A Feminist Criticism of Female Rule in King Lear

By: Lauren AlRabadi

    In Shakespeare’s King Lear, women are portrayed as more powerful and merciless than men, where the royal daughters hold a more demanding rule than their own father who is king. This is an unusual categorization of the female sex as males commonly hold these two characteristics in any given literary work to one extent or another. In this play, female characters are more primal and masculine than their male counterparts, which almost villainizes the former and sparks automatic empathy in the patriarchal latter.

    For instance, when the traitor Gloucester is caught by Regan and her husband, he is threatened with the brutal plucking of his eyes. Regan does not believe her spouse Cornwall can handle fighting the servant defending Gloucester, and violently seizes control of the situation. “Give me thy sword. A peasant stand up thus!” she demands, then “[takes] a sword, and runs at him behind” (Shakespeare 3.7.77-78).

    Furthermore, Goneril is very authoritative over her submissive husband and takes control over their relationship in a traditionally masculine way. She states domineeringly, “I must change arms at home, and give the distaff into my husband’s hands” (4.2.17-18), as if she does not expect nor will accept any protests from her spouse. In a manner unfeminine towards herself and emasculating towards her husband, she declares that she’s taking heed of leading their household and will start wearing the pants in their marriage, while he becomes the acquiescent housewife.

    With their transvestite desire for the exchange of traditional societal and marital roles, these women defy timeless gender norms and exhibit completely unorthodox yet powerful strength as women in Shakespearean times.

King Lear and The Glass Castle: A Literary Comparison

By: Lauren AlRabadi

    Shakespeare’s play King Lear and Jeannette Walls’ book The Glass Castle thematically overlap while simultaneously highlighting each other’s differences. For instance, both literary works majorly present unhealthy parent-child relationships.

    King Lear is a selfish father with a superiority complex and a constant desire for validation from his daughters and subjects. His constant focus is making them compete for his love in exchange for financial reward. “Strive to be interess'd; what can you say to draw,” he demands of Cordelia (Shakespeare 1.1.85).

    Lear didn’t care for his daughters’ wellbeing in the same way that the Walls didn’t care for their children nor prioritize their needs. Rex was so deep in alcoholism that he ruined Christmas, what was planned to be a good day: “He’d popped open the first Budweiser before breakfast, [He’d] ruined Christmas]” (Walls 3.73.114-115).

    Though they shared family dynamics, social hierarchy significantly differed . King Lear’s royal family is at the top of the hierarchy, while the Walls are poor in financial struggle at the lower end of social status. Social class influences the development of a person’s attitude.

    When royal King Lear tries to command a storm, he exclaims, “Blow, winds, and crack your cheeks!” (Shakespeare 3.2.1). When he’s rendered powerless, Lear absurdly gives commands to the weather, proving that his god-complex ridiculously stretches across inanimate objects according to his internal beliefs. Jeanette describes her family’s situation in explaining, “So even though she had a steady job, we were living pretty much like we had before” (Walls 3.17.14).

    The Walls rising economically is extremely unlikely as an occurrence always brings them down due to their impoverished situation. The parents feel insecure in their ability to provide and this constantly troubles the children as they try to predict their unstable, unpredictable future.

Parent-Teenage Child Relationship Dynamics and the Significance of Affection

By: Lauren AlRabadi

Throughout time, as concluded by social and psychological studies, familial relationships have been shown to extensively determine child development and the nature of their livelihoods.

In Shakespeare’s King Lear, parent-child relationships are explored through King Lear’s unique relationships with his daughters. Shakespeare emphasizes the significance of parents ensuring the healthy development of affectionate relationships with their children throughout their teenage years.

When King Lear invites Cordelia to praise him and express her love for him in exchange for a rich inheritance, Cordelia simply states, “Nothing, my Lord” (Shakespeare 1.1.87). In attempt to appease his clear frustrations, Cordelia goes on to tell her father, “I love your majesty / According to my bond, nor more nor less” (1.1.92-93).

Out of anger, he disinherits Cordelia without even considering the absurdity of a father forcing his daughters to compete for his love then rewarding it financially. King Lear always favored his daughter Cordelia the most, giving her more attention than he ever gave Goneril or Regan. Due to this, they hate Cordelia and desire vengeance for their father’s disregard of them. This emphasizes the toxicity of child favoritism and how shallow a parent’s love can be when affection is not only unequal, but also dependent on their children’s praise and vain compliments.

Teenagers facing such challenges should collectively present their disapproval to their parents and respectfully demand fair treatment and equal love and care. Parents’ love and affection for their children should be equal from the moment they’re born. As shown by the royal family, a parent having narcissistic tendencies and a preferred child will only lead to emotional pain in all family members’ livelihoods. In order to have healthy filial relationships, equal affection and dedication to truly loving one another is needed for the well-being of teenagers and parents.