To What Extent Do You Agree That Realisation Leading to Tragic Sorrow Is More Compelling in King Lear Than in the Rather Moralistic Burial at Thebes? Context on Aristotelian and Jacobean Tragic Reception

To what extent do you agree that realisation leading to tragic sorrow is more compelling in King Lear than in the rather moralistic Burial at Thebes?  Context on Aristotelian and Jacobean tragic reception

Both of the plays: King Lear and The Burial at Thebes include tragic sorrow through the characters by portraying pity and fear amongst the audience. Aristotle’s poetics explains “pity is occasioned by undeserved misfortune and fear by that one like themselves.” He stated that if the character was to be the tragic hero, the audience must both pity and fear for them. Fear is defined as “a kind of pain or disturbance due to mental picture of some destructive or painful evil in the future” (W. Rhys Roberts translation) I believe that both playwrights created the characters on the basis of tragic sorrow to give a more meaningful anagnorisis and of course to maintain the Aristotelian tragic hero theory.

Antigone is the child of doom. She is the product of an incestuous relationship, and is born into a world were audiences are inclined to pity her due to the lack of responsibility. Ancient Greek Gods were spiteful and wrathful; they were something to fear rather than love. However Antigone hopes to appeal to the Gods, by burying a fallen solider in accepted burial rights of the Gods. In this, she is also going against state and therefore could have the opposite desired reaction of the Gods. Antigone is an ethical and religious force, an uncompromising element in our being, and is as dangerous in her way as Creon, who she perpetually provokes. King Lear however starts off as a less pitied and feared character. He is a man of great status and therefore has much more respect than Antigone could ever have. In contrast with the God like obedience and conformation of Antigone, the play of King Lear is focused on the human. It does not conform to the classical notion of Gods and due to the absence of the Gods in the Jacobean times; the focus was solely on the human. Therefore there is pity and fear for Lear, as anything that he does is all on himself, there are no Gods to blame. Thus, the beginning of both plays gives a retrospective view to the audience than Antigone is the more pitied character due to her background flaws.

As the plotlines begin to grow, King Lear becomes much more pitied towards the end. Lear is portrayed and defied by his own daughters. He gradually becomes more insane during the course of the play and in Act Three he says “This tempest in my mind/ Doth from my senses take all feeling else/ Save what beats there: filial ingratitude.” (Lines 12-14) He is explaining to the audience that the storm does not torment him as much as the hurt caused by his daughters. We begin to pity Lear more. In contrast Antigone almost has a death wish, she wants to be killed and become a martyr “There’ll be glory in it.” She is not suffering during this play and therefore the audience have no empathy towards her. The moralistic viewpoint of Antigone is much greater due to the conformity of the Gods, however Lear’s suffering and desperation is much more compelling to an audience and therefore the two characters do not play in the same wavelength of tragic sorrow.

Two of King Lear’s characters; Edgar and Cordelia are Christ like figures in the main and sub plot. Cordelia is perfection in a woman; she is a god like figure and therefore is extremely hard for the audience to relate to her. Aristotelian poetics state that in order for a character to be the tragic hero, they must relate to the audience. Cordelia does not which makes pitying and fearing for her difficult to the audience, as she has no faults. She is the version of Antigone who we couldn’t relate to. Edgar is the Christ like figure of the sub plot, he is pitied deeply when he is discarded and banished by his own father. Edgar provides an enormous amount of sympathy due to his courage and sweet nature throughout the play. Both characters are compelling in their own way, but do not provoke the amount of tragic sorrow needed for the audience to totally pity them.

Creon however is a relatable character, he is a man trying to stamp his authority yet lacks in confidence. This is shown when Creon is addressing his guards on page eight. His emphatic and jumpy tone suggests his lack of assurance. The audience can therefore relate to this earthy, nervous character, which promotes pity. However this pity is slightly diminished when we understand his wrathful side of the denial of the burial rights, he is strategic and ruthful which questions our judgement of the character. This can be argued with the affliction between the law of Gods and its relationship to proper justice. We are reminded of Hegel who would have argued that both sides have valid viewpoints, but that the sides were utterly incompatible. Antigone underpins justice of Gods; Creon underpins justice of government- someone has to lose. During the course of the play, the chorus question Creon’s judgement, they are uncertain of his planning and therefore so are the audience. Lear can be contrasted with Creon “Let pride, which she calls plainness, marry her” (Line 123) as Creon said something similar to Antigone. This shows how he too can be cruel and ruthless like Creon.  

The idea of blame and fear for the characters comes into play when Heamon kills himself, the total responsibility is on Creon. His wife’s last words also inspired pity “She called you death- dealer and cursed your name.” Creon has been destroyed and yet he must live on. By definition, the tragic hero’s status is reduced, as he does not die; however we argue that those who live on potentially suffer more. Meaning Creon’s tragic sorrow is extremely compelling in the moralistic environment in which he lives in.

Similar to King Creon, Edmund is also a very strategic character. His plotting and ruthless actions prevent all pity felt for the character until the end of the play. His redeeming line, hires all kinds of pity and empathy towards Edmund. “Yet Edmund was beloved.” His life of being ridiculed as a bastard by his own father has came into contrast with the love felt for him by Goneril and Regan “Somebody loved me.” His tone softens, Edmund has found someone who loved him but are now both dead. He inhabits admirable traits that promotes pity for the character and heightens our feelings of tragic sorrow towards him. Making the realisation of this character all the more compelling to the audience due to the stark contrast of actions by Edmund in the past.

Gloucester, the main character in the sub-plot is, similar to Lear and Creon is ruthless, hot headed and stubborn. This too can lessen the feeling of pity for him, yet through his flaws we can relate. This therefore enhances a fear and pity felt towards the character and therefore an overall compelling sense of tragic sorrow towards the character. Gloucester gives a good summary of the plot and the sub-plot, “The king falls from bias of nature, there’s father against child” (Line 97-98) this is what Lear has already done to Cordelia. Gloucester bans his blood son and trusts the evil Edmund. He is tortured and his eyes are torn from their sockets, this inhabits great fear for Gloucester due to the ruthless Edmund, Goneril and Regan joining forces. Shakespeare is intending to make a point of tragic sorrow through this violence. This should provoke cathartic response from the audience due to the shock of the violence that was traditionally not shown so openly in the Jacobean theatre. The cruelty and violence of the physical suffering makes Gloucester shriek out for the Gods “Give me some help! - O cruel! O you gods!” This allows us to explore the less moralistic views of King Lear in comparison with The Burial at Thebes. Religion almost became distant, Gloucester shouts out to the Gods and even in the end blames them for what has happened to him yet wants to commit suicide, he is hypocritical and his faith is not true.