a cruel, inconsiderate worl d. If you want to get a full essay, put up it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper