Paper Summary:

The paper asserts that while some masterpieces should never be altered, Shakespeare's great tragedy, "King Lear" was turned into a happy ending by David Garrick and Nahum Tate, in the belief that an aging, mad king, might reflect badly on Britain's own aging and mad King, George III. Nevertheless, the paper posits that while art works might be translated into different languages, and theatrical staging might be in modern dress, changing characters, removing some and creating a different ending than the author intended is a tragedy in itself.

From the Paper:

"The world has seen a few masterpieces created that simply withstand the test of time and should not be changed. Can you imagine some artist deciding to alter the smile on the Mona Lisa? Can you imagine, in an age of feminism, that an all-female version of Hamlet can succeed? (It has been tried!). In much the same way, one simply cannot understand why some editor would want to tamper with Shakespeare's greatest tragedy, "King Lear". There have been editing attempts done, mainly to "improve": some of the Old English phrasing which, based on Shakespeare's own original printing,..."

Visitors who viewed this Persuasive Essay also liked these:

• Analytical Essay # 119804 : "The Destruction of the Body Politic in "King Lear"
• Analytical Essay # 36062 : "King Lear"
• Analytical Essay # 4576 : "Madness in "King Lear"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: