Description: Good. Purchasing this book supports the King County Library System Foundation. Thriftbooks and KCLSF have partnered to help raise additional funds for the library system. Ex-Library book-will contain library markings. Light shelf wear and minimal interior marks. Millions of satisfied customers and climbing. Thriftbooks is the name you can trust, guaranteed. Spend Less. Read More. read more
Binding: Paperback
Publisher: Penguin Classics
Date Published: 2000
ISBN-13:9780140714906ISBN:0140714901
Description: Acceptable. Book may have underlining, highlighting, or notes throughout. Well used. Still readable but not for the collector. All orders processed within 2 business days. Ships from Foxboro MA. read more
Binding: Paperback
Publisher: Penguin Classics
Date Published: 2000
ISBN-13:9780140714906ISBN:0140714901
Description: New. Brand New! Buy with confidence-your satisfaction is guaranteed at B-Logistics! Due to the large scale of our operation, we do not have access to the specific contents/condition of our items. Please note that Expedited shipping is not available at this time. read more
Description: Good. Only lightly used. Book has minimal wear to cover and binding. A few pages may have small creases and minimal underlining. Book selection as BIG as Texas. read more
Binding: Paperback
Publisher: Penguin Classics
Date Published: 2000-02-01
ISBN-13:9780140714906ISBN:0140714901
Description: Good. All books in Acceptable-Good condition. Books may NOT include Online Access Codes (InfoTrac, MyEconLab). Books MAY contain highliting/bent pages. We ship M-F. read more
Description: Good. Used copy-Because of our high volume, we can not accurately describe each book, so we list the MINIMUM condition you can expect; most are better than the condition listed. read more
Binding: Paperback
Publisher: PENGUIN GROUP
Date Published: 2000
ISBN-13:9780140714906ISBN:0140714901
Description: The general editors of the new series of forty-two volumes--renowned Shakespeareans Stephen Orgel of Stanford University and A. R. Braunmuller of UCLA--have assembled a team of six eminent scholars who have, along with the general editors themsel... read more
"Alright so there can be left no doubt in the fact that I enjoyed this play very much.
The idea of the old generation being dumped by the new one due to the greed and hunger of power, is perhaps the oldest story in the book. I wondered, perhaps, it was for this very reason that Shakespeare chose a pre-christian era for his play's setting. At the same time he introduced anarchonismic effects, such as the presence of 'school-masters' and 'barbers' etc. seems to suggest that he is trying to built an atmosphere where the past and present are merging, creating an aura for the audience to realise that the problem that is to be dealt here is universal. It is not bound by time or place. Perhaps, it is for this reason that I found this play hold such deep relevance even in today's world, when once again the older generation is shunned and forgotten when the war for power and money begins.
Another interesting aspect in the play that really held my attention was the character of Edgar. He is perhaps the strangest of all of characters that I have ever come across. Where the man stands for both goodness and light, as well as the restoration of the order, which our protagonist had so ruthlessly disturbed in the beginning, he also is our main source of dark and hellish imagery. I kept on wondering what ever in the world could Shakespeare be implying through such a usage. The only thing that really came to my mind was that, perhaps, Shakespeare was trying to emphasise on the fact that if someone wishes to guide and lead on the path of truth and righteousness, one has to know the details of what is evil and monstrous. Another thing that is less likely, it seems, is that even those who appear as the best of the best are only human and psychologically hold a deep well of darkness within them. Or perhaps he was just trying to show that Edgar was good at playing a madman? I don't know.
The imagery of the seven deadly sins, together with the naming of the various devils and the confession that all five were in him is a very strong imagery of darkness in the play. Merely reading it gives me the chills, I wonder how eerie it would be to see a madman say those words?
Coming now to Edmund. Well the first time I read the play, he seemed to me the ultimate 'bad boy'. I am ashamed to admit that I rather liked his character, despite all the cunning and evilness. However, as I read the play again and again, I just couldn't help but dislike him more and more. The only point I gain some sympathy for him is when he is categorised as an illegitimate child. I mean it was not his fault. If someone wants to go and ridicule someone for Edmund's paternity, it should be his parents and not the child. In addition to this, there is also another interesting dimention to Edmund's character that I found on my re-readings. Something seems to tell me, intuition perhaps, that there are undertones in the play, which might suggest that Edmund's guilt was driven by a sense of revenge from his father who had given him such a fate where it was impossible for him to 'inherit lands by birth'. He also seemed to wish for a revenge from Edgar, framing his gullible brother for everything that he desired to happen. In his father's eyes Edgar is drawn as what Edmund should have been dellineated as. The reason behind such an act could be that Edmund desired to be legitimate like Edgar and was jealous of the status of his birth. So I suppose Hatred ensued and he began to take pains to develop a situation in which he could for once enjoy a role reversal.
The women in the play are presented in the same way as I would have thought any Elizabethian might portray a woman. The strong minded and ambitious lady is a villainous monster, while the soft spoken daughter is the angel. However, one thing made me applaud Shakespeare tactics in the play. Where the women are bound by a strong moral code, as in every other old fashioned male dominated literature that I have read, the men are also strongly bound. The conscious Albany, who realises the importance of a parent, who speaks of being blinded by love, who gives fair advise to his wife and abandons her cause when she does not revert to the right path, he is given the merit of being the King at the end who brings hope in both the characters of the play as well as the audience. On the other hand, the cunning Cornwall and Edmund are presented as the ultimate height of evil.
I think every person who wants to claim that they read should at least once in their lifetime give a little time to this play of two climaxes where the sad yet monstrous mistake of a father is unduly punished by his daughters whom he gave all and favoured when he was committing that monstrosity. An amazingly well rounded off play that should be a member of almost every library or bookshelf out there!"
"This was--along with Caesar, Romeo & Juliet, Hamlet, Henry IV, MacBeth and Midsummer Night's Dream--assigned reading in high school. It affected me more than the others, but not probably the way it was intended to. Like Hamlet, I was bothered by the death of so many of the principals and by the political resolution effected by what I saw as bit players. While Hamlet was not a sympathetic character, his treatment of Ophelia being offensive, Cordelia most certainly was and her death virtually ruined the play for me.
Other than being a twentieth and not a seventeenth-century reader, I was probably too young for fully appreciating Lear--or much of Shakespeare for that matter. Romeo and Juliet, the one play with protagonists of my age, was simply too stupid to credit when seen from the perspective of a peer rather than from that of the uncomprehending parents. I therefore question the exposure of the young to Shakespeare with the possible exceptions of MacBeth, Titus Andronicus and, of course, the comedies. It's good to get the cultural capital knowing Shakespeare affords one and it is also good to learn to read his English readily, but most of the plots are beyond the experience of early teens."
"Madness of King Lear leads the significant development in the play. The madness and Lear's epiphany from his madness reflect the same characteristics of humans. To this, I once again get amazed by Shakespeare. Madness exists and is covered by modern civilization that defines civilization according to the level of development of technology. Lear, an old man that is commocly regarded an age of realizing more the life, and human nature, but he seems to learn the most important thing at such sn age and in such a mysery that two of his daughters betray him and, one of his daughter finally dies for saving him after Lear loses all his power. He is not aware of his madness when he is mad until he loses not only his power, but everything. In the play, the fool , the role who owns the least power, is the symbol of wisdom. He may not be older than Lear, but he sees through everything that Lear can't really understand like a kindergarten kid.
Truth, does not exist in old age, pricy colthes, expensive cars, shining gold, and authorities. And this the first thing I once again learn from the play.
The second thing I learn from it, is not to look down any average Joe, and the people that look like nerds."
"Shakespeare goes to the Ancient Sophocles for this play. King Lear is just like the lost Oedipus as his foolishness makes him blind and causes him to wonder like Oedipus while war unfolds all around him. Only instead of Oedipus' loving daughters, Lears are snakes who fight over his land and plot to kill each other and daddy. There's even Edmund who plays everyone like a fiddle and madtom bedlam and a real blinding. Lear's foolishness is that he can rest on his laurels and give up his crown peacefully. If only he could have asked Oedipus..."
We guarantee every item's condition, as described on Alibris. If you are not satisfied that an item is as described, return your purchase for a refund.
rating
