Act 3 Blog 1

The roll of graphic content in modern art is a debate that dates back to the first cult slasher horror film and the first soft core pornography from the late 1940s to the early 1950s. Conservative, family minded people would speak against it because they saw graphic content as an unnecessary evil in art, that art could be created just as easily without such content. Others thought that the content served only to heighten art and to bring forth new emotions that art had not been able to bring forth as completely as this new content. Graphic violence, as we have seen in King Lear, can certainly have a place in classic art as well. Shakespeare included an on-stage presentation of Gloucester’s eyes being gouged out because it was the only way to truly represent the extremes to which Regan and Goneril are willing to go to obtain their goals. It also lends itself to heighten the chaos and confusion that has been a constant in this play. I think that it is necessary for the meaning of the play. As I said before, graphic content is included in art because of the extreme amount of emotion and reaction from the audience it can provoke. Shakespeare knew this, and used it to his advantage. It was the only way to truly express the insanity and cruelty of Goneril and Regan. Slasher films, being a complete genre themselves, require graphic violence; else they would not be slasher films. Originally, I think that slasher films were to some degree made to instill controversy. Over the years, as they have become more acceptable, a definite art has come out of the ability to provoke fear and horror in the audience, and the ability of an actor to portray such fear, horror and death. Grand Theft Auto is another story entirely. The violence in Grand Theft Auto is completely egregious. The video game does not even have a solid plot; the draw of the game is its ability to graphically represent street crime as entertainment. What teenage boy wouldn’t want to beat a drug dealer’s face in with a baseball bat, shot down a frontline of police men with an AK-47? Or have sex with a prostitute, then beat her afterwards to get your money back? Graphic violence is not to be used as a form of interactive entertainment. In such a case, it does nothing but desensitize to an extreme degree. Graphic violence should only be used in instances when a reaction needs to be provoked in order to further the development of a character or plot.

Act 2 Blog 2

On the most basic, shallow level, Edgar’s transformation into Tom O’Bedlam is completely for the purpose of having a disguise in which no one can recognize him. After his ‘fight’ with Edmund, he needed to run away and disguise himself. However, I think that he does the particular disguise he chose for the reason that it represents a chaotic frame of mind, and truly puts forth the confusion and irony that this play presents. The first solidly good character we are introduced to as the audience has found that he must disguise himself as a madman in order to get by. He states in the play, after hiding in a rotted out tree trunk, that he must become "the basest and most poorest shape that ever penury and contempt of man.” This is also because Edgar feels as if he has no place in the world that he grew up in, and so he has been reduced to the standard of a beggar with no home. The fact that a bedlam is a institute for crazy people also lends deeper meaning to the name and disguise Tom O’Bedlam. As I said before, the chaos and craziness of this play is represented in the fact that perhaps the only (or at least most) sane person in the play is disguised as the craziest of all. Overall, he has disguised himself as Tom O’Bedlam because he needed a disguise and wanted to display his confusion in an outward manner.

Act II blog 1

If we remember from back in Act I, Goneril and Regan were not the favored daughters of King Lear. They were the first ones to be married off, while he kept Cordelia at home. We can assume, therefore, that he did not treat Goneril and Regan as fairly or lovingly as he would have treated Cordelia. When he exiled Cordelia, he turned rather heavily to rely on his two less-loved daughters, as if they had been his favorites, or are now to be treated as his favorites. And this all because of his untimely, unjust expulsion of Cordelia? They were at first irritated with him because they envied his relationship with Cordelia. However, their irritation turned to cruelty because of King Lear’s ridiculous assumption that he would retain his title of King and his power as King and his escort of 100 knights as King although he had already given up all of his land and belongings to Goneril and Regan. The irritation and anger (which eventually embodied itself in their cruelty) came from jealously and neglect and the feeling of being less important than their other sister. Parents can be controlling, powerful, degrading, and critical all in the name of love. These are all forms of negative reinforcement when the parent attempts to mold their child. However, many psychological studies have shown that negative parental reinforcement does little to change a child’s behavior, and much to instill a mixed feeling of hatred and love in the child. This is the behavior displayed by Generil and Regan. They are trying to force their father into submission, to realize that the tides of power and control have changed, and that they now lie in the hands of King Lear’s daughters.

Act 1 Blog 1

Edmund is simply a child who perceives that he has not felt the love of his father as much as his other sibling, and therefore feels jealousy and anger because his treatment appears to be unjust. Edmund is the illegitimate son of Gloucester, and therefore is not to receive any inheritance from his father. Instead, all inheritance will go to Edgar, Gloucester’s legitimate son. Edmund plots to take the inheritance for himself by tricking both Edgar and Gloucester in a complex scheme. Edmund acts out of his jealousy and in retaliation to the lack of respect that has been shown to him as Edgar’s equal. It is typical for a child to become jealous and angry and secluded when not given equal recognition. I think that it is admirable that Edmund was actually able to formulate a retaliation out of his emotions and set the plan into action, however evil the plan may be. It speaks to his intelligence and coherency. Gloucester treats Edmund as inferior to his brother (regardless of Gloucester’s true feelings for Edmund) because in Shakespearian times, it was the societal norm for the illegitimate child to be inferior. Also, Gloucester treats Edmund poorly because he is embarrassed by the fact that he has an illegitimate son in the first place. I think that the closest modern day equivalent to the way that Gloucester treats Edmund would be the relationship between stepchildren and stepparents. Stepparents typically prefer their real children (if the have them) to stepchildren because of family ties, and vice versa.

Reaction to Disaster

I believe that humans are of inherently good nature. Based on this concept, humans will all have a similar reaction to a time of strife as a result of a disaster. First, there is the initial reaction of shock, followed by a concern for loved ones and friends. In the case of a disaster causing great harm and damage to one's environment, grief can be the dominant emotion. If a man has secured his own assets and assured the safety of those close to him, his next reaction would be to make sure that the more distant surroundings and people that influence his life in smaller ways are also safe and accounted for. This directly reflects the idea that people are inherently good. It has a lot to od with the idea of the invisible hand in a capitalist economy. The idea of the invisible hand states that people will act upon their own self interest and self gain before any one else's, and that because of this, the economy will flourish. If everyone maximizes their own benefits, the entire economy.society will maximize its benefits. In the case of a disaster, if everyone acts upon their own self interest first, there will be more people able to assist those injured or otherwise unable to help themselves, resulting in a faster and more efficient reconstruction of what was destroyed.

Reaction to Disaster

Act 4, Scene 3

Macduff and Malcolm speak together of Macbeth's treachery and try to find a way to overthrow him, and put Malcolm in his place. On page 186, Macduff refers to Macbeth’s jealousy and treachery as so: “this avarice sticks deeper: grows with more pernicious root than summer-seeming lust.” In essence, he is saying that Macbeth’s greed is deeply rooted, and that root is more harmful than youthful lust.
A group of people with a strange disease searched out King’s touch. Their disease is unmendable by the surgery of the time, and so they sought out the holy blessing of the King to cure them. The disease is called the King’s Evil, which is another allusion to strangeness and supernatural occurrences in Macbeth. The King is also said to have the holy ability of foresight. “The mere despair of surgery, he cures, hanging a golden stamp about their neck put on by holy prayers: and tis spoken, to the succeeding royalty he leave the healing benediction. With this strange virtue he hath a heavenly gift of prophecy, and sundry blessings hang about his throne that speak him full of grace.” Shakespeare did a clever thing my introducing the idea that Macbeth has holy power by virtue of the throne. HE is an unjust, fruitless, evil and false king, and so instead of being blessed with these powers the king is supposedly supposed to control, Macbeth has gone insane, and derives his insanity from the witches. The contrast is that the good king gets power from god, and the bad king becomes insane at the hand of witches.