According to Aristotle in his Poetics, the cathartic effects of a tragedy are its purpose, which is mediated through its form. An examination of Shakespeare's King Lear in relation to the Aristotelian elements of the tragedy - focusing on his respect for plot and inversion of thought - will demonstrate how the playwright preserves the cathartic outcome despite the dramatically altered balance between pity and fear. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Of the three unities of time, place and action, only the last can be directly attributed to Aristotle, who called it the “principle of the organic unity of literature”. In King Lear, Shakespeare holds to this principle, which states that the plot should have a beginning, a middle and an end, it should be of the appropriate length for the believable unfolding of events, and the main character (henceforth referred to as the tragic hero) should follow a specific dramatic process It should be a man greater than us who passes from fortune to misfortune (peripeteia) due to a flaw in his character (harmatia). Anagnorisis follows, the illumination of his responsibility for the fall, and yet the punishment still surpasses the crime King Lear's prologue combines exposition and action, providing the audience with the background information needed to contextualize the events that are about to unfold. It depicts King Lear as a virtuous man - above the average citizen - who makes a terrible error of judgment and shows. his extreme pride, thus instigating the grotesque but necessary downfall that follows. In the opening lines 1-30 Gloucester and Kent discuss Lear's intention to divide his kingdom among his three daughters, and the origins of Gloucester's son Edmund are explained. King Lear's pride can be seen to motivate his first error in judgment; “Here I renounce all my paternal care,” (1, 1,108) he tells the court, as he disowns his only loving daughter Cordelia for refusing to falsely flatter him in an attempt to gain the third largest of his kingdom. He bestows "the power, the revenues, the execution of the rest" (1.1.132) on the other two dishonest daughters and their husbands, expecting to retain "the name and all additions to a king" (1.1.131). Again, pride led him to unrealistic expectations of maintaining royal status without royal duties. Finally, Lear banishes the trusty Kent for warning him of the danger of bowing to the power of "flattery" (1.1.143). By surrounding himself with dishonest people and mistreating those who sincerely love him, Lear has set the Peripeteia in motion. Lear's anagnorisis is a gradual process that begins in Act 3 scene 2 when his "wit begins to change" (3.2.66). Consider first the feelings of the fool and the nature of the "necessities... Which can make base things precious" (3,2,69-70). Lear perceives the value of this insight and the need to suffer to obtain it. This is followed by recognition of his blind arrogance and its effect on the people of his kingdom: Oh, I have cared / Too little for this! Take medicine, pump; expose yourself to feel what the miserable feel, so that you can shake the superflow to them (3,4,32-35). Lear identifies his experience of suffering on the moor with medicine, inferring the awakening it evoked. He also prescribes it to all other pompous people in a plea for a more just world. He admits negligence and shows remorse. He became drastically more aware, considering the suffering of others for the first time in the midst of his own anguish and onset of madness. Since suffering coincides with enlightenment, admirationof the audience for Lear's resistance is abundant and accompanied by a growing pity for his situation. He refers to his suffering as "judicious punishment!" (3,4,71) since it was he who fathered the two daughters who mistreated him. Yet there is still no reference to his cruel misjudgment of Cordelia or Kent. In Act 4, scene 6 Lear finally understands and accepts that he is a mere mortal "They told me I was everything; it's a lie, I'm not proof of high fever" (4,6,103-104), and attributes this self- awareness of the deprivation experienced during the storm. It is not until scene 7 of Act 4 that Lear's anagnorisis is complete. He wakes up and sees Cordelia, kneels humbly before her, fails to associate himself with the royal robes in which he has been placed, and refers to himself as a "very foolish and affectionate old man" (4.7.61). He finally takes responsibility for the last element that caused his downfall: If you have poison for me, I will drink it. I know you don't love me; because your sisters, if I remember correctly, hurt me. You have some reason, they don't. (4,7,73-76)If the play ended here, one could say that it conformed exactly to the Aristotelian idea of ​​a tragic plot that ended on a note of hope and restoration for the future. However, it doesn't end there; although Aristotle did not stipulate that a good tragic plot had to have a happy ending, he said that the moral message must be implicit and that evil must never triumph. This brings the discussion into the realm of what Aristotle called “Thought” and is the element of tragic form with which Shakespeare takes the greatest liberties. Those who thrive on the world's terms – which often include negligence or cruelty – will become hardened and blinded and will therefore be the true fools. This moral message is embedded in King Lear. Cordelia demonstrates an understanding of this concept as she maintains her honesty despite Lear's threat that "Nothing will come from nothing" (1.1.86). The French reiterates the concept when he describes Cordelia as "very rich, being poor..." (1.1.246). Lear and Gloucester both discover that, ironically, everything comes from nothing, truth and enlightenment are only achieved when one is deprived of everything, for Lear including sanity, for Gloucester, sight. «I stumbled when I saw» (4,1,20). And just as Lear did in the third act, scene two, Gloucester invites us to humiliate the arrogant and redistribute wealth: "And let every man have enough" (4,2,72). A central paradox of the play is that Lear and Gloucester could not have learned this moral message in any other way. Lear's Fool is fundamental in highlighting this paradox. Behind his seemingly innocent provocation, the Fool provides clarity about the character's feelings and the events on stage. When Kent states that the Fool's words are utterly foolish, the Fool replies: Nay, faith, lords, and great men will not permit me; if I had a monopoly, they would have a share. And even the ladies won't let me have all the stupidity to myself; they will go and steal. Give me an egg, uncle, and I will give you two crowns (1,4,137-141). The fool's speech here encapsulates the moral message with reference to all lords being fools, and provides a direct commentary on Lear's folly in attempting to divide his kingdom among deceitful women. In this way, Shakespeare took the classical device of the chorus and ironically embodied it in the court jester. If the cruel and the prosperous are the true fools, then justice is an essential factor in the portrayal of good versus evil. This is where Shakespeare inserts ambiguity into his drama. Justice, like wisdom, family loyalty, and obedience, are reversed throughout the work. In thethird act justice can be identified in two contrasting scenes. In the sixth scene, Lear tries Goneril and Regan for filial ingratitude in an imaginary trial. The outward appearance of justice is absurd and pathetic. Earthly justice is determined and administered by a madman, a madman in disguise, and a fool. Yet true justice is presented here. In stark contrast to this is scene seven, in which Cornwall pretends to try Gloucester for treason. Outwardly this process appears correct, as Cornwall possesses the power to try the subjects and follows the methods of interrogation. However, the outcome was predetermined and there is no trace of true justice in the horrible punishment. The appearance and reality of justice have exchanged places (as have wisdom and folly, blindness and sight, poverty and wealth), and evil undoubtedly thrives. All of Shakespeare's value inversions in this play are encompassed in the term "natural." Edmund is Gloucester's "natural" son and represents a violation of the traditional moral order. His concept of Nature and what is natural is Darwinian and animalistic, rejecting religion, astrology, social order and morality "You, nature, are my goddess... Why should I find myself in the plague of custom" (1,2,1-3). For him, "unnatural" means exactly what "natural" means for Lear and Gloucester: the ordered structure and cycles of the natural world and man on earth are intrinsically linked, and astrology is a clear indication of events on earth, e.g. example "These last eclipses..." (1,2,96). So the moral question that permeates the drama is: "Which concept of Natural is true?" If the heavens exist and manipulate human lives, will Edmund, Goneril and Reagan get away with their evil or will there be divine retribution? The answer to this question is far from implicit and certainly challenges Aristotle's notion that evil should never triumph. Evil triumphs in much of King Lear, and the acts of goodness are individual acts of human decency that often come too late to make any real improvement in the situation. Consider Cornish's servant, who avenges Gloucester's cruelty in scene seven of the third act. His intervention fails to improve Gloucester's condition. Likewise, Kent and Edgar assuming disguises allow them to guide the old men through their suffering and deliver a letter to Cordelia, but none of this prevents the death or anguish of Gloucester, Lear, and his virtuous daughter. Albany decides to restore Lear to King and Kent to his honorable position, but this comes too late as Lear dies and Kent dies. Finally, Edmund's dying wish to save Cordelia from death is a spark of human decency in a predominantly evil character that sparks hope in the audience, but even this gesture is too little, too late, and the audience's hopes are quickly dashed. If the gods are responsible for administering punishment and justice, then Cordelia's death is inexplicable. If human decency, on the other hand, is credited with the administration of justice, then it can be argued that human decency has been overwhelmed by negative human emotions such as greed, pride and selfishness, which have led to acts of cruelty. Those few characters with integrity and courage to act accordingly were too fragmented and slow to triumph over evil. The perspective one takes on the ending of King Lear is entirely his. Shakespeare takes the Fool out of the play in act three, scene four, line 80, and audience members can infer what meanings they want from the rest of the play. This conclusion is in direct opposition to the Aristotelian conception of "Character" as well as.