So I have to write a paper for my Shakespeare class. The course title, "Shakespeare and Politics", must in some way guide my choice of topic. I spent all weekend working, trying to devise some sort of coherent, interesting and manageable course of attack. Early on, I decided on King Lear as my play of choice. This was perhaps my first mistake. Shakespeare's tragedies are beastly behemoths of signification, and they don't come any more complex than Hamlet and Lear. So why you ask, didn't I just write on the politics of As You Like It, or the interplay between theatricality and truth as Prince Hal develops from delinquent youth to stately young king (Henry IV I)? Well, I like to make things difficult. Difficulty is rarely far behind when the question at stake is interesting, and, to be honest, I like the challenge.
And now for the topic: What sort of ideology is at play in the conception of nature and of what is natural in King Lear. These two are not always the same, and when they diverge it is always political. How is “nature” contravened, how is it edified, and what are the resonances with contemporary concerns of Jacobean England?
This isn't quite as clear and pointed as I'd like it, but I've no more time to work on it until tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment