A Critical Analysis of Edward Bond’s Lear

In Contemporary Society Edward Bond is looked differently among the entire writer’s of Britain. He is one of the most innovative as well as controversial playwright of his age. His school of thought is wide-ranging and diverse. He is an authoritative critique of the modern society. He has his own perception of violence occurring in the society. This is one of the reasons that he has a vision for a perfect society. Violence and turbulence is the product of injustice widespread in the modern society. Rationality is broken by the agro-effect of his characters. It causes a kind of estrangement where a character feels alienated from his society. Bond believes that theatres must reflect realism associated with human strength as well as misery. He calls such theatres as rational because it brings out and highlights the psychological issues of any socio-political society. Violence cannot be the solution of any problem and this is one of the reasons that Bond calls violence as inefficient. He wants to create a rational society by his art of characterization which is certainly visible in his works. Shakespeare’s King Lear has been rewritten by Bond in 1971. It was produced first by the Royal Court Theatre in the same year. The story is almost similar but it has a different political approach. It was the reason that people started questioning the strata of the society which is based upon power.  The existing aesthetic experience was questioned through such plays. Bond’s Lear is not submissive but it symbolizes powerful, complex and violent instincts present in the society. It shows that how common men and women falls prey to their own society. This play is the study of scattered power where a monarch is disposed by his daughters and he is a kind of person who cannot take it for granted. This play opens with the death of a worker who was busy in constructing the great wall for the king. The wall was being constructed by the king to keep his imagined enemies out of his sight. Bodice and Fontanelle are his daughters who rebel against him by marrying Duke of North and Duke of Cornwall. These men are the sworn enemies of Lear. He is shocked and surprised by her daughters. Both Bodice and Fontanelle think that their marriage will resurrect the peace but Lear believes that peace could only be restored through the great wall. Lear’s daughters hardly find any rational approach behind the wall. Thus, the wall becomes a bone of contention between the father and the daughters. Lear’s believe that the wall can protect him from all of his enemies but it acts like a myth and soon we find her daughters plan of attacking Lear’s army. Lear refuses the advice of Warrington to abandon his war with Fontanelle and Bodice and admits that her daughters cannot be trusted. Warrington reveals the fact that both of his daughters have asked him to betray the king. His affirmation could win him military, sexual and financial rewards. Lear trusts Warrington and says him to finish his dream of erecting the wall if he is killed in between. The wicked desire of the daughters emerges triumphantly and Lear is defeated. We can hardly find any filial attachment between the father and the daughters. The expulsion of the father is planned cunningly by the daughters. Bond has tried to show us the real colors of Bodice and Fontanelle. They are hungry for power and thirsty for blood. To quench their thrust they are ready to eliminate even their father. When the power is shifted from Lear to the daughters then Lear is imprisoned and treated badly by her own daughters. This is the power game where we are made aware that power corrupts. They are the same daughters who once spoke for the injustice but when they have got the power they themselves are corrupt. They try hard to prove Lear as insane. It is the destiny that these sisters are blinded by power game and they stand against their husbands as well. Their mutual trust is also broken because they are opportunist in true sense. Both the sisters want to marry Warrington who stands like alter ego of Lear. They are lustful and Warrington understands them truly. He refuses to be their puppet and as a result Fontanelle orders weird tortures on him. The plot advances as we find Lear escaping the prison. He is hunted by her daughters army who were once loyal to him. The Gravedigger’s boy who is a good fellow provides shelter to him. His goodness is punished brutally as he is murdered by the chasing army men and his pregnant wife Cordelia is also raped. The soldiers are attacked by John, the village carpenter because he also loved Cordelia. Soon we find that dramatically the daughters government is overturned and Lear is imprisoned again. Lear is blinded and his two daughters are killed. Now as Lear has lost his eyesight he can see things clearly. He has become politically ineffective so he is set free. He understands his failure that he was busy in constructing the wall not his administration. He finds himself responsible for his destiny. The power is assumed by Cordelia who successfully converts her wrongs into a powerful empire. The work of constructing the wall is resumed by her. She emerges as a guerilla leader and becomes as violent as Lear was in the beginning. Lear warns Cordelia about the dangers of her emerging persona. He now understands the value of justice and freedom and thus he becomes a Christ like figure. He starts provoking people for the cause of justice but he is warned by Cordelia. At the climax we find him dead as he has been shot by a farmer’s son who has been recruited by Cordelia as a soldier. He is shot because he was trying to pull the wall using a shovel. It is ironical to find that Lear has taken a life in the beginning of the play for the construction of the wall sacrifices his own life for the same wall. Bond has tried to show us how a society is erected and trapped on the patterns of aggression. The fate of the common man is captivated by the government in power. The wall building project of Lear acts like a connecting link between the false public policy and corrupt laws of the government.