King Lear - Ending

1949 Words8 Pages
Many definitions of tragedy claim that at the end of the play, positives have emerged, is it possible to see anything positive in the ending of King Lear or do you agree that the ending is contrary to the natural ideas of justice? ‘Natural Justice’ can be defined as simply the ‘duty to act fairly’; this concept has only two rules; the first being a rule against bias, and the second states that everyone deserves a fair trial. In this sense, King Lear is non-compliant, as although the majority of characters in the play are judged through-out the play, only one has a fair trial; only one character receives a fair trial, Edmund, who ironically, is the least deserving. This leads us to the question of whether all the characters deserve their comeuppance; some readers may say that Lear deserves his death because it was he who caused the tragedies of the main plot – namely Cordelia’s death – modern audiences may view the disowning of ones own children to be an unjustifiable and unforgiveable thing. In act 5, scene 3, lines 275- 278 Albany says that “All friends shall taste the wages of their virtues, and all foes the cup of their deserving.” These words suggest that everybody gets what they deserve and that justice and order have triumphed over villainy and cruelty, and the world is finally a just place. The audience may agree that the disloyal Gonerill and Regan, the loathsome Edmund and the barbaric Cornwall all richly reserve their deaths, also therefore seeing the deaths as poetic justice. Poetic justice is the fact of experiencing a fitting punishment for ones crimes; for example, Edgar takes the law into his own hands when he challenges Edmund in a ‘trial of combat’, this occurs when one person accuses another of a crime, the accused can then challenge the accuser to a fight, the winner would be seen as the one who is right because people thought that the Gods

More about King Lear - Ending

Open Document