| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "TROILUS CRESSIDA KING LEAR": |
|
|
"Troilus and Cressida" and "King Lear", 2002.
A comparison of Ulysses' "Degree" speech with Act 1 of King Lear, with reference to other Shakespeare plays such as "Macbeth".
962 words (approx. 3.8 pages), 0 sources, $ 34.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper analyzes and compares the language, tone, character, and plot of 'Troilus and Cressida' and of 'King Lear'. The paper examines Ulysses' "Degree" speech and explains its relevance to Act 1 of Shakespeare's "King Lear" and particularly to the relationship of Lear with his three daughters.
From the Paper
"Ulysses? speech in Troilus and Cressida is Shakespeare at his most political. It echoes the concerns of King Lear?s Act 1 whilst hinting at the writers personal beliefs. In this way, the speech accentuates Lear?s mistakes, while prophesising his ultimate, tragic fate. Ulysses takes the role of a political philosopher, diagnosing the ills of the Greek army. He describes the ?hollow Grecian tents?, tracing it all to the neglect of the importance of ?degree? ? ignoring the glue that holds society together."
| |
|
"Troilus and Cressida", 2002.
A critique of human motivation within the context of William Shakespeare's "Troilus and Cressida".
1,400 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 1 source, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the play, "Troilus and Cressida," as a critique on the mythology of the Trojan War and as a larger comment on the problems of human desire and self-centered actions. There are three kinds of reasoning offered by three different characters, all of which make claims to a method for judgement, a method for values and as a rationale for acting. Shakespeare then portrays each character in contradiction, acting in self-serving ways, thus prolonging the war, trapped in a cycle of unresolvable issues that are based on the conflicts of human motivation.
| |
|
Kent in Shakespeare?s ?King Lear?, 2002.
This paper explores the role of Kent in Shakespeare?s ?King Lear? as a foreshadow of Lear?s growth from an unfeeling man, to a man who places love above all else.
780 words (approx. 3.1 pages), 1 source, $ 27.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This author believes that Kent is perhaps one of the most loyal subjects ever written by Shakespeare. He states that Kent is a complex person, who is loyal to his king, even when he must disagree with him. By doing this, the paper says that Kent causes the reader to look for signs of redemption in King Lear.
From the Paper
"Kent is blunt and does not know how to soften his words. This gets him into trouble, but Kent?s way of communicating also stands in contrast to those around the King who merely say what he wants to hear. Kent?s outspoken nature serves to emphasize the cause of King Lear?s difficulties: he has lost track of who to believe."
| |
|
Shakespeare's "King Lear", 1978.
This paper examines the interpersonal relations in William Shakespeare's "King Lear" between Lear and his three daughters.
1,575 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 1 source, $ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The purpose of this research is to examine the interpersonal relations in William Shakespeare's "King Lear" between Lear and his three daughters. Since the character of Lear himself is the catalyst for the relations not only between him and his daughters but also those relations between sister and sister. This research will first discuss the title character. This discussion will be followed by an examination of the various scenes of the play that best illuminate all of these relationships, how they are presented, how they change and how they reflect on the nature of familial, parental relationships in general. The research will conclude with some overall observations on the play itself, other relationships that enrich and reflect on those main ones among Lear and his daughters.
Lear is at his worst in the very first scene in which we see... "
| |
|
King Lear's Transformation, 2003.
An analysis of how King Lear's character transforms from a controller to one who is controlled, in William Shakespeare's, "King Lear."
945 words (approx. 3.8 pages), 0 sources, $ 33.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper analyzes King Lear's transformation of character in William Shakespeare's tragic play, "King Lear." It shows how King Lear's all-too-human reaction to disrespect from within his own family forces a metamorphoses, a turning point, that transforms a controlling man into one who is controlled. The paper discusses the progression of the play and of the power of the character of King Lear.
From the Paper
"Unfortunately, Lear does not realize that he has made terrible decisions until his entire kingdom crashes down upon him. Only after he has lost all of his power and land does Lear recognize the fallacy of his judgment and change his character into a caring human being. The loss of one's power base and one's possessions in the later years in life is a typical transformation that takes place for the elderly. They must rely on their children to care for them with their best interests at heart. The failure of children to consider the best interests of aging parents can be disheartening to the aging person. The parent becomes the child, but often cannot successfully fulfill that role. Like Lear, they die of a broken heart."
| |
|
Justice in "King Lear", 2002.
An analysis of King Lear's sense of justice in the four trials within William Shakespeare's "King Lear".
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 1 source, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper will discuss the four trials in Shakespeare's play "King Lear" and discover if King Lear possesses any justice in the his participation over the trials. By analyzing these episodes that tell us how Lear plays the judge, we can see how he behaves in the scope of justice and what that means to him. An analysis of the motives in his judgment will be brought forth and revealed in the way that he plays king and judge in this play.
| |
|
Shakespeare's "King Lear", 2005.
This paper analyzes extensively the character of King Lear in Shakespeare's tragedy, "King Lear".
4,240 words (approx. 17.0 pages), 5 sources, $ 112.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper argues that King Lear is driven by a desire to validate himself independently from his noble status and that his natural combativeness brings about his own downfall. The author asks why, in the first place, does King Lear give up the throne and answers that he is beginning to realize his office is a separate entity from himself and that he is having a sort of belated mid-life crisis. The paper relates that Lear changes because, throughout the play, he finds the validation for which he has been searching and can now accept the love that Cordelia offers freely, the same love that he attempts to extort from her at the beginning of the play.
From the Paper
"As early as the first scene, Lear can be seen struggling with his roles as king and father, and how his failings as one overlap with the other. As the play opens, Lear is secure, if not necessarily successful, in his position as king, but he has decided to abdicate the throne to his daughters and their husbands. He does so by staging a ?love test?, wherein he asks his daughters which one of them loves him most and awards them a portion of the kingdom in relation to their answers. Cordelia?s refusal to flatter him causes him to explode, banishing her and his trusted advisor Kent, and setting the play in motion. This scene introduces many important ideas that will recur throughout the play, and is the most important for understanding Lear?s character."
| |
|
The Fool in "King Lear", 2006.
Explores the role of the Fool in Shakespeare's tragic play, "King Lear".
1,059 words (approx. 4.2 pages), 0 sources, $ 37.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The Fool in William Shakespeare's "King Lear" is often mistaken as foolhardy, but everything he says has a deeper significance and greater truth. Since he is the court jester, the audience assumes that the Fool's main purpose is to entertain us. The paper shows that the Fool's dramatic function is not to humor us, but to tell King Lear the truth through his metaphoric rhymes and jests. The Fool is a representation of King Lear's psyche. The paper explains that when the Fool disappears after Act III, scene ii, what is left of King Lear's stable mentality quickly disintegrates. The relationship between King Lear is not one of master and servant. The Fool could be considered King Lear's subconscious; he has perceptions the King Lear does not. With his knowledge, the Fool tries to teach King Lear how to reason out the truth for himself.
From the Paper
"The Fool states that King Lear was wise in a time when he did not need it as he doe now. King Lear was a wise King but when his wisdom was greatly needed he did not apply his knowledge. The Fool states that he is merely a Fool, but he would rather be a Fool than a befallen King. He strives to inform Lear of how adverse his situation is, but King Lear still does not fully comprehend the Fool's metaphors. Before King Lear decided to see his other daughter, Regan, the Fool warns King Lear that Regan's reception will be similar if not worse than Gonerils'."
| |
|
Poor Character Judgment in "King Lear", 2008.
A analysis of King Lear's poor character judgement in William Shakespeare's play, "King Lear."
1,108 words (approx. 4.4 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 38.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper analyzes a personal life evaluation of the blindness of poor character judgment in relation to William Shakespeare's "King Lear." It specifically discusses the poor character judgment of King Lear by not choosing Cordelia to take over his empire and invariably leaving his domains in the hands of his two corrupt daughters, Goneril and Regan. It also presents the writer's own personal experience with relation to the "blindness" of poor character judgment.
From the Paper
"In conclusion, the arrogance of age is one example in my life where I had made a 'blind' choice because I assumed an elder superiority over rational judgment. Much like king Lear, I had chosen the wrong persons to inherit a valuable asset, which invariably ended in a tragic and destructive way. King Lear had lost his ability to rule, just as I had lost my old car to an irresponsible cousin. In this manner, I was blind because of my arrogance in assuming that those that respect my status as an elder would be more responsible. King Lear also made this mistake by allowing his superficial and usurping daughters to inherit his kingdom over the far more honest and noble Cordelia. This is how my own life experience was blind the truth in relation to King Lear of William Shakespeare's tragic play."
| |
|
Nahum Tate?s "King Lear", 2005.
This paper compares Nahum Tate's "King Lear" with Shakespeare's "King Lear" upon which Tate based his version.
1,910 words (approx. 7.6 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 60.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
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."
| |
|
"King Lear", 2002.
An analysis of Lear's traits through a comparison of the opening and closing scenes of William Shakespeare's "King Lear".
1,150 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 2 sources, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper compares the opening and closing scenes of "King Lear" in terms of tragic flaws in Lear's character. Pride and a false view of power are his two worst traits.
| |
|
Madness in "King Lear" and "Twelfth Night", 2002.
Examines the multiple levels of the theme of madness in two plays by William Shakespeare, "King Lear" and "Twelfth Night".
2,150 words (approx. 8.6 pages), 6 sources, $ 80.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Madness in Shakespearean plays has distinct and multiple meanings and purposes. On one level, the madness of insanity is clearly felt in the tragedies like "Lear". On another, madness is also felt in the frenetic pace of impossible situations and comedic errors in judgment as is found in "Twelfth Night". Madness is, then, both tragic and comedic. But, it is much more than that. Madness represents a loss of control, of being borne by unnatural impulses, drivesa nd, perhaps, voices. Being mad is to not be yourself, it is to have lost touch with humanity, with life and with reality. The mad are excused from the rules of man and at the same time, tragically bound by them. For some, in madness is found freedom. Lear is wrapped, tightly, within a horrible prison created by his inability to see through the duplicitous daughters and embrace the one person in his life that loves him enough to refuse him. His madness, in the end, is what sets him free of the binds that his daughters and his pride had him in. The madness, however, is like the release from an intense and long-term drug addiction, it is horrible to watch, but leaves Lear in a better state afterward, free of poisons. Madness also allows otherwise straight-laced, bound by social rules (which were oppressive in Elizabethan England), to freely express inner passions, make mistakes and be fools in the eyes of others without fear of recourse, as is the case with nearly every character in "Twelfth Night". It is the purpose of this paper to examine the nature of madness in the Shakespearean context, how it plays out in both King Lear and Twelfth Night, and the meaning behind the madness in both works.
| |
|
King Lear, 2005.
An analysis of William Shakespeare's presentation of the character of King Lear.
2,395 words (approx. 9.6 pages), 0 sources, $ 73.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper is an exploration of the presentation of the titular character in the play "King Lear", from a wide overview of his disintegration and changing role, to analysis of specific quotes from the text which give us insight into Shakespeare's intentions. It covers Lear's presentation in the first act, and how his language, introduction and interplay with the other characters is designed by Shakespeare to make him a figure of status and significance, then considers the role of characters such as Cordelia, the Fool and Gloucester in providing us with more insight into Lear's true nature. There is close analysis of Lear's use of language, and how Shakespeare crafts this to reflect the King's shifting mind state over the course of the play.
From the Paper
"Shakespeare presents Lear in the first act as having his own secret agenda. he admits to having a 'darker purpose' and explains his 'fast intent' to the court. The phrase 'darker purpose' hints that Lear masks his true objectives behind a more cautious public agenda. Shakespeare portrays Lear through such comments as a sharp King who considers his position carefully in vital matters, a man who reveals his thoughts only when he deems it to be necessary - who plots his every action. This presentation will fall in sharp and deliberate contrast with Lear's behaviour later in the play, when he sticks stubbornly to a single, unwise agenda and uses desperate tactics to try to enforce it."
| |
|
The Storm in "King Lear", 2000.
A discussion of the possible meanings to the great tempestuous storm in William Shakespeare's "King Lear".
935 words (approx. 3.7 pages), 0 sources, $ 33.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper reviews William Shakespeare's play "King Lear" with an emphasis on the storm which is featured primarily in Act III. It examines how the storm operates on several levels both integral to the plot and purely metaphorical or aesthetic. It looks at how it serves as an icon of the treachery and ruthlessness of Lear?s disloyal daughters and how the pounding rain and thunder is clearly representative of his confusion, anger and increasing madness. It evaluates how it could be a sign of divine disapproval for Lear?s abdication of a God-assigned position as earthly ruler since without the storm, Lear would never have met Edgar, nor would Kent run into the gentleman whom he sends to Dover to inform Cordelia of the alliance between Albany and Cornwall.
From the Paper
"After giving up his land to them, Lear is at the mercy of Goneril and Regan, who, despite their professed love of the king, conspire to take all of his power away. Goneril perpetually finds faults in the king, uttering ridicules like: ?Here do you keep a hundred knights and squires, men so disordered, so debauched and bold, that this our court, infected with their manners, shows like a riotous inn,? (Lr. 1.4.248-51). After this, Lear makes a plethora of particularly damning statements, including: ?Into her womb convey sterility. Dry up in her the organs of increase, and from her derogate body never spring a babe to honor her. "
| |
|
King Lear and the Fool, 2002.
An examination of the characters of King Lear and the Fool and how character determines conduct.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 1 source, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the concept of how "character determines conduct", or how the personal qualities of the individual is reflected through their behavior. The text used to demonstrate this theme is Shakespeare's "King Lear", where the characters of Lear and the Fool are analyzed.
|
|
|
