KING LEAR STORY OF AN ALBION

BY

PROF. DR. SHAHAB YAR KHAN

400th ANNIVERSARY SPECIAL EDITION

Publisher: Syed Jafer Abbas Naqvi, Lahore, Pakistan.

Cover design: Enes Kaljanac

Produced and distributed by Paras Academy Ali Raza Abad, Lahore,

Pakistan

First published in Pakistan by Paras Academy, Ali Raza Abad, Lahore, 2016

Copyrights

2016 by the author

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or

distributed in any form or by any means without the prior permission of
the author

ISBN 696-783-008-1

LIST OF CONTENT

FOREWORD

BOSNIA, AN ALBION

BOSNIA, THE ALBION LEAR DREAMED OF

18

A WORD OF ADVICE

35

18
4

Bosnia, the Albion Lear dreamed of

'I loved her the most and thought to set my rest on her kind
nursery'
King Lear wanted to leave a kingdom behind him ruled over by an ideal
woman. English monarchy has always been hereditary. In the light of its
constitutional frame work, being the eldest born, King Lears Albion
belonged to Goneril. But Lears maps, redesigned long before the play
begins, make sure that both Goneril and Regan are kept away from the
political affairs of Albion. Albion, Lear reserves for Cordelia. Like a
crafty director he designed the whole scene 1 to promote Cordelia at the
centre stage as the future of his world. The very manner of address gives
the tonal complexion to the political atmosphere created by Lear:
Goneril, eldest born, speak, Regan, wife of Cornwall, speak and now
our joy, although the last but not the least. The scene has serious
political
connotation. It is by no means the love trial scene where an old, senile
autocrat asks the most abnormal of the questions in public to his three
daughters, which of you shall we say doth love us most. It could have
been a love trial if Shakespeare had not painstakingly created the images,
within the first seven lines of the play, of the maps already designed by
the approval of the councillors of the state:
KENT
I thought the king had more affected the Duke of
Albany than Cornwall.
GLOUCESTER
It did always seem so to us: but now, in the
division of the kingdom, it appears not which of
the dukes he values most; for equalities are so
weighed, that curiosity in neither can make choice
of either's moiety.
19

The purpose of the scene staged by Lear is twofold. Firstly, he wanted all
the newly appointed rulers to take a public oath that in terms of their
absolute commitments, towards what he stood for during his long reign,
they would be the essence of continuity. This is how I directed the play in
2013 and again in 2016, replacing the images of love speech with the
oath
taking ceremony. It is not the love trial scene; I rename it as oath of
legion scene. If maps depended on the speeches they would have not
been designed before the play. The purpose of the speeches was not
personal but political. These were for the ears of the people Lear ruled
over for almost half a century. He was a symbol of political stability,
continuity and, as a result, prosperity for his people. In that chaotic
Europe of 6th or 7th century where the average political life span of a king
was less than five years this great diplomat served his nation perhaps for
over four decades This symbol of stability and prosperity was about to
disappear when the play starts and Lear decided to address the concerns
of his people by exhibiting that in terms of his policies nothing changes in
political office but the face. Secondly, through this scene the visionary
king went beyond all the normal routine procedures to make sure the
future kingdom is lead by the one who deserves it. Laws of inheritance,
divine rights, and traditionalism nothing could stop him from taking the
decision which would mark the end of the patriarchal system in his
kingdom.
Cordelia, the ideal woman who marks the beginning of the matriarchal
system, is that new blood, new vision, younger strength, Lear speaks of
at the very beginning of the play. Lear loved her the most and wanted
to set the rest on her kind nursery because she is the one groomed by
him
through so many layers of favours to establish a system of those virtues
20

that never let a peaceful land become the gored state, a chaotic society.
Cordelias character is womanhood personified. It is an embodiment of
truthfulness in youth (so young and true, my lord), honesty, chastity and
fairness (no vicious blot, murder, or foulness, no unchaste action, or
dishonour'd step'), elegance and sophistication, (her voice was ever soft,
gentle and low, an excellent thing in women) motherhood (kind and
dear princess). By the end she returns to a play which was set into
motion by her choice of proclaiming nothing but wherein she hardly had
a role to play. Shakespeare often uses this device of concealing the
character of central thematic significance (among many are Fortinbras
and Malcolm) from the public eye to portray lives which have a very few
happenings but uncountable states. These states are the stations of
wisdom where evolutionary processes are nothing but illuminationary
process. Cordelia is the most evolved of all Shakespearean female
heroes besides Rosalind; she is the voice of justice and balance in a
society where patriarchal values, adopted by women as well, lead to
direst
forms of cruelty. It is important to note that women like Goneril and
Regan are those pathetic imitations of men who, in Lady Macbeths
words unsex themselves. If these women lead the society, the change in
the formative features can never occur as these women in gender are
barely women in character. Lear had deep understanding of his elder
daughters deformities of the mental states designed after the male role
models of the exhausted patriarchal system. These women then and now
remain representatives of that obsolete political, ethical, economic
system
which Lear wanted to discard, replacing by the one where justice and
balance prevail and statehood becomes motherhood. The ruler and the
land establish a system not of political but of filial nature. Systems of
21

politics can be named by any set of ideology they represent. Any term can
be used to define a particular system but all are the systems of evil if they
deny justice to the weak. The concept of nationhood primarily exists for
those who cannot live and cannot be accepted anywhere else but the land
wherein they are born; the land which they call mother. The rich and the
socially strong live beyond the essential need of a mother land as they
dont find themselves dependent on it for survival. In other words
countries exist to protect the rights and lives of their deprived people. If a
state fails to perform this fundamental function, it becomes hard to find
justification for its existence. The simple rule of good governance,
otherwise a mystery for many heads of the states, is the principle of
accountability and justice for all the members of a society. Patriarchal
system, based on the corruption of competition and the horrid ideology of
the survival of the fittest, protects the powerful and hunts down the weak.
Inflicting its injustice for millenniums, this unjust system has caused
failure to every single social, economic, religious philosophy introduced
for the benefit of the deprived. Lear uniquely choosing to divest from
both of rule, interest of territory stands as a remarkable example in all
Shakespeare of being a king whom exterior causes could not dethrone. It
is a highly symbolic gesture by the man who stood as the head of the
patriarchal system for almost half a century with sway over the minds and
hearts of all (in my opinion it was mainly to magnify Lears patriarchal
absoluteness that his queen and her possible influences on her daughters
were excluded from the structural pattern of the play). In Lear we see an
absolute monarch who happens to be a man of vision with inexorable
courage. Depriving himself of authority and possessions, that future
strife may be prevented now, he changed the entire value system of his
22

political world. He knew that in lives of nations, happenings of historical

stature change interpretation of life. With every change in social lives,
unsystematic philosophies appear to replace the older philosophies. If
elevated minds, illuminated souls set up personal examples through
personal suffering and sacrifice at these junctures of social evolution, new
mode of life appears. In this world where the canons of satisfaction are
designed around the concepts of power, authority and material measures,
Lears decision to abandon all in favour of the elevated, the illuminated
Cordelia becomes the most vocal critique of the patriarchal system. In the
world of Lear his decision was as unnatural as it is in our world today.
The fools words in Act I Sc. III echo all stupefied at the idea of the king
falling from the bias of his nature:
That lord that counsell'd thee
To give away thy land,
Come place him here by me,
Do thou for him stand:
The sweet and bitter fool
Will presently appear;
The one in motley here,
The other found out there.
The vacuum created by Lears absence from the political scene until the
return of Cordelia in Act IV, gave ground to the traditional warmongers
and followers of the routine norms of success to restore the system of the
survival of the fittest. Motherhood was banished with Cordelia, statehood
now lay dismembered with Lear cut in the brain. However, by the end
of the play things take a different complexion. It was through the personal

23

example of suffering and sacrifice that Lear and Cordelia succeeded to

establish a society where symbols of power were finally cast aside. The
last part of the last scene is the philosophical appearance of a new
attitude
of acceptance of life as phenomenon bigger than the measures of
success.
No one wanted to inherit the throne for which wars were fought and
families were wiped out. Lear and Cordelia died to live through the
system they left to Edgar as continuity of their essence. The attitude of
renunciation, where Lears hopes for change were not seen as change but
as insanity, withered out completely. With the return of Cordelia to the
play, motherhood returned and statehood prevailed. Once Lear, king of
Albion, had abandoned his kingdom for her to establish motherhood as a
social system; she, queen of France, returned now as mother abandoning
her kingdom for her people and her father whose only desire had been to
rest under her kind nursery. Lear knew the value of her sacrifice:
Upon such sacrifices, my Cordelia,
The gods themselves throw incense.
She, in her last sentences before her death, mindful of her achievement
through the great nature of her sacrifice adopts a ametaphysical tone. Her
judgment does not remain her instinct but becomes, as if, the will of the
Divine:
We are not the first
Who, with best meaning, have incurr'd the worst.
For thee, oppressed king, am I cast down;
Myself could else out-frown false fortune's frown.

24

A matriarchal system in the last part of the play is fully functional with a
head of the state who is willing to sacrifice all for the sake of her people
towrds whom her first duty is to 'mean best'.
This system is the only hope for the future of the world. But keeping in
mind that our entire past life, the horrific tale of the patriarchal system, is
in the present, makes its introduction the most unlikely possibility.
Secondly, we must be certain that the women of our age might have more
in common with Goneril than with Cordelia as men without character and
vision remain the role models of success in social, economic, political,
cultural, religious spheres. Women understand, define themselves either
through the system that men have created over the ages or at best they
live
all their lives reacting to it, coining naive slogans, we can do it. This
early twentieth century feminist mark of recognition is actually a
confirmation of mens great contributions to the world that women
would also like to match with and imitate. As a result, the contribution of
the feminist movement in creating an independent character and mind of
the female population of the world, distinguishable from that of the men
as a social, political, cultural, industrial being will always be questioned.
Women at best are extension of male ideals of politics (no new
philosophy or system of political ideal appeared), culture (no new art
forms or sports particular to women ever appeared), religion (male
hierarchy in all religions goes unchallenged), commerce, trade and
banking (women only further consolidated the corruption inherent within
these unfair systems, no reforms within fundamental structures were ever
suggested). These are only a few areas of life to mention, the list is
unending; women as such are more and more absorbed by the ancient
patriarchal system in the name of modernity. This is the greatest tragedy
25

of the twentieth century, the loss of the remains of womanhood in the

wake of the feminist movement. Womanhood as a concept always existed
all around the world and often in mythologies, scriptures and familiar
histories its specimen stand as a role model for all the mankind.
Shakespearean drama as continuity of the ancient wisdom celebrates
womanhood to define its particulars for its own age and its significance
for the age that we live in. Along with the traits of womanhood we
discussed in Cordelias character earlier, a few more can be introduced at
this stage. Womanhood and the art of educating the world around, like in
Rosalinds character, are the most inseparable virtues in Shakespearean
drama (disconnected from their original self, trying to be successful as
men, women are no more in position to educate men in social life, they
only learn from them). Flexibility of mind in order to understand a
particular set of circumstance, absolute control over psychological states,
flow of emotions and linguistic decorum are those female intensive
instinctive manifolds that cannot be understood practically by the male
intellect unless womanhood is adopted as manner of life (living social
ideal of competitive life determined by men, womens exposure to
identical kind of frustrations like their role models make them suffer and
react like men; f word, otherwise showing male aggression is now
regular feature of the female vocabulary as well). Natural sense of
humour, superior wit and spirit of refinement have been quite intact until
a century ago, all these fading virtues will disappear soon with the rise of
the low culture and the lifestyle called casual by men, enthusiastically
joined by women.
In the presence of the ancient patriarchal system and in the absence of
the
much needed womanhood we cannot even dimly suspect a bright future
26

for the mankind. More wars and more concentrations camps, more crimes
against children and women, more countries dissolved into oblivion, more
fertile grounds for extremist ideals to breed, more reckless abuse of
natural resources and growing pollution, more political injustice and
economic crises all are the commonly known forecast for the next two
decades. This globe, Lears Albion, is in need of a Cordelia.
It seems there is no other way for the matriarchal system to rise but
through the accidental death of the patriarchal system. In Bosnia, it
seems,
the period of ultimate exhaustion of the patriarchal system has been
reached. It is a country where male-female ratio is 0.95; with female
literacy rate over 95 percent and already a large number of families in
major cities dependent on female jobs, Bosnia is well set for a shift in its
social and political structures. Out of necessity this country will be in the
hands of its female population within a decade. Without getting into the
heated debate about the calibre of its current male population in handling
of the state affairs, commerce and industry, imaginative arts, professions,
etc., we can simply count on the constantly, gradually reduced role of it in
the course of the next decade. This is the high time for the sensible and
farsighted members of the male population to start seeing the situation in
the manner of a Lear. The shift has already taken place, patriarchal
system
in this country has crashed, is heading downwards, we are only waiting
for the impact. People of vision in this country must encourage young
girls to think independently to create for themselves a personality of such
grace and depth which their mothers and aunties living in a strong
patriarchal system could possibly not perceive. We should launch a
detailed work plan to introduce methods to the young girls to think

27

politically, culturally and industrially at as early an age as first grade of

the primary schools.
1. As the first elementary step, we should prepare ourselves to educate
the
women of the future in the art of speech and public discourse. A wider
range of vocabulary leading to a complex range of ideas will liberate
future generation of women from the cheap and the stereotype
mannerism
of life prevalent in the society at the moment. (This is what Shakespeare
presented through matriarchal model of Rosalind and Cordelia. Both of
them are the youngest in their plays, with the exception of Celia, but at
the same time with the widest range of vocabulary and the deepest
insight
into life. If keenly observed, one finds out that they rarely repeat words
and despite their tender ages they are designed to dominate the minds
and
the speeches of a galaxy of characters around them.)
2. Appreciation for complex equations and metrical propositions engender
the elements of high culture and philosophical thinking. Women of the
future must be trained at early ages to have skills in mathematics,
literature and music. The ease with which many Shakespearean female
heroes, including Rosalind, Lady Macbeth, Cordelia, Perdita, Cleopatra,
etc use intricate syntax and complex thoughts shows their profound
balance of personality attained through training into these arts.
(Elizabethan noble women just like the Bosnian nobility of the Middle
Ages were traditionally trained into these arts). These arts trigger
complex
modes of thinking at a young age and help one to learn to create balance
both within and without.
3. Through detailed cultural studies of legends, mythologies and in case
of religious backgrounds the Scriptures, concepts of elevated human
28

character and spiritual thoughts must be induced. These lead to another

essential characteristic feature of womanhood, modesty. (Modesty
personified Perdita, Mirinda, Cordelia, Rosalind, Julia and many other
Shakespearean characters chalk out the rules of modesty for the women
of
the future).
4. Reckless and casual lifestyle of the patriarchal system that centres
itself
on the ideals of vague and purposeless entertainment is among the major
causes of the death of human character. (an outdated thing like smoking
for example, introduced as a manner of fashionable elite century ago,
costs money sufficient to provides for bread and milk for an ordinary
Bosnian family. This widespread luxury, along with drinking, is a
reflection of the lack of community consciousness among the poor nations
like ours as it shows lack of discipline in social life and utmost disrespect
for those searching for food in garbage). Culture of wasting time in
cafeterias and disco clubs is another ancient patriarchal luxury accepted
ironically in the name of progress and modernity (every moment of the
cultural life of a poor nation demands character training and commitment
to the cause of rising strong. This 1950s style cheap model of
entertainment stands no scope in the new system.). Reckless street talks,
vulgar dresses, casual nature of physical contacts all mark deformed
states
of mind where the flesh reigns supreme (this patriarchal approach to take
life as a funny sport will die in the wake of the new wars of civilizations
and fast approaching natural calamities any way). Nature of man-woman
romantic relation in the matriarchal system will be the first thing
challenged and changed by the women of dignity and grace. 1920s style
of dating in this 2016 world of hyperactive mafias and traffickers needs
serious overhauling any way. (The word dating itself is an amazing
29

puzzle and regardless of the long history of companionship in human

cultures, one must wonder what it actually implies. Similar is the case
with the terms boy friend-girl friend. Love relations always existed but
wherefrom these 20th century terms appeared and what do these mean?
Matriarchal system will survey and dispatch apart these patriarchal sex
symbols adhered by the 20th century world). Shakespeare gives us the
model of companionship in King Lear. Two suitors of Cordelia are
welcomed by her father and they lodge at their palace. The father calls
their stay, amorous sojourn. Can one in this liberal and free world
easily go this far to invite two men in love with his daughter and for two
months on daily basis date in front of his own eyes? The model
suggested by Shakespeare empowers women to choose for themselves
the
best options under the supervisions of their elders. Love is the relation of
belonging and when a woman chooses for herself a companion, she
chooses to belong. Belonging is a concept rooted in the concept honour.
Women are the honour of their parents, brothers, lovers or husbands and
if none of these relations exist, they are the honour of their societies. This
elevated stature is the hallmark of the matriarchal system where a
woman
makes decisions to establish belonging expanding its social range from a
daughter to all the way a mother. Women will date in the matriarchal
system only to establish belonging and elders from this activity will not
be excluded as nothing private but practical wisdom ultimately leading
to the private will be shared by the future partners.
What will be the structural format of Bosnian matriarchal system? If we
inversely read King Lears text, we get our answer. Bosnian matriarchal
system will be in effect when dogs are (no longer) obeyed in office and
mad men (do not any more) lead the blind. When wise men are (not to
30

be) grown fopish with their manners apish. When priests are (not) more
in word than matter; when nobles are (not any more) their tailors'
tutors; when usurers (cannot dare to) tell their gold in the field; and
whores do (not) churches build. When truth must (not be) to kennel and
Lady the brach may (not be allowed to) stand by the fire to stink. Then
the realm of Albion comes (not) to great confusion.
King Lear's Albion is the story of all those nations who have learned to
obey 'dogs' in office. A system of political life where the values of
sacrifice, wisdom, truth, humility, simplicity are mocked at and every
single role model of human virtue from Socrates to the prophets and all
the way down to the followers of their path is erased from social life
being misfit, is doomed to have dogs in high offices. Four centuries later
we wonder, is it an 'Albion' where we live? If lead by the mad men whose
'vision' has brought the world to incurable economic injustice, horrific
climatic forecast, academic sterility, spiritual hollowness, 'death, dearth,
dissolutions; divisions in state, menaces and maledictions against
nobles; we are in our Albion. If inspired by religious elite whose weekly
sermons are never put into action through personal examples, we are in
our Albion. If our model of social success moves around the 'whore' who
knows best the art to white wash whatever is black, we are in our Albion.
Every land on this earth is an Albion where the 'effects' Shakespeare
'wrote unhappily succeed'. 'Unnaturalness between the child and the
parent; death, dearth, dissolutions of ancient amities; divisions in state,
menaces and maledictions against nobles; needless diffidences,
banishment of friends, dissipation of cohorts, nuptial breaches, and I
know not what.'

31

Every Albion marks the collapse of a value system, a system of

enlightened mind and insightful thinking. It stands as a symbol of the
breach in the laws of nature, the laws of filial and social nature. It is the
death inflicted upon the seeds of future, the hope for socio-economic
justice, spiritual and intellectual balance. It is the reflection of the chaotic
loss of humanity into 'apishness'.
King Lear's structural pattern, subsequently, is chaotic like the effect of its
thematic nuance. The apishness that rules over the design of the
thoughts
of the characters haunts upon the minds of the audiences as well and
forces them to encounter various shadows of human will within to
experience the truth of their own uncertainties. King Lear made a choice
at the beginning of the play that determined the nature of his last but 'the
ultimate moment' of life. It is the ultimate moment that we all live our
lives for. These moments are those points of references through which our
entire personalities filter to give meaning to all that exists around us in
the
fuller sense of the word or in other words our own meaning is defined by
us in the light of the truth never before suspected by us. When all the
modes of human will shatter to merge into the Divine Will, the ultimate
moment of life is experienced. The cost paid can be enormous to realize
the fuller meaning of existence but this is the scale, the only scale, to
measure the stature of hierarchies of elevation and stations of wisdom
among humans.
Choices of similar kind are made by Cordelia, Gloucester, Earl of Kent,
Edgar on one hand and by Goneril, Regan, Edmund on the other. This
'choice making' at the beginning of the play, in Act I Sc. 1, is that
formative feature which leads us to see all these characters, as if, in their

32

evolutionary process. It is human mind in making through restructuring of

human soul. All of these characters are thus placed within the grey areas
of human understanding, the shade of human character where the good
and the bad the white and the black remain unidentified. Shakespeare,
somehow, managed to bring the unidentified 'grey' as both the pretext
and
the context of the main structure. Its dominating presence, horrifying
eeriness, causes conflict within the audiences whose hearts support what
their intellects reject. Earl of Gloucester, for instance, wins our hearts by
favouring the 'one who is out of favour'. His heroic support for the
wronged king and his great sacrifice make him on spiritual-idealistic scale
a role model of moral conduct in harsh times for us. However, his secret
support for the French army to rescue the king is a political blunder that
could reduce England to the stature of a French satellite state had the
French army lead by the French queen, even if she happens to be a
former
English princess, succeeded. By means of law, in assisting a foreign army
to land in England, he is a traitor. Spiritually-idealistically he is correct;
rationally-politically he is not. As audience our rational and emotional
selves are challenged to take sides and our incapability to do so make us
look at this splay as something that stands beyond the definitions of arts
and above the literary theories of the critics. Shakespeare was not a
follower of the Greek model of drama. His drama does not deal with 'the
good and the bad' but the 'versatile' in human nature. The soul of his
drama is not 'conflict' between the opposing forces of good and evil but
the layers of contrast within one's own self exploring the unfathomable
depth of possibilities of experiencing black in white and white in black.

33

Such flexibility transformed the symbolic structure of Elizabethan art.

Shakespeare used this method to create a kind of drama which is of no
genre and that would in future transcend all geo-cultural and even
religious barriers. But the question (is his drama criticism of life or life as
its criticism qualifies it?) remains unanswered unless we see it as offering
two varying perspectives as mirror of the matriarchal and the patriarchal
systems. In Shakespearean art, life seen through patriarchal perspective
leads us to understand Nature, as a site of rational analysis and
dissection. His art helps us to understand the complexity of this
phenomenon and to reinterpret it in such pleasurable way that it becomes
a fragment of human knowledge. From matriarchal perception, however,
the word life stands for that harmony between reason and spiritual
insights that affect our imaginal world. Shakespearean art equips us with
the means to liberate ourselves from existence as it is offered to us and
set
our future beyond the bounds of the so called real by breathing in the
Real
as our life principle.

34