King Lear Question again - discussion of possible ways to interpret and write on it (1 Viewer)

[frankyd]

just wondering... at the moment I'm thinking that this question could have been answered in one of two ways:

1) You took the personal interpretation idea to mean you focus solely one your interpretation.
In doing that you eliminated reference to other productions bar a small paragraph on reception over time, because in the introduction it was established that the enduring power of shakespeare's characterisation lies in the fact that it holds relevance in todays context and focused on detailed textual analysis for your personal interpretation.

2) You focused on your own interp., but still referenced other productions/readings and showed that they influenced your ideas. So, the "enduring power" was in its ability to be seen in such different ways, and this influenced your interpretation by allowing you to reflect on a the way the characterisation was portrayed in other peoples visions etc which was then incorporated into your own version

Which did you do?

I took the number 1 perspective, throwing the secondary feminist reading out the window to focus on detailed analysis of the intro and storm scenes.

I mean, I can't see how either method could be marked down upon due to the ambiguity of the question... but what does everyone else think?

 

[sandersen]

Well I didn't answer the question properly - I missed the whole only analysing the character King Lear bit, so I talked about Cordelia in relation to father-daughter relationships in the first and last scenes of the play. So i mentioned Lear a little bit, but I also talked about two other productions and how they shaped my perspectives, as well as my own context.
But although that might sound OK, i only wrote about 4 pages and it was written in about 20 minutes. Not my best work.

 

[RingerINC]

Re: King Lear Question again - discussion of possible ways to interpret and write on

Yeah i can't remember if i read the question properly of not, all i know is i talked mainly of king lear...

Also, i did method two, emphasising how their interpretation of Lear has shaped my own. Focused on act iv and closing.

 

[summer25]

OMG i'm stressing out i'm not sure if i answered it right????
Basically i started with a short reception over time paragraph talking about how lear has been received by various critics/productions etc then i focused soley on my own interpretation backing that up with productions that conveyed similar ideas.
My argument was that the enduring power of lears characterisation was one factor to consider but that the ambiguity/complexity of shakespeares language, universal themes on human nature etc were also significant in shaping how i viewed the play eg allowing me to interpret it despite contextual change and its textual intergity as a whole. everyone keeps on saying they did their interpretation + a reading - help???

 

[nickyroony]

I think the main focus of the question was also to answer "To what extent". I basically did my personal interpretation, but also brought in the concept of textual integrity as well.. so not only was it characterisation that influenced my response, but also other factors such as language, dramatic techniques, structure and productions etc.

 

[shinji]

i wrote about how king lear progressed throughout the text.
..also brought in textual integrity. haha

did the whole "child like lear" -> "mature lear"
onli 6-7 pages though T_T

 

[nickyroony]

Re: King Lear Question again - discussion of possible ways to interpret and write on

onli 6-7 pages though T_T

Yeah same.. I was really struggling to write x_x I left the question till last so I had about 50min to do it. And I wrote the least for it.. so that sucked.

 

[Porcia]

I think the main focus of the question was also to answer "To what extent".

nicky roony here is right - that was the main focus and u had the option of going "against the grain"

i said "to NO extent has Lear's use of characterisation influenced my personal response" citing Barthes and Death of the Author... do u htink that is ok?

 

[Tim035]

I did 1 and 2 lol. I did an opening paragraph showing the characterisation of Lear over time from the Elizbethan era to brook's approach and then in Sir Richard Eyres approach.
I then moved onto my personal interpretation but still brought in other productions in snipets eg. As in Brooks production in which Schofield plays Lear as "angry and unheroic" my personal responce to the play invites the audience to make their own assumptions on Lear between his claims and those of his kin. In his disintegrated state of madness, Lear symbolises his daughters as animals tearing at his body "is it not this mouth should tear this hand for lifting food to it?". In an angry tone of voice Lear would project this statement whilst characters dressed entirely in black tugged and ripped at his costume before running back off stage. This way the audience can decide who is the lesser of the two evils between the angry King Lear or the daughters who blinded him so easily and left him with nothing.

Also as others have mentioned though I said that Lear's endurring characterisation is not the sole extent to which I have based my responce on the play. Other crucial characters and elements such as blindness versus seeing clearly, madness versus sanity and appearance versus reality have also appealed to me in my interpretation of the play. Edgar announces the appearance of Gloucester in the storm as "this is the foul flibbertigibbet, a dancing devil who stalks the night spreading disease". However it is Edmond who metaphorically is the devil spreading chaos to all he interferes with. Gloucester's gullibility to Edmond proves him to be some what foolish and irrational and therefore a picture of Edmonds eyes on the back of Gloucester's costume would show how Edmond has controlled his fathers actions. When Gloucester announces "I had a son now outruled from my blood" he would tear off this part of his costume, symbolising how he is no longer being controlled by Edmond, no longer blinded by those around him.

But meh, I've always hated, despised and wished for English, shakespeare and anything to do with analysing texts to rot in the deep depths of Hell and never return EVER!!!

 

[yankyfly]

Re: King Lear Question again - discussion of possible ways to interpret and write on

Here's what i did.

I had prepared 4 scenes and the critical readings of Family Drama and Nihilsm and the two productions accociated with them.

I saw saw the question... FREAKED OUT... ditched the nihilist reading, ditched the two excess family drama scenes, ditched the productions, ditched the critical theory i had studied, and was left with a total of about... 4 quotes.

Then, i put all my bullshitting skills to the test, and threw everything i knew at the question. I discussed shakespreaean context versus my personal context in a modern Australia. I talked about how Shakespeares enduring charcterisation led to my vision for the staging of King Lear (i.e i discussed my personal staging). Then i did the two scenes, talked a bit more about my own staging aspirations. Then wrote a 1.5 page conclusion to waste as much time as i could.

SO THE QUESTION IS: do you reckon i will get any cred for like my specific answer to the question. And will i get any marks for the inclusion of my own staging ideas as associated with my personal reading...?

 

[ane_st]

Re: King Lear Question again - discussion of possible ways to interpret and write on

I did 1, but i did two of my readings, cause they both truly do influence my own!

Oh and i did the scene1 act1 (for family reading) and storm scene (for existentialism) and i did the Harlos 2006, Peter Brook's 1971 and Richard Eyre 1997...

 

[shinji]

Re: King Lear Question again - discussion of possible ways to interpret and write on

Yeah same.. I was really struggling to write x_x I left the question till last so I had about 50min to do it. And I wrote the least for it.. so that sucked.

at least u had 5o mintues. i had 3ominutes or so T_T

 

[tunawalker]

Re: King Lear Question again - discussion of possible ways to interpret and write on

Im pretty sure you had to discuss interpretations. I didnt mind this question too much.

I saw the Harlos production this year as well. Thats my great adv eng story.