I think King Lear is too harshly criticized when being depicted as a heartless tyrant who shows no love for his children. Kahn's contention that he is initially a "man's man" so to speak, displaying little emotion or ability to nurture is made primarily on the basis of his tirade against Cordelia (and Kent) at the beginning. Rather than show him harsh and devoid of emotion I think this instead humanizes Lear who is devastated by what he perceives as a lack of love from the daughter whom he loves most. He turns hard-hearted against her and this betrays how deeply and truly he loved her. This love is misguided but still demonstrably present.
As for Lear's revulsion to displaying affection for Goneril and Regan, who can blame him? It is no wonder he should feel it weak to let emotion get in the way of his deserving rage. Goneril and Regan show themselves to be sociopaths which Lear is not. Aside from his love for Cordelia, Lear also has the loyalty and affection of the Duke of Kent, Gloucester and his fool. These men, all honorable and compasssionate characters, stand with Lear even after it is clear they have little or nothing to gain from his friendship. This is a telling thing in itself that should not be overlooked. It is not likely he should receive such loyalty if he were nothing but a cold-hearted despot.
It's true that Lear makes an emotional conversion by the end of the play, becoming more openly affectionate and compassionate toward all, especially Cordelia whom he has clearly wronged. While this conversion, made at an earlier stage, might have prevented or at least altered the course of events, it could have in no way changed the characters of Goneril or Regan. Their behavior cannot be attributed directly to Lear from what we learn about him in the text.
If we accept that feeling affection and "being open with emotions" to be womanly qualities, then Lear certainly has become more womanly by the end and a better person for it, though perhaps too late. This is unfortunate but we need not give him such a hard time.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Monday, June 15, 2009
The Moviegoer
Reaction to The Moviegoer
(or, Somebody Please Shoot Me)
It is Sunday at ten p.m. and I have just finished reading The Moviegoer. It had the remarkably unique quality of being one of the most well-crafted, well-conceived and affecting novels I have ever read while at the same time being almost impossible to sit down to. A rare dichotomy of brilliant writing and joyless reading. The word buzz-kill comes to mind. It felt like Percy, through his character Binx, beat me over the head for two-hundred forty pages with cynicism and ennui.
And poor Binx, oh miserable man that he is! In the first chapter he describes his "search" without really saying what it is that he is looking for. He hints at God or religion or some central philosophy worth living for. He contends that this is what his story is all about and it is purportedly the central unifying theme. However, I don't really recognize it as a search. A search would require an open-minded and objective look at the world around him. It would demand that he ask objective questions and seek objective answers. This he does not do. As Binx goes through the motions of life he sees everything through a lens of overtly hostile cynicism. He projects this trait upon everyone and every event in his life. His search is disingenuous at best. It seems more of a code-word he uses to "certify" himself and imbue some meaning on his life, in much the same way the moviegoer does who sees his hometown on the big screen. It helps to make him a "someone" rather than just an "anyone." He chooses to believe he is searching although he has already settled on the answer. Binx's problem is combating "everydayness," an endeavor that could not be helped even if he found some sort of faith. He says, "If God himself had appeared to me, it would have changed nothing. In fact, I have only to hear the word God and a curtain comes down in my head." (145)
In the end, it is difficult to say whether or not Binx finds what he is looking for. As for faith or religion, I doubt it. Acceptance of his life as meaningless, perhaps. I think he takes a sort of pride in his misery. Referring to the seats in the movie theater he says there exists a "sense of wonder about the enduring, about all the nights... when the seats endured alone in the empty theater. The enduring is something which must be accounted for. One cannot simply shrug it off." (80) Binx might have made some cursory acceptance of religion, the "heroic unreligiousness" of his family in church (160), but it has little do with combating everydayness. He has instead let go of the search and contented himself to face the everyday like a good stoic.
The Moviegoer left me somewhat dissatisfied in the end. The vagueness of the epilogue left me wanting. Probably this is what Percy was after, to leave the reader with a sense of dissatisfied acceptance. Dare I say, it is a must-read, but you might be prepared with a length of rope just in case.
(or, Somebody Please Shoot Me)
It is Sunday at ten p.m. and I have just finished reading The Moviegoer. It had the remarkably unique quality of being one of the most well-crafted, well-conceived and affecting novels I have ever read while at the same time being almost impossible to sit down to. A rare dichotomy of brilliant writing and joyless reading. The word buzz-kill comes to mind. It felt like Percy, through his character Binx, beat me over the head for two-hundred forty pages with cynicism and ennui.
And poor Binx, oh miserable man that he is! In the first chapter he describes his "search" without really saying what it is that he is looking for. He hints at God or religion or some central philosophy worth living for. He contends that this is what his story is all about and it is purportedly the central unifying theme. However, I don't really recognize it as a search. A search would require an open-minded and objective look at the world around him. It would demand that he ask objective questions and seek objective answers. This he does not do. As Binx goes through the motions of life he sees everything through a lens of overtly hostile cynicism. He projects this trait upon everyone and every event in his life. His search is disingenuous at best. It seems more of a code-word he uses to "certify" himself and imbue some meaning on his life, in much the same way the moviegoer does who sees his hometown on the big screen. It helps to make him a "someone" rather than just an "anyone." He chooses to believe he is searching although he has already settled on the answer. Binx's problem is combating "everydayness," an endeavor that could not be helped even if he found some sort of faith. He says, "If God himself had appeared to me, it would have changed nothing. In fact, I have only to hear the word God and a curtain comes down in my head." (145)
In the end, it is difficult to say whether or not Binx finds what he is looking for. As for faith or religion, I doubt it. Acceptance of his life as meaningless, perhaps. I think he takes a sort of pride in his misery. Referring to the seats in the movie theater he says there exists a "sense of wonder about the enduring, about all the nights... when the seats endured alone in the empty theater. The enduring is something which must be accounted for. One cannot simply shrug it off." (80) Binx might have made some cursory acceptance of religion, the "heroic unreligiousness" of his family in church (160), but it has little do with combating everydayness. He has instead let go of the search and contented himself to face the everyday like a good stoic.
The Moviegoer left me somewhat dissatisfied in the end. The vagueness of the epilogue left me wanting. Probably this is what Percy was after, to leave the reader with a sense of dissatisfied acceptance. Dare I say, it is a must-read, but you might be prepared with a length of rope just in case.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)