TERM PAPER She Lives!

!: Cordelia as a Type of Christ in the Thought Experiment of Shakespeares King Lear Shakespeares King Lear has been noted as being perhaps his bleakest work, and only Hamlet and Macbeth approach it in depicting such thorough devastationin the mind, body, and the body politic (Bevington 702). Shakespeare theorist Tom McAlindon points out, No other text of Shakespeares seems so bent on penetrating the actualities of observed experience to confront what it holds to be the unchanging complexities of human nature and the natural world (159). Widely held to function as a commentary on the relationship of human beings and nature, the play has been subject to varying, and at times contradictory, interpretations, both in literary criticism and cinematic adaptation. Films of the play have typically preferred one of two interpretive routes regarding the final scenes, either presenting the world in which its character exist as ultimately redemptive and forgiving, or nihilistic and void of purpose. These, however, are not the only plausible approaches to the plays complex commentary on the human condition. A third, perhaps more accurate, understanding of the text can be revealed through an examination of Shakespeare use of typology and iconography. If seen as a thought experiment, in which the playwright attempts to illustrate a portrait of Britain before the influence of Christianity, presenting Cordelia as a type of Christ, and making use of iconic constructions

Linnea Nelson ENGL 482/682

L. Nelson 2

which would likely have been immediately reminiscent and recognizable to his audiences, a cohesive comprehension of the play may be achieved. The fundamental questions that permeate the play have been the topic of a great deal of interest and uncertainty among viewers, readers, scholars and directors. Since King Lears first appearance, manyhave searched anxiously for more hopeful answers, ones that will not seem utterly nihilistic (Bevington 702). Even so, In a countervailing trend, especially during the later part of the twentieth century, these redemptive readings of the tragedy have more often been replaced by nihilistic interpretations that have found little evidence in the play to support the idea of spiritual regeneration and tragic enlightenment (Bevington 702). Film interpretations have thus generally been divided, taking one stance or the other. Akira Kurosawas renowned adaptation, Ran, set in Sengoku-era Japan, closes with a shot of a blind man staring into a void, and is a prominently Buddhist adaptation, as shown both in the practices of the characters, and the sentiments it establishes. From images of Buddha falling to the ground and contemplations on the useless suffering that makes up human life, Kurosawa makes a clear choice in interpreting the play as a bleakly definitive view of the purposelessness of existence on earth. While some support for such an interpretation can be drawn from the original text, such as Gloucesters proclamation on the seemingly desolate state of the pagan world with, As flies to wanton boys are we to th gods;/ They kill us for their sport (lines 4.1.36-7), there are suggestions of hope and redemption which cannot be explained with a purely nihilistic understanding of the text.

L. Nelson 3

Despite the tumult, deterioration, and confusion which prevail throughout much of the story, Lear pronounces that if, indeed, she [Cordelia] lives! then, If it be so, it is a chance which does redeem all sorrows (5.3.270-71), which is one among several other significant indications in the text of spiritual deliverance. As Frederick Turner observes in Shakespeares Twenty-First-Century Economics, the play is hopeful in that it shows everything can come from nothing (172). He notes, on the cliff-top scene:

Edgar tells his father, Gloucester, that marvelous lying truth: Thy lifes a
miracle. A despairing king experiences an apparently miraculous return from the dead and undergoes an epiphanic realization that life truly is a miracle, a realization that is not undermined by the fact that the miracle is a benign deception (Turner 179). Gregori Kozintsevs 1971 version is but one of the films which take hold of these more optimistic suggestions, emphasizing Lears undying hope of being reunited with Cordelia and faith in her goodness, and coming to an end with a view of rushing water and sea birds in flight, backed by Dmitri Shostakovichs majestic musical score. Music plays a significant role in the film, and helps to ease Edmunds death as an occurrence of justice, while still eliciting audience sympathy. Joseph Papps 1974 production and Michael Elliotts 1983 version (with Laurence Olivier as Lear) also both notably focus on indications in the play that a higher power exists (one which punishes evil and delivers the virtuous), that human life is a thing of value, and that true purpose and happiness exists, even if it eludes the plays primary characters. In both films, Lear and Cordelia wear pure white robes in

L. Nelson 4

their final scenes, making them appear as innocently angelic and undeniable victims. In addition, Oliviers and James Earl Jones portrayals of Lear are similarly gentle and submissive, despite the angered grieving and aggravated awareness of injustice so evident in Lears final lines in Shakespeares text. Yet, another approach to interpreting the play is possible, and debatably closer to that which Shakespearean audience would have experienced. King Lear may validly be read as a sort of thought experiment, in which Shakespeare works with the nuances of typology (the study of symbolism, particularly as it is used in Scripture relating to indications of the coming of Christ [typology]), and iconography (which deals with the representation of people or objects by any application of the arts of design [iconography]) to communicate to his audiences the vision of a world which, while not yet having been exposed to the Gospel and Christianity, was inhabited by virtuous human beings. According to Catholic doctrine, these righteous people (such as Cordelia), would be saved by Christ from damnation during the Harrowing of Hell. As outlined in Peter Burfeinds The Harrowing of Hell: Filling in the Blanks, this harrowing takes place during Jesus descent into hell, or Sheol, directly prior to His resurrection, when the Son of God liberates the souls of the faithful who died before His crucifixion (5-6). If so understood, then the play is both nihilistic and redemptive, exhibiting an honest and sobering view of a world without Christ, while projecting a sort of vision of the hope that was to come; and so read, many of the paradox[es] that cannot be argued or resolved, but must be lived (Bevington 703) do, in fact resolve themselves as they are played out.

L. Nelson 5

Although living in a Protestant England, Shakespeare certainly had familial connections to the Catholic Church, and, according to J.M.I. Klaver, most [critics] have come to acknowledge that Catholicism played an important part in the family Shakespeare grew up in (73). Thus, he would have been familiar with the Stations of the Cross, a series of 14 visual representations of Christs passion commonly found in cathedrals and rendered by innumerable artists of the time. The thirteenth of these Stations is the Deposition or Lamentation, which depicts Mary mourning over the body of the dead Savior. A related pose in art, known as the piet, which featured Mary holding Christs body in her arms, was very commonly produced by artists and sculptors, probably most famously by Michaelangelo c. 1498. From Albrecht Durers woodcut Lamentation for the Dead Christ (see The Complete Woodcuts of Albrecht Durer) to Botticellis Lamentation over the Dead Christ (see Botticelli: Life and Work) and countless others, the image of the piet was wellcirculated and would arguably have been instantly recognizable to a typical audience member during this time. It is through using these immediately reminiscent images that Shakespeare shows Cordelia to be a type of Christ. Cordelia is certainly not a Christian, but she is a solid example of a typological character. She, like Lear, is defective in understanding, and does not comprehend herself properly, but is, rather, a retrospective being who points towards a higher and better one (Tillyard 72). Shakespeares Cordelia meets her death in hanging, as Christ is recorded as having been executed by hanging on a tree (Acts 5:30). Continuing the parallel, Lears cry that she lives!, while on the surface seemingly nothing more than

L. Nelson 6

evidence of Lears failing perceptive abilities, ironically points to the life in eternity with God, and reflects Cordelias deliverance into it. Even further, Shakespeares stage direction, Enter Lear, with Cordelia in his arms (5.3.261) directly mirrors the lifeless body of Christ in Marys arms. It is important to make note here that Shakespeare takes a liberty in Cordelias death, in that it is of his own invention. According to Geoffrey of Monmouths The Histories of the Kings of Britain, which predates Shakespeare by several hundred years, the real Cordelia of British history and legend survived Lear (or Leir), and, after ruling his country peaceably for a time, was captured, imprisoned, and eventually took her own life (86-7). Also of great significance is the moment in history in which Shakespeare grounds the play. King Lear is set further back in history than any other British play, predating Merlin, as Shakespeare makes clear to audiences in the Fools expositive conclusion, This prophecy Merlin shall make, for I live before his time (3.2.95-6). The question, then, must be asked: Why would Shakespeare give such a clue to his audiences, and set a play so far back in British history, if he was not attempting to do something he had never done before, and build upon a concept specific and pertinent to this period? An arguable answer is that this setting would facilitate Shakespeares thought experiment, an examination of the state of human spirituality in Britain from a Christian perspective, prior to Christian influence. Shakespeares representation of this period frankly confronts reality in a way that many of his plays do not, with rather overly-contrived happy or melodramatic endings. Part of what makes King Lear stand apart from Shakespeares other plays is that it defies an

L. Nelson 7

altogether optimistic or despairing reading. Thus, Shakespeare writes within the laws of his own experiment. If the play were to end happily and free of its lasting, sobering implications, what need would the characters have of a Savior? If the conclusion was altogether without hope and utterly nihilistic, what indication would there be that one will ever come? It is true that King Lear shows a Britain in which uncertainty regarding the afterlife prevailed and understanding of human beings relationship with each other and a higher being was unstable at best, but through multilayered lingual references and typological representation, Shakespeare conveys a vision of the world it would become.

L. Nelson 8

Works Cited Bevington, David, ed. Context and Dating: Redemption, Nihilism, and Cosmic Catastrophe. Shakespeare: Script, Stage, Screen. New York: Pearson, 2006. Print. Burfeind, Peter. The Harrowing of Hell: Filling in the Blanks. LOGIA: A Journal of Lutheran Theology 18.1 (2009): 5-14. Web. Iconography. Oxford English Dictionary Online. Oxford UP, 2012. Web. 10 December 2012. Klaver, J.M.I. Methinks My Lord Should Be Religious: A Survey of Recent Publications Bearing on Shakespeare and Catholicism. The Heythrop Journal. 51.1 (2010): 73-80. EBSCO. Web. 09 December 2012. Kurth, Willi, ed. The Complete Woodcuts of Albrecht Durer. Mineola: Dover, 1963. Print. Lightblown, Ronald, ed. Botticelli: Life and Work. New York: Abbeville, 1989. Print. McAlindon, Tom. Shakespeares Tragic Cosmos. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1991. Print. Geoffrey of Monmouth. The Histories of the Kings of Britain. Trans. Lewis Thorpe. London: Penguin, 1966. Print. Shakespeare, William. King Lear. Shakespeare: Script, Stage, Screen. Ed. David Bevington, Anne Marie Welsh and Michael L. Greenwald. New York: Pearson, 2006. Print. Tillyard, E.M.W. The Elizabethan World Picture: A Study of the Idea of Order in the Age of Shakespeare, Donne and Milton. New York: Random House, n.d. Print. The New Jerusalem Bible. Ed. Alexander Jones. New York: Doubleday, 1966. Print. Turner, Frederick. Shakespeares Twenty-First-Century Economics: The Morality of Love and Money. New York: Oxford UP, 1999. Print. Typology. Oxford English Dictionary Online. Oxford UP, 2012. Web. 10 December 2012.