Shakespeare`s King Lear

 “King Lear” was written between 1605-6 and reflects philosophical trends and world views as the social and political foundation the society. This play unveils values and traditions of the Middle Ages, and appeals to readers through its vividness and topicality of themes portrayed in the play. The article under analysis is “King Lear: the lost leader; group disintegration, transformation and suspended reconsolidation” by Denis Brown.

In this article the author analyses the personality of the King Lear and gives psychological interpretation of his actions and motives. Brown applies group theory and leadership to analyze actions of King Lear and other characters. The author states that King Ear can be called “the lost leader” who lacks vision and leadership skills, but follows selfish and egoistic behavior patterns. Taking into account historical significance of the play and personality of King Lear, it is possible to disagree with the author saying that King Lear embodies qualities and skills typical for all leaders of his time.

Brown states that “his last act of leadership is a descent into a leader’s narcissism, forcing the rivals Gonerill and Regan into fulsome flattery, the more honest and perceptive Cordelia into the rhetorical equivalent of silent withdrawal — `nothing’ (Brown, 2001).

It is possible to disagree with this testament saying that is a real leader who has ability to persuade others willingly to behave differ­ently. King Lear does not possess leader’s narcissism, which should be interpreted as a high level of emotional involvement in his relationships with other people. As a leader, King Lear has empathy with other people and gives attention to what events and actions mean.

He sees himself more as a conservator and regulator of the exist­ing order of affairs with which he identifies, and from which he gains benefits. King Lear’s sense of identity does not depend upon social roles which helps him to search out opportunities for change. For instance, Lear comments “For you, great King, /      I would not from your love make such a stray / To match you where I hate; therefore beseech you “(Act I, scene I, lines 211-213). This scene depicts that leadership of King Lear is based on a function of personality, and it can be seen as a behavioral category. It may also be viewed in terms of the role of the leader and his ability to achieve effective performance from others.

Brown characterizes King Lear as a psychopathic individual stating that “the play commences in near-fairytale narcissism, where the ageing king wishes to retain all the trappings of his sovereignty yet relinquish all its responsibilities” (Brown, 2001). Taking into account events describing in the play, it is evident that a king’s function, is to achieve the task. King Lear’s leadership influence is dependent upon the type of power he exercises over other people. The King does not “relinquish all its responsibilities”, but gives certain freedom to his subordinates in order to maintain control and manage the situations they are faced with.

It is possible to say that legitimate power of King Lear is based on the subordinate’s perception that the leader has a right to exercise influence because of the leader’s role and position in the society. The power of the King is based on authority and the hierarchical structure of society. Lear states: “My train are men of choice and rarest parts, / That all particulars of duty know / And in the most exact regard support / he worships of their name” (Act I, scene iv, lines 178-181).  The power King Lear exercises is based on the role of the leader in the society, and not on the nature of the personal relationship with others.

Brown comes to conclusion that: “the core action of the play concerns Lear’s renunciation of group leadership and the attempt of a surviving `good’ group to ward off total disintegration and `heal’ the lost group leader” (Brown, 2001). Brown does not take into account that leaders and their groups are therefore interdependent. Also, the author does not account of the main functions of the leader performed by King Lear: maintain relationships between themselves and the group and the indi­viduals in it – effective in the sense that they are conducive to achieving the task. I

n reality, King Lear cannot be called “the lost leader”, because he performs the main leadership function. His actions in one area affect both the others; thus successful achievement of the task is essential if the group is to be held together and its members motivated to give their best effort. Action directed at group and individual needs relates to the needs of the task. It is impossible to consider individuals in isolation from the group and to consider the group without referring to the individuals within it.

Society in “King Lear” represents different groups influenced by leadership of the King and external events. Brown argues that “Shakespeare’s Lear is about group dynamics in extremis, …  But the group members can only do this by partially sharing the darkness into which their erstwhile leader has been plunged” (Brown, 2001). It is difficult to agree with the author because the style of leadership adopted by King Lear has an important influence on the behavior of members of the group.

The groups in the play have their own system of sanctions including sarcasm and playing tricks, ostracis­ing those members who do not conform with the group norms. The group does not “share the darkness” of the leader, because the group exists to achieve a common purpose and on the individual level each individual is independent member of this group who does not follow leader’s values.

On the other hand it is difficult to agree that the actions of King Lear can be characterized as “darkness”.  The king’s power depends on the environment and, of course, on the group. Analysing the qualities of leadership in terms of intelligence, initiative, self-assurance, it is possible to say that King Lear embodies the main skills and values important for leaders.

In sum, the article under analysis portrays King Lear negatively and does not take into account important functions of King Lear as a king and his role as a group leader. It is possible to say leadership of Lear is exercised through greater knowledge and exper­tise, and by his reputation. His skills are based on the per­sonal qualities and charisma. His function as a king are more important than presented in the article, because the author does not focus on leadership in terms of the relationship with followers and the adoption of a particular style of leadership.

           
References

1. Shakespeare, w. King Lear. Available at; http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext97/1ws3310.txt
2. Brown, Dennis King Lear: The Lost Leader; Group Disintegration, Transformation and Suspended Reconsolidatio. Critical Survey, Vol. 13, 2001, p. 19.