At the beginning of the second scene Edmund stands alone on the stage and presents a soliloquy. A soliloquy is a speech that reveals the innermost thoughts of the speaker. The monologue is not intended to represent realistic speech.
Edmund begins with the following:
Thou, nature, art my goddess; to thy law
My services are bound. (1-2)
Shakespeare personifies nature as a metaphor to distinguish between two kinds of laws: the laws of nature and the laws of man (or society). Edmund is declaring that he would rather follow the laws of nature over the laws of man. The laws of man are not favorable toward Edmund. As a younger son, the social laws and rules indicate that he should inherit very little or nothing from his father upon his father’s death. Moreover, because he is a bastard – an illegitimate child – the laws of society are even more against him. The laws do not require any man to care for or support his illegitimate children. And, to contribute to the unfairness of the times, society brands all bastards as being unnatural and immoral and untrustworthy. Edmund thus questions and condemns the customs and laws of his unfair society. Unfortunately, the society of England at that time is governed by and ruled by first-born legitimate sons; and they certainly see no need to change that established social order. Thus, Edmund would rather follow his natural inclinations – he would rather follow his human nature – which impels him to criticize those rules and laws and to rebel against them.
Shakespeare in all likelihood also probably intended that Edmund’s dedication of himself to the goddess Nature be recognized as a pun on the word natural: (1) that word – natural – was sometimes used in the Renaissance to mean bastard. (2) In addition, the word natural was also used to indicate the filial affection and respect that was due to a father. Edmund, however, is quite unnatural because he does not love or respect his father. But then again, neither do Goneril and Regan. Edmund thus becomes a parallel figure to Goneril and Regan. All three of them act unnaturally: all three of them have no love for their fathers, and all three of them plot against their fathers. But here Shakespeare cleverly reveals that one does not have to be an illegitimate child to act unnaturally. The legitimate and supposedly honorable princesses will also behave disrespectfully and even cruelly to their father.
Edmund complains that he is not that much younger than his brother – only a matter of fourteen months (line 5). But he even more strongly complains that society calls all bastards “base” (line 6). The word base here means socially low – to be at the bottom socially. Thus, society viewed bastards as being lower or worse than even servants or serfs. Edmund argues that his mind and body (shape) are just as good and well-made as any legitimate child (line 8). Edmund also asserts – in what would be viewed as a fine comical line by the audience – that illegitimate children are conceived with more zest and energy and enthusiasm than legitimate children are because a man who produces offspring with his wife does so on “a dull, stale, tired bed” (line 13). In other words, men grow tired of their wives and the act of sexual intercourse becomes a routine and tedious act rather than an act of pleasure. So, as Edmund concludes, the numerous children produced by a man and his wife are nothing but a “tribe of fops” (14). With the word fop, Edmund means a dull-spirited wimp or dunce. Edmund is thus actually declaring bastards to be superior to legitimate children.
At the end of his soliloquy Edmund reveals his intention to discredit Edgar, the legitimate and older son of the Earl of Gloucester. To accomplish this plan, Edmund has written a letter, imitating the writing style of Edgar. Edmund hopes to trick or fool his father into believing that Edgar is plotting or scheming against him. If Edmund’s scheme is successful (if his “invention thrive”), then Edgar will be disowned; and Edmund will inherit the title and all of the money and property belonging to the Earl of Gloucester.
Once again Shakespeare provides a shift from poetry to prose (beginning at line 23). Edmund’s soliloquy is in poetry since it represents his thoughts and it does clearly protest the injustice of his age. Although Shakespeare would find nothing noble in Edmund’s plan to cheat his brother and father, Shakespeare would agree with Edmund that the laws of society are unjust and unfair.
The reader might also view the shift from poetry to prose as a semiotic device (a sign or symbol) to awaken the audience to the dialogic (or parallel) relationship between Edmund (and his brother and father) and Goneril and Regan (with their sister and father). Neither Edmund nor the two princesses have any reservations about taking the inheritance away from their siblings; and neither of them have any regrets about scheming against their fathers.
The scene shifts to prose when the soliloquy is over. Gloucester, Edmund’s father, appears; and Edmund begins to put his scheme into action. Edmund pretends to try to hide the letter which he had written himself, but he is putting on an act. He knows that his father sees what he is doing. Gloucester naturally becomes curious and asks Edmund about the letter. Edmund answers that the letter comes from Edgar but that the letter is not “fit” or appropriate for the father to read (line 38). This makes Gloucester even more curious, and he demands to see the letter. Edmunds pretends that he is reluctant to hand over the letter, but then he gives it to Gloucester.
Gloucester reads the letter out loud, and in it Edgar (supposedly) complains about his father being a tyrant and keeping their “fortunes” (their inheritance) away from them even though they are mature adults and could use the money now. The letter also includes the following line:
If our father would sleep till I waked him,
you should enjoy half his revenue for ever.” (50-51)
The line suggests that Edgar would never wake up his father if he had his way. He would let his father sleep forever so that he and Edmund could enjoy his money and property themselves. Of course, the only kind of sleep that is forever is the sleep of death. The line is a subtle way of suggesting that Edgar is plotting to kill his father.
Gloucester is rightfully shocked when he reads this, and he asks Edmund if Edgar had ever talked about this matter before. Edmund claims that once he heard Edgar stating a belief that grown sons should becomes the guardians over their aged fathers (lines 67-70). Such a remark, had Edgar actually said it, would be most disrespectful and dishonorable. Gloucester becomes enraged and demands to speak with Edgar at once. But Edmund knows that such a conversation could ruin his scheme.
So Edmund tells his father that perhaps Edgar wrote the letter to test Edmund’s own loyalty to his father. Edmund adds that he will have a talk with Edgar himself, and he suggests that Gloucester should listen in secretly – that Gloucester should eavesdrop on the conversation to determine Edgar’s true intentions. Of course, Edmund is extremely clever and cunning. He knows that he can control the conversation so that Edgar’s line are taken out of context and are completely misunderstood by Gloucester. Such a use of eavesdropping and misunderstanding also appears in the tragedy of Othello. The protagonist Othello eavesdrop in on a conversation between the villain Iago and a man named Cassio. Iago manipulates the conversation to convince Othello that his wife is having an affair with Cassio. Shakespeare was well aware that hearing a part of a conversation or hearing a conversation out of context could lead to a gross misunderstanding that could have the most tragic consequences.
Gloucester, still in shock over what he has just read, tries to make sense out of what he feels is madness. Gloucester attributes the mad or bizarre behavior of Edgar to fate or some other supernatural force:
These late eclipses in the sun and moon portend no good to us. Though the reason of nature can reason it thus and thus, yet nature finds itself scourged by the sequent effects. (96-99)
The year before King Lear was first performed (in 1605), both lunar and solar eclipses occurred and were visible to the people living in London. Many people then were quite superstitious and believed in astrology. They believed that events such as eclipses were signs or omens that some great disaster or misfortune was occurring or would soon be occurring. Gloucester notes that some people simply explain the reason for eclipses with science (“the reason of nature”), but Gloucester does not accept such scientific explanations. He states that the “effects” or results of the eclipses are always negative – some type of disaster or misfortune always seems to occur. The disaster that follows thus proves that eclipses are omens.
Gloucester then exits the stage, perhaps still shaking his head in wonder and fear over all of the strange events that have recently occurred (Edgar’s letter, Lear’s anger, Cordelia’s disinheritance, and Kent’s banishment).