Free Essay on Demystifying the Mystery of State: King Lear and the World Upside Down

In "DEMYSTIFYING THE MYSTERY OF STATE": King Lear and the World Upside Down, Margot Heinemann focuses on Shakespeare's criticism. She argues that the play is much concerned with government and politics as it is with personal, familial issues. Heinemann critics stress that the play should be interpreted regarding a personal loss of power and as the collapse of social and political structures. She also suggests ways in which the political implications of King Lear might be related to the politics of England under King James I.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Heinemann asserts that the play is much a political one that is concerned with power and the government. She confidently believes that despite other productions trying to make it a drama that is more and only focused on psychological and personal perspectives. She supports her claim by saying that even if the recent productions' aims at targeting the modern audiences, it still does not make an intelligent action. Heinemann believes that the audiences who are being targeted by the recent productions through their claim are very simple-minded. Further supporting this claim that she does not only mean the play is only based on a political perspective as her assertions may be misinterpreted by many as one that does not support claims from other sources such as that of the recent production sources which make it a purely personal, familial, and psychological drama. Therefore, King Lear is not only a play that primarily focuses on one individual. Shakespeare himself tries to generalize the issues as a way to show that the play was not only concerned with Lear's psychology or character.

Further expounding on his critics and the chapter, Heinemann supports his claim by saying that the main political thrust displayed from the play is not just to propound an ideal, simplified, harmonious solution for conflicts and contradictions that were genuinely insoluble in the society. It rather aims at representing the complex conflicts of interests and ideology of Shakespeare that he uses in his own words. The political effect in the play is dramatized in the form of human conflicts and actions. Heinemann argument is aimed at showing the different ideologies that are capable of holding the society together. These ideologies are usually mixed with political conflicts. Heinemann is also trying to show how learning and interpretation of reading have changed since the interpretation of historical reading. She is trying to change the society on how they should approach different readings basing on different issues, and that is why she tried analyzing the play in terms of political and historical significance. By trying to support her main claim, she also asserts that the play showed optimistic confidence in political and military action to fulfill the national destiny that gave place to a sense of history as tragedy, and modern English history became for the time being a banned subject.

Given the technical approach of Heinemann, she is trying to get the audience focus on seeing more and applicable information from the play. She is trying to form some other ways of thinking that should not only be based on the claim by the recent productions. It is the reason as to why besides the assertion that the play is much a political one, she also supports her claim of why she thinks it is concerned with power and government.