Depiction of Masculinity in King Lear and Richard II - Essay Example

No: Institute’s Depiction of Masculinity in King Lear and Richard II (Association between Manhood and Leadership) King Lear and Richard II, both written differently by Shakespeare portray different storylines but similar cause that is to take hold of the kingdom and power. In Richard II, the role of women is nearly negligible as the story revolves around the male characters of the story ignoring any female characters. However, in King Lear, the role of women is not ignorable but they are tried to be governed by male characters of the story. Therefore, in both the plays, we can witness an association between manhood and leadership as the control and leadership does not lie with the male characters showing feminine values in the play whether their decisions are correct or false. The control is with the characters that are masculine in nature and not in sex. The main characters, King Lear and Richard II, both are more feminine as compared to masculine and their leadership hath a downfall on the basis of their feminine traits. King Lear while taking the decision of dividing his kingdom between his daughters conducts a ridiculous test just to flatter himself. He asks just a childish question and wishes to listen big announcements of love from his daughters whether they be true or false as he asks them, “Which of you shall we say doth love us most?” (Act 1, Scene 1) King Lear, the king of the land, the patriarch of the family is unable to recognize the true love and obsequious remarks of his daughters. He keeps all the power to bless his daughters or deprive them. Previously, he decides to divide the kingdom in three equal parts between his daughters but then, he puts a test to check the wordy love of his daughters in which, Cordelia fails to succeed and hence gets deprived of her right in the kingdom. The King shows a feminist way of cursing his daughter Cordelia for not saying elevated words for showing her love for him and gives her hand scornfully to the King of France without any blessing. Her speech was full of truth as she says, “Why have my sisters husbands, if they say They love you all?” (Act 1, Scene 1) She points towards her sisters and informs that their representation of extensive love for Lear is false as they cannot have husbands if they love their father to such a great extent as they cannot tolerate to leave their father at someone else’s hands. However, her sisters have no intention to live for their whole lives with their father and without husbands. However, Lear ignores his daughter Cordelia’s honest words and threats her that she would be unable to get her fortune showing his power as he says, “How, how, Cordelia! mend your speech a little, Lest it may mar your fortunes.” (Act 1, Scene 1) Lear knows that as the head of the family, as a patriarch, he has all the power to exercise on his daughters and make them work as per his own wishes. As a male head of the family, he is also aware of his manhood and wants his daughters to acknowledge his superiority by praising him and showing their overwhelming love for him ignoring every other male creature of the world. When Cordelia says that she loves her that much that is her duty and will give the due share of her love to her husband, Lear at once is aggravated as his masculine power over his most beloved daughter is threatened. Lear initially decides to give away his power but shows an emotional response that is feminist in nature as Jackson (2007) says, “The removal or transfer of (masculine) power represented by land, power, or the infliction of an injury results in an overwhelmingly (female) emotional response” (70). As per the writer Jackson (2007), Lear shows a more feminine nature instead of a masculine nature. He gets emotional when he sees that he is going to lose everything including his belongings and his daughters. Richard II on the other hand shows much more masculine power as compared to King Lear. In Richard II, Shakespeare indicates towards the power of King as God. People like Richard’s uncles, Gaunt and York stand for conventional values and show no problem in accepting the power of Richard II as his uncle Gaunt says, “God’s is the quarrel, for God’s substitute, His deputy anointed in His sight, Hath caused his death:” (Act I, scene 2, 37-39) Gaunt regards Richard as the righteous king who can only be punished by God is he performs any ills. However, his cousin Bolingbroke realizes that Richard is the wrong king and later on builds a small army to invade Richard’s kingdom. Richard abuses his power by taking away the rightful property of people and later on for using them for his own interest as he takes away his uncle’s property after his death and deprives his cousin Bolingbroke of his righteous land. In the whole ply, the readers are unable to see and witness many females and their importance on males as we can find very short space given to females. So, the masculine factor is quite dominant in the play Richard II. Richard is depicted to show less masculine power as understood by other characters of the play. For example in Act 1, Scene 1, Mowbrey and Bolingbroke get involved in a fight and want to settle through a combat, however, Richard suggests them to settle the issue through discussion instead of shedding each other’s blood as he says, “Let?s purge this choler without letting blood. This we prescribe, though no physician: Deep malice makes too deep incision; Forget, forgive, conclude, and be agreed” (Act 1, Scene 1, 153-156) His suggestion to settle the dispute through an unmanly manner makes him more feminine than masculine. According to Garofalo (2009), “this preference for speech over action stands in direct opposition to the more masculine impulses of Bolingbroke” (46). Garofalo further claims that Richard and Bolingbroke stand in contrast to each other as Bolingbroke represents the masculine while Richard represents the feminine. Richard II and King Lear both lament and weep over the loss, they have to face. Richard weeps and wails over the loss of his kingdom, which is taken over by his cousin Bolingbroke when Richard was on an expedition for war. However, King Lear weeps and laments many times over the ingratitude behaviours of his daughters and finally at the corpse of Cordelia showing himself as a more feminine character than masculine. Weeping and lamenting, both are associated with feminist features and as the main characters or protagonists lament over the losses that they face, their portrayal depicts of a more feminine sort in place of a masculine nature. Vaught (2008) informs that Shakespeare’s play Richard II can be seen as a depictive play in which, the readers can see an association between masculinity and expressive articulateness (4). The traits of manhood or masculinity restrict a man to shed tears over any kind of sorrow while, the protagonists of both the plays shed tears at their losses and show their feminine portrayal. King Lear considering himself old and ready to accept the dominance of female family members divides his kingdom after which, he gets deprived of his remaining rights as well. He is unable to depict the traits of a good leader or a strong masculine figure. He is more of a feminine nature as he starts cursing his daughter on showing less love for him and without considering the after-effects of his decision, banishes his daughter. Later on, he disapproves his decision and laments. Lear is unable to do anything but just able to narrate his loss to people. Likewise, Richard II in unable to show masculine power in fighting against the forces combating against him and tries to waste his time in battling that is not required. His wrong decisions enable the more masculine figure, Bolingbroke to take hold of the kingdom after which, Richard can only lament for the loss and for his decisions. Like Lear, he is ready to curse those who have deprived him of his kingdom but he is unable to take any action because he is more poetic and speaking figure than a masculine fighting figure. Hence, both the characters, King Lear and King Richard loss their power because of lacking in their personality. In reality, they lack masculinity and leadership qualities due to which, they are unable to judge people and the surrounding around them and the decisions that they take are based on emotional responses. The readers are unable to see any thoughtfulness in the decisions and emotional expressions of the two kings. They appear as more submissive than their counterparts in the plays King Lear and Richard II. King Lear at multiple occasions in the play informs that his daughters try to destabilize his authority and manhood (Fensham 80) as he says to Goneril, his oldest daughter, "I am ashamed that thou hast power to shake my manhood thus" (Act 1, Scene 4, 295-296) Lear shows shamefulness that his daughter enjoys more power than him while being a man, he should have more power. However, he has handed over this power to his daughters himself showing himself weak and powerless. Being a man, he perceives himself being belittled by his daughter because of her command on Lear’s knights to get out of the house. Goneril and Regan, both of Lear’s daughters show more attraction towards gaining control of the kingdom and their traits are more masculine than Lear as they try to do violent acts to take control of the whole kingdom. Richard shows utmost interest in adopting Italian fashion to such an extent that is not required. He becomes a person who likes his own being the most and it is due to this reason that he is unable to judge the lacking interest of people around him. He is involved in his personality so much that he is unable to evaluate his surroundings and hence depicts feminine traits. According to Vaught (2008), “Richard II is a notably feminine, melodramatic figure whose flaws include his narcissism and self-absorption” (20). His poetic speeches make him a tragic figure who is unable to take any actions for his betterment. He is unable to identify the problems around him because of his self-absorption that is regarded wholly as a feminine feature. He starts dramatizing the situation but is never able to take any actions and as a representation of manhood and masculinity, a man has to take actions to prove his mettle. While lamenting for his loss and handing over his kingdom to Bolingbroke, Richard says, “I?ll give my jewels for a set of beads, My gorgeous palace for a hermitage, My gay apparel for an almsman?s gown, My figured goblets for a dish of wood, My scepter for a palmer?s walking staff, My subjects for a pair of carved saints, And my large kingdom for a little grave.” (Act 111, Scene 111, 146-152) The language and the word usage of King Richard inform about his feminine portrayal. Like a lady, Richard bewails and counts his prior possessions and shows readiness in handing them over to Bolingbroke and taking less and inevitable things instead. The language used in the play also makes Richard more feminine than masculine. Therefore, while evaluating the characters of both the plays specially King Lear and Richard II, it is quite clear that both the characters show weaknesses due to which, they have to face adverse fates at the hands of their opponents. They make wrong decisions and show more attraction towards their own selves, which in King Lear is proved by his foolish demand of asking his daughters about who loves him the most in elevated speeches and in Richard II by his wrong decision of conducting a useless war expedition that finally becomes disadvantageous for the ruler. Also, Richard shows more pleasure in changing fashions and investing too much on his self willed interests not in favour of the kingdom. Both of the characters show weaknesses in terms of having masculine traits due to which, they get deprived of their kingdoms and power and have to hand over the power and land to those who are more masculine in character. Later on, their lamenting and weeping on their situations and loss also point towards their feminine traits and it is regarded as insulting for masculine figures to bewail and mourn. All the discussion shows the linkage between leadership and the masculine traits. What Shakespeare wants to prove in the plays is that leadership is a masculine trait and can exist with people depicting manhood or masculine traits, while the people with feminine traits are weak leaders and have to submit to masculine powers. Works Cited Fensham, Rachel. To Watch Theatre: Essays on Genre and Corporeality. Vol. 16. Peter Lang Pub Incorporated, 2009. Garofalo, Sanner. "A Balance between Richard? S “Tongue” And Bolingbroke? S “Teeth”: The Feminine and The Masculine In Richard II." The Birmingham Journal of Literature and Language Volume II 2009: 45-54. Jackson, M. T. Shaking Manhoods and Wandering Wombs: Castration, Hysteria, and Motherlessness in King Lear. Prized Writing 2006-2007 (2007): 69-75. [Online]. Jan 21, 2013. Shakespeare, William. King Lear. Ed. Stephen Orgel. New York: Penguin Books Inc., 1999. Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy of King Richard the Second. The Norton Shakespeare. Eds. Stephen Greenblatt, Walter Cohen, Jean E. Howard, and Katharine Eisaman Maus. London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1997. 952-1014. Vaught, Jennifer C. Masculinity and emotion in early modern English literature. Ashgate Publishing Company, 2008. Read More