Lear király

By William Shakespeare

Egy zaklatott kora hajnalon Lear király úgy dönt, hogy a birodalmat felosztja három lánya között. Szokatlan döntését szokatlan órában hajtja végre, pillanatnyi szeszélyétől vezéreltetve összehívja a királyi udvart, majd leányaihoz a mesékből jól ismert

• Language: Magyar
• Publisher: Fapadoskonyv.hu Kiadó
• Release date: Mar 9, 2016
• ISBN: 9789633764428

William Shakespeare

William Shakespeare is widely regarded as the greatest playwright the world has seen. He produced an astonishing amount of work; 37 plays, 154 sonnets, and 5 poems. He died on 23rd April 1616, aged 52, and was buried in the Holy Trinity Church, Stratford.

Book preview

WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE

LEAR KIRÁLY

Dráma

Honlap: www.fapadoskonyv.hu

E-mail: [e-mail]

Borító: Rimanóczy Andrea

978-963-376-442-8

© Fapadoskonyv.hu Kft.

SZEMÉLYEK

Lear, Britannia királya.

A franczia király.

A burgundi fejedelem.

Cornwall, fejedelem.

Alban, fejedelem.

Kent, gróf.

Gloster, gróf.

Edgar, Gloster fia.

Edmund, Gloster törvénytelen fia.

Curan, udvaroncz.

Aggastyán, Gloster haszonbérlője.

Orvos.

Bolond.

Oszvald, Goneril udvarnoka.

Tiszt Edmund szolgálatában.

Nemesek, Cordelia kíséretében.

Hírnök.

Szolgák, Cornwallnál.

Goneril, |

Regan, |

Cordelia |

Lear leányai.

Lovagok a király kíséretében.

Tisztek, követek, katonák és kísérők

BEVEZETÉS

Lear király két negyedrét kiadásban jelent meg, mielőtt az 1623-ki folio-kiadásba kerűlt. Származási idejét 1603. és 1606. közé lehet tenni. 1603-ból van ugyanis Harsnet könyve: Discovery of Popish impostors, (Pápista csalók leleplezése), mely többek közt leírja, hogyan zsákmányolták ki a jezsuiták a babonás asszonyok hiszékenységét, midőn egy Puckham nevű katholikus házában három nőcselédet és két szolgát kigyógyítottak az ördöngösségből. Mikor az ügy a törvényszék elé kerűlt, nyilvánosságra jöttek mind amaz ördögi nevek és az ördöngösséggel járó különféle részletek, melyeket Shakespeare Edgar hóbortos beszédjeiben felhasznál. Ezeket csak Harsnet könyvéből ismerhette, következőleg a drámát csak 1603. után írhatta. De 1606. előtt már készen kellett lennie, mert a londoni könyvkereskedők lajstromába való beiktatásánál világosan meg van említve, hogy Lear király-t 1606. karácsonyán előadták Whitehallban a királyi udvar előtt. Születési évéül legnagyobb valószínűséggel az 1604-ik évet lehet venni, mert a következő évben, 1605-ben már egy más Lear-dráma jelent meg, s nehogy ez tévedésbe vezesse a közönséget, mely összezavarhatta volna Shakespearenek a színpadon már előadott Learjével, megjelentek 1608-ban a negyedrét kiadások, Shakespeare nevének világos megemlítésével és a tartalom megjelölésével.

A Lear királyról és leányairól szóló mondát a költő Holinshed krónikájából vette, mely így szól: „Leir, Bladud fia, a világ 3105-dik esztendejében foglalta el a brit trónt, ugyanakkor, midőn Joas volt Juda királya. Leir nemes érzésű férfiú volt, ki alatt az ország és népe felvirágzott. Ő építette Cairleir városát, mely most Leicesternek neveztetik, a Dore folyó mellett. A mint a könyvekben meg van írva, nem volt más utódja, mint három leánya, névszerint Gonorilla, Regan és Cordilla, kiket gyöngéden szeretett, kivált Cordillát, a legifjabbat."

„Midőn ezen Leir élemedett lett és a kortól elgyöngűlt, meggyőződést akart szerezni leányainak szeretetéről s azt tenni utódjává a trónon, ki legjobban megnyeri tetszését. Azért először Gonorillát, a legidősebbet kérdezte, mennyire szereti őt. Gonorilla az isteneket hívta bizonyságúl, hogy jobban szereti őt saját életénél, mely pedig joggal a legdrágább előtte. E felelettel atyja nagyon meg volt elégedve s ugyanezt a kérdést intézte második leányához, ki ünnepélyesen megesküdött, hogy jobban szereti őt, mint a nyelv kifejezni képes, jobban, mint a világ minden más teremtményét. Erre maga elé hivatta legifjabb leányát, Cordillát, s ez a következő választ adá: Jól ismerem a nagy atyai szeretetet és gondviselést, melyet irántam mindig tanúsítottál, azért nem beszélek máskép, mint szívem érez és lelkiismeretem oktat. Légy meggyőződve, hogy mindig szerettelek, s a meddig életem tart, szeretni foglak, mint édes atyámat, és ha szeretetemet mélyebben meg akarod mérni, tudd meg: annyit érsz, a mennyivel bírsz, és eddig terjed szeretetem s nem tovább."

„E felelettel az atya épen nem volt megelégedve, s férjhez adta két idősebb leányát, az egyiket Henninushoz, Cornwallis herczegéhez, a másikat Maglanushoz, Albania herczegéhez, s úgy rendelé, hogy halála után országa osztassék fel köztük, felét azonban rögtön megkapják. De harmadik leánya, Cordilla számára, semmit sem rendelt. Történt azonban, hogy Galliának, a mostani Francziaországnak egyik fejedelme, névszerint Aganippus, meghallá a nevezett Cordilla szépségét és női erényeit s hitvesűl kíváná őt. Követséget küldött atyjához és megkérte kezét. Válaszúl azt nyeré, hogy megkaphatja a leányt, de hozományra nem számíthat, mert már minden át van írva testvéreire. Daczára annak, hogy Cordilla nem nyert hozományt, Aganippus mégis nőül vette őt, egyesegyedül szépsége és szeretetreméltó tulajdonságai kedvéért. Ez Aganippus egyike volt a tizenkét királynak, kik akkoriban, mint a brit történetben írva van, Gallia fölött uralkodtak. De hogy visszatérjünk Leirre: midőn már igen magas kort ért, a két herczegnek, kik idősb leányait nőül vették, hosszúnak kezdett feltűnni az idő, míg trónra juthatnak; azért fegyvert ragadtak ellene és megfoszták uralkodásától, kikötve számára az élethosszig való eltartást. Életjáradékot tűztek ki számára, azaz meghatározott összeget szabtak ki háztartására, de idő folytán ezt is megrövidítették, úgy Maglanus, mint Henninus. De Leir legnagyobb fájdalma az volt, hogy látnia kellett leányainak szívtelenségét, kiknek a legcsekélyebb is, a mivel bírt, már sok volt, úgy hogy egyiktől a másikhoz kellett mennie és oly nyomorba jutott, hogy csak egy szolgát akartak neki engedni. Végűl két legidősb leánya, a hajdani szép és kedves szavak daczára, oly szeretetlenűl, vagy mondhatni, természetellenesen viselte magát, hogy szükségtől hajtva elbújdosott az országból és Galliába hajózott, hogy vigaszt keressen legifjabb leányánál, Cordillánál, kit azelőtt gyűlölt."

„Lady Cordilla hallva megérkezését és inséges helyzetét, először titkon egy összeg pénzt küldött neki, hogy fölszerelhesse és állásához való személyzettel vehesse körűl magát. Így fölszerelve követte meghívását udvarához, s itt oly szíves, tiszteletteljes és gyöngéd fogadtatásra talált, úgy veje, Aganippus, mint leánya, Cordilla részéről, hogy nagy szívbeli vigasztalására szolgált, mert nem kisebb tiszteletet mutattak iránta, mintha ő maga lett volna az egész ország királya. És midőn elmondá másik két leányának viseletét, Aganippus hatalmas hadsereget és nagy hajóhadat szerelt föl, hogy visszahelyezze őt trónjára. Elhatározták, hogy Cordilla vele menjen, mert megigérte, hogy rá hagyja országát, mint jogszerű örökösére, tekintet nélkül arra, mit engedett át előbb másik két leányának és férjeiknek. S midőn a sereg és hajóhad elkészűlt, Leir leányával és vejével tengerre szállt, s midőn Britanniába érkeztek, győzelmes csatát vívtak ellenségeikkel, s Maglanus és Henninus elestek. Ezután Leirt visszahelyezték trónjára, melyen még két évig uralkodott s azután meghalt, mindössze negyven éven át uralkodván. Holttestét Leicesterben temették el, a Dore medre alatti sírboltban, közel a városhoz."

A krónika azután még Cordelia sorsával is foglalkozik. Lear halála után ő lép a trónra s több éven át boldogan uralkodik; de aztán föllázadnak ellene unokaöcscsei, az albaniai Morgan és a cornwallisi Conidagus; legyőzik, börtönbe vetik s oly szorosan tartják, hogy kétségbeesésében megöli magát.

Gloster grófnak és két fiának történetét, mely párhúzamosan halad Lear és leányainak történetével, s oly művészileg van bele szőve, hogy nem mint egyszerű epizódot, hanem mint a dráma cselekvényének kiegészítő részét kell tekintenünk, Shakespeare Sidney Fülöp Arcadiá-jából vette. Itt egy paphlagoniai király szerepel, ki épen úgy, mint Gloster, hitelt ad törvénytelen fia, Plexistus, áskálódásainak a törvényes fiú, Leonatus ellen, s ez kénytelen futás által menteni meg életét. Plexistus ekkor letaszítja atyját a trónról, megvakítja és nyomorba dönti. A boldogtalan apát Leonatus veszi oltalmába, vezetője lesz bújdosásában s megmenti életét, midőn egy magas szikláról le akar ugrani. Eddig tart a hasonlóság. A mi ezután történik, annak semmi köze sincs Edgar és Edmund történetéhez. A korcs Plexistus meg akarja gyilkolni testvérét, de ez ellenáll s szövetségesekre talál; a pontusi király is hadat küld segítségére, a nép fellázad Plexistus ellen és elűzi. A vak király Leonatus fejére helyezi a koronát s abban a pillanatban meghal.

Shakespeare életében Lear király az akkori közönség legkedveltebb darabjai közé tartozott, a mit a több negyedrét kiadáson kívül az is bizonyít, hogy ugyan-e tárgyról s ugyan-e czím alatt egy más dráma is jelent meg, kevéssel a valódi Lear után, s ennek népszerűségét akarta a maga számára kizsákmányolni. Alig van a költőnek darabja, mely oly gazdag volna összeütközésekben, mint ez. Mintha megbomlott volna a világ

Reviews for Lear király

[composingcomposer · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

There are three main reasons for the disorder already occurring by the end of Act I. The first and most obvious is Lear's madness. He certain seems to be loosing it a bit, and his crazed banishment of Cordelia and Kent couldn't possibly have done anything but harm to him. The second reason is Cordelia's sister's treachery. It could be argued that they appear to be trying to protect him and their people by taking away his knights, he is crazy after all, if it weren't for Cordelia's parting words to them; "I know you what you are;/And, like a sister, am most loth to call/Your faults as they are nam'd. Love well our father:/To your professed bosoms I commit him:/But yet, alas, stood I within his grace, I would prefer him to a better place." And a few lines later; "Time shall unfold what plighted cunning/Who cover faults, at last shame them derides." These lines seem to indicate that Cordelia knows that Goneril and Regan are not only flattering Lear for gain, but also that they hold him in contempt, and will likely do him harm, and revealing the second harbinger of disorder.

The third indicator of the chaos to come is Edmund. I feel bad for him, for the contempt others hold him in because of the doings of his parents, but he quickly does what he can to dispel my pity for him with his evil attitudes as he works to turn his father and brother against one another. I find it ironic that he distains his father's belief in fate through astrology, yet confesses that because of when he was born he was supposed to be 'rough and lecherous,' yet doesn't believe himself to have those traits he was just showing.

Shakespeare's purpose in showing this disorder seems to come from the idea of dividing his kingdom. A divided kingdom would often lead to civil war and chaos, so Lear's deliberate dividing of the kingdom would probably have been viewed as deliberately inviting disorder.

Power in England was structured in a pyramid. The king on top, and wealth and power went to a few nobles who had all the money. Lear was trying to disrupt that structure in a way that would have alarmed the people watching the play. Cordelia took a great risk in not bowing to her father's wishes, as his denying her dowry could have driven away both her suitors, leaving her alone and destitute in a world that didn't favor lone women. In her case, however Cordelia's suitor from France still marries her, which would be very unusual since she had no dowry, and she wouldn't gain him an alliance with England.

Family dynamics can change depending on the health of a person, as others may come into their lives and as children grow up. Cordelia was Lear's favorite child, yet when she would not lie to him with flattery, he cast her off. Why? Did he not realize that her impending marriage would change is relationship with her? She would still love him, of course, but even with the play being in pre-Christian era, the belief would probably have been that the wife's foremost alliegence should be to her husband, and Lear should have understood this. In fact, it seems strange that he would have even questioned this part of the structure of society at all.

No one has a perfect family. This is shown in Edgar and Edmund's family. Gloster (or Gloucester as some versions call him) may have been unfaithful to his wife, it's never stated whether she was alive at the time of Edmund's conception. If Gloster was unfaithful to his wife than he was dishonest and breaking one of the oldest understandings of marriage. If Edgar's mother had already died, that Gloster was not responsible enough to remarry, and to marry Edmund's mother, or at least admit himself Edmund's father when the boy was a child, instead of waiting until Edmund was old enough to distinguish himself, and in doing so, add to Gloster's reputation. It seems very unfair that Edmund, and almost any other illigitmate child born until the the late 1900s should be punished for something that their parents did. Yet neither should Edmund take out his misfortunes on his brother, who was, in all probability, guiltless in tormenting him. After all, Edgar trusts Edmund completely, which does not seem like an attitude he would hold had he tormented Edmund before. I think that Gloster could have stopped his fate had he treated Edmund with kindness from the beginning of his life, rather than waiting until Edmund could add to his reputation to acknowledge him.

I don't actually seem him mocking Edmund, so much as simply being ashamed of his illegitimacy because it was Gloster's own act that was the cause of Edmund's bastardy. As Gloster was speaking to Kent, he was very frank about the manner of Edmund's conception, to the point that we would say he was being rude to Edmund, but really, for the time, the fact that he had acknowledged Edmund as his son at all was better than many bastards would have gotten. For this reason I think that more than anything it was the fact that he took so long to acknowledge Edmund, that led to Edmund's bitterness and Gloster's downfall.

(This review is patched up from posts I made on an online Shakespeare class)

[charlie68_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

An intriguing play aptly portrayed by the cast, working with an excellent script.

[jfoster_sf · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Classic Shakespeare tragedy.

[takeitorleaveit_1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

another play. another dreary subject. another tragic ending.

[angelarenea-1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

A fairly quick read. I didn't love it as much as I remember. Lear was way obsessed with 'nature' and the whole thing was so pompous. But not as bad as some of his other stuff.

[jwhenderson_1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

The division of the Kingdom begins the play with first, the Earls of Kent and Gloucester speculating on the basis for the division and second, the actual division by Lear based on professions of love requested from his three daughters. When this event goes not as planned the action of the play ensues and the reader is in for a wild ride, much as Lear himself.The play provides one of Shakespeare's most thoroughly evil characters in Edmund while much of the rest of the cast is aligned against each other with Lear the outcast suffering along with the Earl of Gloucester who is tricked by his bastard son Edmund into believing that his other son Edgar is plotting against him. While there are some lighter moments the play is generally very dark filled with the bitter results of Lear's poor decisions at the outset. Interestingly we do not get much of a back story and find, other than his age of four score years, little else to suggest why Lear would surrender his power and his Kingdom at the outset. The play is certainly powerful and maintains your interest through dramatic scenes, while it also provides for many questions - some of which remain unanswered.

[rosenstern · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

One of my favorite Shakespeare plays. King Lear asks his daughters who truly loves him, and the oldest two spin golden words of flattery while the third one cannot do so. Lear abandons his third daughter and this opens the story to the madness that follows. Brilliantly imagined characters and psyches. Worth it

[eustaciatan · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

There's probably nothing more I can say about this book, since it's been studied for a long time. But although this was a school book, for my Independent Oral Commentary, I really grew to love this book. Shakespeare's mastery of the English language is obvious here. From the truncated but meaningful dialogue, with the most famous probably being "Nothing my Lord". These three words manage to express love, and I have the utmost respect for Shakespeare for writing this. Even after our IOC, we are still influenced by this wonderful play. One friend proceeded to enact the storm scene in the rain (from sheer joy), and this was one of the most quoted books in our inscriptions to our Teacher on Teacher's Day. I could go on and on, but "no, let me shun that. That way madness lies" (Too much of a good thing can be bad after all)

[briandewey · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Shakespeare, William. King Lear. University of Virginia Electronic Text Center, 15XX. This is my favorite Shakespeare play. I don't know if I would have re-read it now if I hadn't had a copy on my iPaq and needed something to read at night without disturbing Molly and Tony on our trip to Madrid. I like Lear for its apocalyptic vision and because I think the transition from one generation to the next is an interesting topic. The paper I wrote on this play in college, which compares Edgar to the Fool, is one of my favorites.

[thatsfresh_1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Another great tragic tale as told my Shakespeare. Like all his plays, you're able to dig deep into this story and draw out tons of stories, themes and hidden meanings out of all its layers. An enjoyable read for any Shakespeare enthusiast.

[kettle666 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

The writer I feel most in awe of, by a mile, is Shakespeare. I'm not going to say anything much about him because it's all been said, so I'll just say he's the boss, and the play that most shocks and thrills and saddens me is King Lear. But I could almost have said exactly the same about most of the plays he wrote. Every time I experience him in performance I feel overwhelmed by his brilliance, and I just have to shut up before I get too sycophantic.

[jpsnow · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Compare to his other masterpieces, this was for me too wide in character and at the same time lacking the intimacy of baseline human feelings or experience. "Thy truth be thy dower."

[dirkjohnson_1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I'm somewhat biased: Lear is my favorite play written since the time of Euripides (who wrote later than my absolute favorites Aeschylus and Sophocles).The cast and execution of the Naxos audiobook are also excellent. I would list the cast, but the combination of blurred lines between book and performance and my own laziness and busy schedule prohibit me.

[othemts · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

This is my favorite Shakespeare tragedy. The plot, language, and characterization show the dramatist at his mature best.

[aliceanna-1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Probably the best of Shakespeare's works thematically, but not the easiest to follow. The sub-plots, the various intrigues, makes for a very convoluted plot. Some great roles though -- Lear, Edgar playing a madman, the Fool, the evil Edmund and the scheming daughters ... some serious scene-stealing material.

[mstrust · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Vain and silly King Lear demands that each of his three daughters describe their love for him. When the youngest and favored Cordelia gives a reply that is less gushing, but more reasonable, than her sisters, the King banishes her. This sets up a chain of miserable events in which the sisters and their husbands scramble to replace Cordelia in their father's heart, but fail because ambition brings out their cruelty.

[xshyx · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Let me talk about this specific edition of the book first. I have to read this edition for my creative writing class. At first, it can be so hard to read, but once you put your heart reading it, it is an easy read. This is also because the translation of the words are on the other side of the page. Unlike the other King Lear edition where you need to go to the back of the and check what those words mean. It's also affordable. The play itself is really good - not too depressing or cheesy for me compare to Hamlet. Even though this is about a royal family, anyone can relate it directly or indirectly whether they have rivalry with their siblings or a loyal assistant or having problems with their parents.

[mrslee_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

For some reason I was rather set against this play at the beginning. However, it had all the elements I enjoy in a story; gruesome, depressing and yet, after act two, compelling. I couldn't put it down. It's sort of the flip-side of his comedies. Lots of misunderstanding at the beginning, betrayals by the bad guys (that's not in the comedies much), lots of people running around disguised as other people, then at the end, instead of everyone forgiving everyone after all is revealed, almost everyone dies. Not quite the happy-ever-after ending of the comedies, yet in this play it worked. I'm left with one thing unsettled though, what happened to the blind Gloucester?

[wubsy_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I recently read this for the Shakespeare module on my degree, and was a little disappointed. Having been told it was the Bard's masterpiece, I perhaps came to it with rather high expectations, but then doesn't everyone with Shakespeare? In my own opinion I feel that it falls short of Hamlet, though is superior to Othello, Macbeth and Romeo and Juliet in Shakespeare's line-up of 'famous tragedies' in terms of reading; on performance I cannot comment having seen only Hamlet and R&J. The Fool is an excellent character, and his relationship with Cordelia perhaps the most interesting in the drama. Edmond is also a good dramatic character, but the sisters Regan and Gonerill were flat. Lear's language is itself at times brilliant, but something left me wanting the dexterity of Hamlet. Cordelia is powerful in her absence, and really dominates the final act through her own speech, and that of Lear. The play is undoubtedly infused with some magical moments, but as a text to read, it does not, for me, inspire or humor as Hamlet manages.

[clif_1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

This play was discussed by the Great Books KC group of which I am a member. We also watched the movie "A Thousand Acres" to see another version of the plot. This story becomes more harrowing the older one becomes. It's a reminder that one's children don't always remain loyal. But then again, some parents do bad things or make unwise choices.

[jhudsui_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

This did not quite top Hamlet as my favorite Shakespeare play but it is way up there. With the exception of the black and white hatted Gloucester boys there is a lot more moral complexity and ambiguity than you normally see in Shakespeare play; it wasn't until well into the play that I had any idea who I was supposed to sympathize with between the king and the daughters and that suspense actually adding a great deal to my interest while reading. Edgar's antic disposition is a lot more interesting and entertaining to me than Hamlet's but he doesn't have anything like Hamlet's soliloquies.

[jaelmore · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

If I could only recommend one Shakespeare Play it would be King Lear.

[cheme2005 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

This is my favorite of all of Shakespeare's works. Blood, death, and treachery. Who could ask for more!

[m2gilbert · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

The proud King Lear disowns his most dutiful daughter and is consequently betrayed by his other two. A bastard son betrays both his brother and father out of jealousy and malice. I think it is the saddest of his tragedies, and it moves very quickly to me (though not as quickly as Macbeth). It is also really one of the most profound expressions of human suffering ever written in the English language. The play sees deeply into the soul, and so I would often linger a bit on a line or speech with a quiet awe. The actions pierce its characters with a sad, penetrating irony. The eyes will eventually see in their blindness. The heart bleeds and the storm rages. It is depressing, yes. But in all, as depraved as its villains are, I also read in King Lear what is very beautiful about humanity and kinship, however frail it may appear teetering on the edge of a cliff: compassion, loyalty, charity, and mercy.

[crazy4reading · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Took me awhile to read this book due to life taking over my reading time. I also just wasn't interested in reading the play for awhile. The Tragedy of King Lear is a well written play by William Shakespeare. I have only read one other work by Shakespeare and that is Romeo and Juliet. I enjoyed the story of King Lear, I just wish I had a better understanding of his English writing to fully understand Shakespeare's works.

[jbd1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

One of my favorite Shakespeare plays, though it had been a long time since I read it. Didn't disappoint on a reread!

[jscape2000 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

The version of Lear I saw in 2012 too closely matched the texted: too many story lines, too many gag scenes, and too much talking about how hard it is to be king. The tragedy of Lear is that he gets exactly what he deserved. For me, it lacks much of the intrigue of Macbeth or the poetry of Hamlet or Othello.

[katieloucks · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Not my cup of tea, but it was nice to read it because I haven't before.

[jmcgarry2011 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Excellent work. I saw this performed at the Great River Shakespeare Festival in Winona, MN. Very powerful performance. I liked this edition in particular because it explained the nuances of the language right next to the original text. That plus the performance made this easier to understand.

[cbl_tn · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

King Lear makes a fateful decision to divide his kingdom between his three daughters. The reaction of one daughter, Cordelia, displeases the king so much that he cuts her out of any inheritance. The kingdom will be divided between the other two daughters, Goneril and Regan. His plan is that they will take care of him in his old age. They soon decide that they don't want to use their inheritance to support their father, and the king finds himself with nowhere to shelter in a violent storm. Meanwhile, the Earl of Gloucester's illegitimate son plots to usurp his legitimate brother's place as their father's heir. As in many of Shakespeare's plays, there are characters in disguise. It's filled with violence and cruelty without comic relief like the gravedigger scene in Hamlet. The family conflict at its heart will continue to resonate with audiences and readers as long as there are families.