Ok, let's do some Shakespeare.
1. Which currently famous actors and actresses would you cast in the following roles, and why?
- Cordelia - Only Sigourney Weaver has the raw and blunt honesty required to play Cordelia. Her matter-of-fact but impassioned speeches are perfectly suited for Cordelia's contemplative monologues.
- Regan - Regan requires a creature of remote beauty. Uma Thurman can be icy cold but appealing simultaneously, so this is a good fit.
- Edmund - Robert Pattinson has the dark, brooding appearance of a traitor. Edmund and Pattinson would both suck you dry if given the chance.
- Albany - Albany's kind of a non-entity in this play. He's a positive influence for Lear, but he doesn't do much of significance. For him, we need an actor that can fade into the background in an unexciting way. I think Steve Buscemi could fill such a role.
- The Fool - Hugh Laurie is the perfect fool. In House, everything Hugh Laurie says has a double meaning and more significance than meets the eye, just as The Fool.
2. Which character (out of all of them) do you most admire and why?
At the risk of sounding trite, I believe The Fool is the most admirable character in the play. He never acts in a duplicitous manner, though he is often hard to understand. He starkly speaks and doesn't soften his words in blind deference to the king. Like a fine wine, Lear's fool is an acquired taste. Taken with enough thought, The Fool is arguably the most authentic character in the play. The Fool is a refreshing break from all of the unclear motives and evilness in the play.
3. Aristotle believes a proper tragedy will evoke a catharsis in its audience. Which scene induces catharsis? Can you explain why? (It will help to review the long definition of catharsis.)
King Lear is not a soothing play. Throughout the work, terrible things happen and continue to happen. There is no particular moment when the pressure and upset is relieved, but there is quite an epic conclusion. The great death scene at the end where many major characters perish could be thought of as cathartic. Though King Lear and Cordelia (the primary positive or empathetic characters) die, so does Edmund, which is moderately relieving. I suppose the death scene could be considered cathartic, if for no other reason than some bad guys die. It's also kind of relieving when King Lear finally dies, because at that point you know he's free of his madness. As far as I can tell, catharsis doesn't have to be positive, just relieving.
4. When Lear and the Fool are leaving Regan's and headed into the storm, Lear is concerned about going "mad" (crazy or senile). The storm is a symbol of the brewing madness in Lear's mind. What aspect of aging frightens you, and what could symbolize it?
Madness is synonymous with the phrase "losing one's mind" for a reason. More severe mental disorders manifest literally as a shattered psyche; multiple personalities existing in one consciousness. Lear feels his will slipping away rapidly, and comes to hate and fear this process. Lear regards the end of his life as something to be conquered and opposed, rather than a natural process to be embraced. This internal conflict and inevitability of aging is symbolized by the large and tumultuous storm brewing outside. Just as the atmospheric eddies are barometrically at odds, Lear is at odds with the very process of aging.
No one wants to get old. Though there's no theoretical upper limit on the age of human cells, in practice people don't often live much past 100. After life, there's no guarantee that anything else happens. At all. So, I suppose I'm most afraid of approaching death. After all, isn't that what age is a measure of? One's proximity to death?
Death is often symbolized. It's a recurring theme in the human psyche, and many a famous artist has touched upon the subject. If I were to symbolize death in its most haunting form, I would choose blackness. Lack of sight and vision implies lack of general sensory perception, which is what I'm afraid death might be. I want to be sure I'll 'continue', but age is certainly an obstacle.
5. How does reflecting on King Lear (its story and/or particular characters) make you feel "uncomfortably at home"?
Shakespeare comes difficultly to me. Languages, especially English, are contextual creatures: to fully understand them, one must understand the cultural background. English is so fragmented and nuanced that a single word can have several meanings depending on pronunciation, spelling and emphasis. I have very little contextual knowledge of Shakespeare's time, and many of his words appear foreign to me. However, with an effective "translation" at my side and much effort indeed, I can comprehend The Bard's writing. When I do bridge that language gap, the characters in King Lear come into sharp relief.
It is easy to empathize with the characters in King Lear. The important ones are illustrated as nuanced and multidimensional. Based on an odd formula of drama, emotion and madness, each character's motives are easily understood and sympathized with. The characters in King Lear are just as human as you or I. A rage terrible enough to gouge another's eyes out is comprehensible, if not actionable. We all feel as if a storm is raging when we conflict with a process that comes from within. We can love Lear and appreciate his folly (as pointed out by The Fool) at the same time; a process which is not easy, even with real people.
King Lear resonates in an uncomfortable way. In the inhumanity of the characters, we see ourselves.
