The formal Earl of Kent, who had been banished by Lear, is a symbol of loyalty and honesty in this play. Even though Lear has ordered him to leave England, Kent still plans to serve the king. So, he disguises himself by cutting his hair, shaving his beard, and putting on the cloths of a commoner. At the beginning of the fourth scene, Kent presents a short soliloquy to state his intentions. A pun appears in the speech that modern audiences often fail to detect:
I razed my likeness. (4)
Literally, to raze means to tear down. In this context, it means (1) to change. Kent has changed his appearance. But the word also means (2) to apply a razor to one’s face. Kent has also just shaved off his beard. Kent is not only honest, he is also intelligent. Shakespeare uses both diction and poetic meter (high language indicating his noble intentions) to convey this positive image of Kent.
The language changes to prose when Kent directly asks Lear if he can be his servant. The shift indicates that Lear has fallen in authority and respect, and therefore the dignified language of poetry is unsuitable.
A definition of tragedy entails the fall of the protagonist. The protagonist moves from a position of power, authority, respect, and honor to one of grave dishonor and loss of his position of respect. In most tragedies, the fall occurs toward the end of the play. King Lear is unusual because the fall of the protagonist occurs in Act I. The play is also unusual – and highly ironic – because the protagonist willingly allows himself to fall from his position of authority. William Shakespeare enjoyed experimenting with the conventions of drama, and he would obviously have been most delighted with the notion of a tragedy that breaks the most important and crucial convention of that genre. But more importantly, Shakespeare makes it work. King Lear remains one of the greatest tragedies ever written.
After Lear agrees to keep Kent in his service, he encounters some difficulty with Oswald, Goneril’s obnoxious servant. Oswald first ignores Lear when the former king calls him and then speaks bluntly and rudely to him. Lear becomes enraged and strikes the saucy servant (at line 72). Oswald then speaks angrily and even more rudely to the king, so Kent trips him and roughly pushes out of the room. Lear is beginning to realize what it means to be a king without a kingdom.
Shakespeare appreciated great comic banter and great comic characters, and the fools in his dramatic works often get many of the best lines in the plays. Touchstone in the comedy of As You Like It and especially Feste in Twelfth Night are two of Shakespeare’s greatest characters. The unnamed Fool in Lear deserves a place right alongside with them. The Fool in Lear provides not only comic relief to lighten the dark and serious moments of the play: the Fool also provides relevant social commentary. He criticizes the king to awaken him to the grave mistakes that he has made, and he enlightens the audience by provoking them into seeing Lear’s mistake from a variety of perspectives. When the Fool first appears on the stage, he takes off his fool’s cap and offers it to Kent (at line 81). He is implying that Kent should wear the hat of a fool because Kent has just done something very foolish. The fool’s cap is referred to as a coxcomb because the long pointed hats often had a ridged top that resembles the comb of a rooster (or cock).
The Fool explains that Kent has just been hired to serve a lord who is “out of favor” (85). A man who serves a lord that has no possessions, no authority, and no respect. A man who serves lord who has nothing will only get nothing for his service. And a man who serves a fool is a fool himself. And Lear’s Fool quickly implies that Lear himself is a fool:
Would I had two coxcombs and two daughters! (90)
The Fool then explains his riddle:
If I gave them all my living,
I’d keep my coxcombs myself. (92)
The word would (at line 90) means “I wish.” More importantly, the coxcombs symbolize the crown. The word living in this context refers to property and wealth. Thus, the Fool is implying that although Lear could leave all of his wealth and property to his daughters, he should never give them his crowns (his authority). If Lear still had his authority, he would not then be at the mercy of his callous daughters. So, since Lear has given up his crown, the Fool offers him a new hat to take the place of it. The Fool offers Lear his coxcomb because Lear has indeed foolishly given away his authority.
Although the Fool is jesting, Lear becomes somewhat incensed at being called a fool and warns the Fool that he could be whipped. The Fool responds with the following:
Truth’s a dog must to kennel; he must be whipped out, When Lady the brach may stand by the fire and stink.
(95-96)
The Fool is speaking metaphorically. He is stating that a good dog is forced out of the house and sent to a kennel or doghouse while a bad dog is allowed to stay indoors even though it smells bad (or acts offensively). On one level, the good dog refers to the Fool himself. He is just being truthful in informing Lear that the old king has been foolish. The word brach means bitch or female dog. This word, then, refers directly to Goneril (and Regan as well). They are allowed to stay indoors – they are allowed to stay in positions of authority even though they are acting rudely and offensively. On a second level, then, the good or truthful dog also symbolizes the truthful and honest Cordelia. She has been sent to the “kennel” – she has been banished – because she truthfully told Lear about the extent of her love for him.
The Fool continues to comment upon the foolishness of Lear giving up his kingdom for many lines. At one point he also uses the metaphor of an egg. The Fool asks Lear to give him an egg, and in return he will give Lear two crowns (suggesting two kingdoms – at line 136). When Lear asks for an explanation, the Fool tells him that after he cracks the egg in half and eats up the inside, he can then give Lear the two halves of the eggshell (which are also referred to as crowns). Thus, the only crown that Lear can now possess is one that is worthless. And that makes Lear worth far less than any king should be.
Perhaps the Fool’s most succinct comment about Lear’s foolish behavior comes next. The Fool tells Lear that when he gave away his kingdom, he carried “thy ass on thy back o’er the dirt” (141). A man who carries a horse or donkey on his back and attempts to walk down a dirt path would indeed be most foolish. He is doing the opposite of what is natural. The Fool, then, is informing Lear that he has acted unnaturally. The Fool is telling Lear that he does not even understand his own fundamental nature.
A note on medieval English legal theory regarding the king may prove useful here. According to such theory, the king of a land is different from other men because the king has two bodies in one: he is both Human and Divine. He is both a “poor, bare, fork’d animal” and a body of holy or “anointed flesh.” During the Middle Ages, men viewed their king, then, as something more than just a natural being. He is both man-like and god-like. Lear, though, is in confusion over his dual identity. By giving up his position as king, he is in essence giving up half of himself. He is trying to separate his human body from his divine body even though the two parts are actually inseparable. Lear’s problems are a result of his own failure to understand the unique position of king. His fatal error (what Aristotle refers to as hamartia) or mistake is not just his failure to understand the true natures of his daughters but also his failure to understand himself.
Just a few lines later, when he becomes
involved in a conflict with Goneril, Lear asks …
Who is it that can tell me who I am? (205)
Lear thus questions his own identity. The Fool answers the question: “Lear’s shadow” (206). And that answer is quite correct. The best and noblest and most spiritual part of Lear is gone, and what remains lacks substance.