Nahum Tate's "King Lear"

Paper Summary:

This paper explains that Nahum Tate's idea was to adapt Shakespeare to suit the taste of 18th century restoration theatergoers; thus, Lear no longer dies, Cordelia marries Edgar, the monarchy is restored and order once again reigns. The author points out Lear's suffering, which in Shakespeare's original play denotes the nature of humanity and the tragedy and misunderstanding that often accompany human life is completely lost in Tate's rewritten version, especially in terms of the ending. The paper reveals that the use of language by Tate and by Shakespeare also differs significantly; whereas Shakespeare believes in the reductive power of language in its simplest form, Tate's philosophy leans more towards the elevated forms of language hence the greater effect of Cordelia's simple statement in the Shakespeare play.

From the Paper:

"Other significant differences between the two versions include the roles of the specific characters. Edgar, for example, takes the role of Cordelia's suitor from the beginning of Tate's play, whereas in Shakespeare he never pursues the girl, but does become king at the end of the tragedy. His role in both Shakespeare's and Tate's plays is to restore justice, but in different ways. In Shakespeare's play, his role is tragic. Because of the betrayal by his brother, Edmund, who attempted to dishonor him in his father's eyes, Edgar is obliged to disguise himself. He thus pretends to be a demonic madman in order to escape his father's men. As such he also serves as a parallel for King Lear's madness, and gives him somebody to identify with during this difficulty. Edgar thus has a redemptive function here. In Tate's play, his redemptive function is mainly focused upon Cordelia and eventually the kingdom."

More papers on Nahum Tate's "King Lear":

• Persuasive Essay # 142304 : "Editing King Lear"
• Analytical Essay # 50622 : "King Lear"
• Persuasive Essay # 29981 : "King Lear" and "Titus Andronicus"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: