King Lear (Arden Shakespeare: Third
Series) by William Shakespeare
My Humble King Lear Review - With A Great Deal Of Influence From Cavell.
By far the best edition of King Lear - in respect of both textual and other
matters - that we now have. John Lyon, English Language Notes This
volume is a treasure-trove of precise information and stimulating
comments on practically every aspect of the Lear-universe. I know of no
other edition which I would recommend with such confidence: to students,
professional colleagues and also the educated public. Dieter Mehl,
Shakespeare Jahrbuch, vol 134
Personal Review: King Lear (Arden Shakespeare: Third Series)
by William Shakespeare
The Arden edition of King Lear (I believe this one is in its third printing) is a
combination of both the Quarto and the Folio editions of the play. Of
course, when you end up with a conflated edition (one that is made up of
both) you are left at the mercy of the editor but, for my money, R.A. Foakes

does an excellent job of integrating the manuscripts and often points out in
the notes which and why certain choices were made.
Other people have summarized the plot of King Lear here at amazon.com
so I won't engage in that sort of review. I will concentrate instead on the
particular edition and why I think it's among the best and then I will point
out some things to look for in the play, things that I believe deserve close
attention, things that will add to your enjoyment of the play.
First of all the Arden edition - the book is basically divided into two major
parts: the essays and the play. The play occupies the top half of each
page, while the editorial notes and "translations" are found on the bottom.
So, for example, when King Lear first lets us know about "divesting" his
kingdom, Foakes tells us that this word is important because it sets an
important pattern regarding clothes throughout the play.
Sometimes the observations are incisive and surprisingly good, sometimes
not as good. For example, when Lear starts talking about "By all the
operation of the orbs / From whom we do exist, and cease to be", Foakes
points out that the orbs are the planets (during Shakespeare's lifetime, the
alignments of the planets was important - the word "disaster" actually
means stars out of alignment - the kind of worldview that held the earth as
the center of the universe was the worldview that Shakespeare inherited
and lived in). But Foakes fails to mention that the orbs are also our EYES
and in their full operation, opening your eyes can make one "exist" (as in
we see them) and closing your eyes can make one "cease to be" (as in
you don't see them). Furthermore, the orbs can be seen as being the eyes
of God and us existing in them. Bishop Berkely's philosophy relied heavily
on the idea that everything exists because God perceives it.
Anyway, just realize that the greatest of notes are nowhere near as good
as the greatest of care and attention when reading. Especially when
reading the greatest writer that ever lived.
Now onto some things I believe everyone should pay attention to. The
word "love" appears in the play more than any other word of meaning
(obviously I'm excluding words like "the" in the search). Now if you
combine language that are related to eyes (sight, orbs, look, see, etc) you
will also notice a great preponderance of these words. The same thing will
happen if you combine the other senses (touch, feeling, smell, etc). Why is
this of any import? Well, if you're going to write about something, you're
going to have to use words. If something is important, you're going to want
to drive that point home so you will be using some words more than others.
This is an indication that the play you're reading is going to be about those
things. So "love", "seeing", "nature", "clothes" and animals such as "dog,
snake, wolf, etc" are words that appear a lot and are important.

Sometime Shakespeare is so goddamn clever that you could spend a
lifetime and not catch everything. For example, it wasn't until my 2nd
reading of the play that I noticed he tells Kent
"Our potency made good, take thy reward.
Five days we do allot thee, for provision
To shield thee from diseases of the world;
And on the sixth to turn thy hated back
Upon our kingdom: if, on the tenth day following,
Thy banish'd trunk be found in our dominions,
The moment is thy death. Away! by Jupiter,
This shall not be revoked."
Notice the word "provision". The root of the word is pro-vision. It means to
look ahead. Later on in the play Kent reappears, in disguise! Is
Shakespeare having fun with us or am I reading too much into what could
be an unintended use of the word? Let me put it this way - if I'm going to
find morsels like this one, Shakespeare gets the credit.
The words relating to seeing and feeling are especially important if you
take tragedy to be an epistemological problem. If the tragic figure is one
that denies a kind of knowledge (Lear and Gloucester certainly do this)
then one can deny it by not seeing or feeling, hence the words that relate
to the acquisition of knowledge through empirical means. Notice in the
above verses that Kent will be told to re-appear, but he can only reappear
in disguise. Lear has already denied his love and devotion. Kent must
reappear as something else to allow Lear to "love him" again.
Lastly, pay close attention to Shakespeare's doubling and mirroring. This is
a favorite thing of his to do. I remember that the first time I read "Measure
for Measure" I noticed doubling and mirroring on every page. Then I read it
again and noticed these things every 5 lines. Then I read it again and
started noticing them with ever increasing frequency! In King Lear the
mirroring is much more subtle and even more rewarding. Notice how
Goneril ends up "confusing" Gloucester with Lear when she tells him to
"smell" his "way to Dover". From that moment on Gloucester and Lear
become doubles and possibly even more and the reader becomes a party
to the confusion.
Reading Shakespeare is a mind blowing experience and King Lear is
probably his greatest play (and that's saying something considering he
also wrote "Hamlet", "Othello" and "Macbeth").
Shakespeare wrote this play towards the end of his playwright's career. He
had two daughters, one of which was a bit of an embarrassment to him. It's
fun to hypothesize whether retiring was on his mind and if it was his own
intent
"To shake all cares and business from our age;
Conferring them on younger strengths, while we

Unburthen'd crawl toward death."
I cannot leave a review of King Lear without mentioning some important
essays on it. A few years back philosopher Stanley Cavell wrote a review
called "The Avoidance of Love". His reading of King Lear is revolutionary
beyond belief. No student or lover of Shakespeare's plays should be
without it. The essay has been combined with other Cavell essays on other
Shakespearian plays and is available in the book "Disowning Knowledge".
Amazon has it. It will blow your mind. Also, A.C. Bradley wrote a famous
essay on King Lear that should be read as well.
P.S. check out the cool and artistic cover which features a tree trunk
splitting into three branches. Is it an allegory for the play? By golly, I think it
is. That's Arden for you - quality cover to cover :)
For More 5 Star Customer Reviews and Lowest Price:
King Lear (Arden Shakespeare: Third Series) by William Shakespeare 5 Star Customer
Reviews and Lowest Price!