Why is KING LEAR so EFFINN HARDDDD!!! (1 Viewer)

[patchy20]

i just took this from last years markers notes

​

For The Tragedy of King Lear, textual integrity involves the literary elements and techniques
(language, structure, content, form and features, themes and characterisation) contributing to a personal
appreciation and understanding of the play. Candidates also needed to evaluate how the play transcends
its original context and to consider what constitutes the ‘enduring power’ of Shakespeare’s
characterisation of King Lear. This relates to the play’s ‘reception in different contexts.’
In better responses, candidates adopted an authoritative voice which revealed their own personal
thoughtful and informed engagement with the play. The best responses were grounded in the play, The
Tragedy of King Lear, rather than simply using readings and/or productions as an artificial construct for
a thesis. When better candidates accessed a reading and/or production, they used this to supplement
their own personal view or to highlight an alternative perception of an extract from the prescribed text
that was being used to evaluate Shakespeare’s characterisation of Lear.

so we have to discuss how we personally interpret the play [for example as a drama of the family and politics] and then we can say, eg.my interpretation blah blah king lear is a rash and overbearing parent. Richard Eyre supports this interpretation through staging and lears sycophantic tone...


can anyone tell me if im on the right track? i have never done anything about personal interpretations in class ​

 

[danish222]

I'd say you are on the right track. Personal interpretation/response is simply how you view the play- eg. why you think the tragedy occured. Make sure you analyse at least 2 parts of the play and follow a character/motif/theme/imagery thread through the play to show/prove your reading. This will help to show textual integrity of the play. You can use other productions or readings of the play to show how they support or disagree with your interpretation.

Hope that helped

 

[will-pj-doyle]

see, that's where i get confused...what you've done makes sense, like, here's my personal reading, here's how that's supported in a production.

that's what i did in my trial and i got destroyed. the kid who got the highest mark in my year did not mention a single production and stuck only to his readings.

which is where i think it comes down to what question they ask us.

my trial question:

"The univerality of CONFLICT enables audiences throughout time and across cultures to derive relevance from The Tragedy Of King Lear."

Does your response to the play challenge or confirm this view?

see, that's not such a bad question, but they didn't like me talking about a nihilistic production as well as my personal christian reading (i used the nihilistic to express relevance across cultures and to contrast my personal christian reading). they only wanted my personal christian reading.

i just get scared they'll ask us something like:

The Fool. Discuss. :mad1:

 

[morganforrest]

see, that's where i get confused...what you've done makes sense, like, here's my personal reading, here's how that's supported in a production.

that's what i did in my trial and i got destroyed. the kid who got the highest mark in my year did not mention a single production and stuck only to his readings.

which is where i think it comes down to what question they ask us.

my trial question:

"The univerality of CONFLICT enables audiences throughout time and across cultures to derive relevance from The Tragedy Of King Lear."

Does your response to the play challenge or confirm this view?

see, that's not such a bad question, but they didn't like me talking about a nihilistic production as well as my personal christian reading (i used the nihilistic to express relevance across cultures and to contrast my personal christian reading). they only wanted my personal christian reading.

i just get scared they'll ask us something like:

The Fool. Discuss. :mad1:

Funny thing is that I would love a question like that as we have done so much in class on the fool/cordelia/dover relationship/interaction

 

[patchy20]

.

Hope that helped

thanks, that helped me understand alot!

 

[forevaunited]

I too am so scared about specific questions . . . especially those regarding the Fool. Like I understand that he's an important part of the play and i know his remarks are deeper than what appears . .. but im really not that confident discussing him.

I just hope they dont force and theme or concept on us. Like, how does the issue of political/economic power shape your understanding of the play. See, I like the question above because it mentions a theme (conflict) but then it says "does your response challenge or confirm this view?"

 

[ccc123]

a) a few years ago, it did not ask about readings!!! IT NEVER HAS it draws a response regarding context!!!

B) MY TEACHER IS THE SENOIR MARKER FOR BOTH JOURNEY AND LEAR, HE HAS TOLD US REPEATEDLY THAT THE BOS HATES SUPERFICIAL REFERENCES TO PRODUCTIONS ETC, AND THAT, THE STUDY ITSELF IS A STUDY OF THE PLAY, NOT ITS INTERPRETATIONS...

This may be horrible to understand asit was for me post-trials, but base ur entire ANSWER ON THE PLAY ITSELF! no readings, or productions....

textual integrity is why the play is valued.... this is merely because of its timeless reception i.e. poignant images such as lear carrying cordelia in 5.3, the play's beautuful construction and its exhibition of compelling moral codas etc etc

I think what your teacher was implying is that your essay should never be a mere summary of the various critical readings of a text, as your own personal engagement with the text is paramount. However, I don't think there's any harm in alluding to various critical intepretations to support, enhance or just provide your own response with more breath and evidence of discerning research. That said, I tend to agree that critical readings should compliment, rather than overshadow your own interpretation.