Monday, May 5, 2008

Fools and Kings

King Lear I.4, lines 114-130

FOOL Mark it, nuncle.
Have more than thou showest,
Speak less than thou knowest,
Lend less than thou owest,
Ride more than thou goest,
Learn more than thou trowest,
Set less than thou throwest;
Leave thy drink and thy whore,
And keep in-a-door,
And thou shalt have more
Than two tens to a score.

KENT This is nothing, fool.

FOOL Then ‘tis like the breath of an unfee’d lawyer –
you gave me nothing for’t. Can you make no use of
nothing, nuncle?

LEAR Why, no, boy. Nothing can be made out of noth-
ing.


The Fool’s song stands out from the surrounding text because of its sing-song rhythm and rhyme. Just as the shift from prose to verse (and vice versa) points to the importance either of a character in terms of status or of the message within the respective lines, the Fool’s characteristic songs convey significant insight into Lear’s situation. In addition, they contain a great deal of reason and wisdom, that which Lear apparently lacks. This construct ironizes Lear’s character with regard to the Fool by effectively subverting the presumptions of what each one should be; Lear, the king, shows himself a fool, while the Fool speaks the wisdom that a king should possess.
This reversal of roles parallels the situation with Lear and his daughters, Regan and Goneril. Having pared his kingdom and power betwixt the two, Lear leaves himself at their charge, positioning him as a child charged by his children. The Fool asks Lear, “Can you make no use of nothing nuncle?” Lear answers that naught comes from naught, just as he said of Cordelia’s initial response to his question of love. Ironically, his actions prove the statement true, in ways he likely did not fathom. The two daughter’s to which he gives everything have nothing for him, at least not in terms of real love or concern (in spite of their speeches). In banishing Cordelia and giving up his wealth and power, he loses everything, leaving himself with nothing, a result of whim and anger, anger produced by nothing (Cordelia’s truthful and appropriate response) interpreted as something (again, ironically- if nothing be the lack of something- nothing, here as lack of love).

~Katlyn Rodriguez

No comments: