University of Dallas News

Issue date: 3/3/09 Section: News

Detail from James Barry's "King Lear Weeping Over the Death of Cordelia." 1786-1787

The Gorman Faculty Lounge was filled on Wednesday, Feb. 25, as Dr. Leo Paul de Alvarez presented his case for why Cordelia, of Shakespeare's "King Lear," must die in the first Braniff Graduate Salon of the Spring 2009 semester. De Alvarez pointed out that from the beginning, Cordelia's death seems absurd. As Edmund manipulates her death, it seems as if "malice triumphs over innocence," and what could have been a manageable and almost happy ending to the play, becomes "cheerless, dark and deadly." The purpose of the lecture, then, was to explain to those gathered why Shakespeare would put in such an unnatural ending.

De Alvarez proposed first that "the deaths of Lear and Cordelia are required for the transgressions of justice both had committed," but he quickly followed the explanation with, "the world would be dark if Cordelias couldn't live." The difficulty with Cordelia, then, was that she preferred to lose a kingdom-and the prospect of controlling that kingdom-than be untrue to her father or herself. De Alvarez pointed out how strange it is that Cordelia stands to the side and mutters about her inability to describe her love with mere words, yet when her father questions her, she doesn't say this, but rather refuses an answer at all. "Her reply appears proud," de Alvarez commented, and Lear's response of "nothing will come from nothing," is entirely understandable, considering he had believed that Cordelia's response would immediately justify his giving the kingdom to her. "Her love," de Alvarez explained, "transcends the contractual," and a simple description of her love so that she can prove she owes something was not enough for the honest Cordelia.

De Alvarez explained how Lear, in his seemingly confused state, tries to mingle the private with the public. He bases the succession and rule of his kingdom off of a love test. He wants his daughters to flatter and boost his ego so that he can pass it all off with the assurance that he is loved, but as de Alvarez pointed out, "the division of the kingdom was already settled, so it's not determined by love." Why, then, does he pretend? He had hoped that there would be no opposition to his decision. Cordelia was the obvious favorite, and he had determined she would get the most and best part of the kingdom, so when she professes her love better than Goneril and Regan, there would be no dispute as to whom he would prefer. Bringing this private matter into the public realm-mixing the love of his daughters with the division of the kingdom-presents a transgression. He's bypassing "what is expected in hereditary kingship," according to de Alvarez. "Love has guided his distribution of the kingdom," de Alvarez explained. A public matter has become private, thus Lear has made a transgression, and Cordelia acts against this-distancing herself from the mingling of the public and private-and focuses only on a private and filial love. Rather than publicize her love so that she can gain lands and power, she explains that her love is private and not to be expressed properly, thus remaining true to herself and her father, whether he notices it or not. "Cordelia prefers her own truth," de Alvarez said, "and is thus truly her father's daughter."

Continued...

Page 1 of 2 next >

Article Tools