Treated Like a Bug: The Similarities Between the Lives of Franz Kafka and The Metamorphosis's Gregor Samsa

Treated Like a Bug

The Similarities Between The Lives of Franz Kafka and The Metamorphosis's Gregor Samsa

Top: A cartoon image of the transformed Gregor.  Image from Kafkaesque World.

Above: Franz Kafka.  Image from A Focus on Franz Kafka: Elana Wolff's "Metamorphoses" published by EVENT Magazine, "Two Short Talks by Anne Carson" upcoming on Brick Books.

One of the distinguishing characteristics of Kafka’s writing is the extent to which the experiences of the characters in his works reflect his own experiences.  In fact, so many parallels exist between his life and those of certain characters in his works that, according to GradeSaver’s “Biography of Franz Kafka”: “Kafka’s biography reads almost like a critical analysis of his work,” (classicnote.com).  One work to which this description applies is the novella The Metamorphosis.  Although the novella revolves around an implausible event—the transformation of the main character, Gregor Samsa, into an insect—many similarities exist between the lives of Kafka and Samsa.  Not only were the occupational and familial circumstances of the two similar, both struggled with ill health and the inability to form lasting relationships with women.  The similarities between the lives of the two indicate that, like the main character in The Metamorphosis, Franz Kafka was regarded as a bug, both by himself and by others.

Interactions With Family Members

The events of The Metamorphosis revolve around the transformation of Gregor Samsa, a young traveling salesman, into an insect.  Samsa’s transformation compels the members of his family to undergo their own transformations: his father, who had previously been too depressed to work, is forced to take a job as a messenger, which temporarily increases his vitality; his mother is compelled to take a job as a seamstress; and his younger sister, Grete, matures as a result of taking a job as a sales clerk and beginning to study French and shorthand.  Before his transformation, Samsa had the sole wage earner in his family; the fact that the family initially employs a cook and a separate servant girl indicate that his job affords his family a comfortable existence.  However, the only family member to whom Samsa is genuinely loyal is Grete.  Grete initially reciprocates this loyalty, wholeheartedly caring for him even after his transformation.  The dedicated manner in which Grete cares for her Samsa is demonstrated by her response to the observation that he has not eaten any of the food that she had brought him:

“But his sister at once noticed, with surprise, that the basin was still full, except for a little milk that had been spilt all around it, she lifted it immediately, not with her bare hands, true, but with a cloth and carried it away.  Gregor was wildly curious to know what she would bring instead, and made various speculations about it.  Yet what she actually did next, in the goodness of her heart, he could never have guessed at.  To find out what he liked she brought him a whole selection of food, all set on an old newspaper.  There were old, half-decayed vegetables, bones from last night’s supper covered with a white sauce that had thickened; some raisins and almonds; a piece of cheese that Gregor would have called uneatable two days ago; a dry roll of bread, a buttered roll, and a roll both buttered and salted,” (Kafka 282).

When Grete discovers that Samsa does not like the food that she had brought him, she brings him a vast assortment of food in order to assess his preferences.  Her actions indicate that she cares for him out of a genuine desire to aid him (rather than because of an obligation to do so).  As the novella progresses, however, Grete begins to view her brother as a liability, eventually advocating for abandoning him after he disturbs the lodgers to whom they are subleasing a room:

“‘We must try to get rid of it,’ his sister now said explicitly to her father, since her mother was coughing too much to hear a word, ‘it will be the death of both of us, I can see that coming.  When one has to work as hard as we do, all of us, one can’t stand this continual torment at home on top of it.  At least I can’t stand it any longer.’  And she burst into such a passion of sobbing that her tears dropped on her mother’s face, where she wiped them off mechanically,” (Kafka, 298).

Grete views Samsa as more of a burden than a brother; not only does she feel that her family must rid itself of him, she refers to him as it.  She regards Samsa in this way because the obligations of her job and studies prevent her from caring for him, and because his disturbance of the lodgers jeopardizes one of the family’s sources of income.  Samsa’s relationship with his father is another important facet of the novella, as the former is in many ways a victim of the latter.  The father has not worked since his business failed five years prior to the events of the novella, instead relying on his son for financial support.  Whereas Samsa had set his alarm for four o’clock in the morning on the eve of his metamorphosis (Kafka 272), his father “[lingers his breakfast] out for hours over various newspapers,” (Kafka 278).  This juxtaposition reinforces the disparity between Samsa’s contributions to his family and those of his father.  After Samsa’s transformation, the father becomes disconcerted by the loss of his source of income and begins to drive his son back to his room:

“Pitilessly Gregor’s father drove him back, hissing and crying ‘Shoo!’ like a savage…If [Gregor] only had a chance to turn round he could get back to his room at once, but he was afraid of exasperating his father by the slowness of such a rotation and at any moment the stick in his father’s hand might hit him a fatal blow on the back or on the head…Perhaps his father noticed his good intentions, for he did not interfere except every now and then to help him in the manoeuvre from a distance with the point of the stick.  If only he would have stopped making that unbearable hissing noise!  It made Gregor quite lose his head.  He had turned almost completely round when the hissing noise so distracted him that he even turned a little the wrong way again.  But when at last his head was fortunately right in front of the doorway it appeared that his body was too broad to get through the opening.  His father, of course in his present mood was far from thinking of such a thing as opening the other half of the door, to let Gregor have enough space.  He had merely the fixed idea of driving Gregor back into his room as quickly as possible,” (Kafka 280).

As Samsa’s father drives his son back into his room, he hisses and seems to disregard his inability to fit through the doorway.  His actions establish that he is easily angered and somewhat simpleminded.  Samsa’s transformation eventually compels his father to take a job as a messenger.  This job temporarily revitalizes him, as demonstrated when Samsa contrasts his newfound livelihood with his former physical condition:

“And yet, and yet, could that be his father?  The man who used to lie wearily sunk in bed whenever Gregor set out on a business journey; who welcomed him back of an evening lying in a long chair in a dressing gown; who could not really rise to his feet but only lifted his arms in greeting, and on the rare occasions when he did go out with his family, on one or two Sundays a year and on high holidays, walked between Gregor and his mother, who were slow walkers anyhow, even more slowly than they did, muffled in his old greatcoat, shuffling laboriously forward with the help of his crook-handled stick which he set down most cautiously at every step and, whenever he wanted to say anything, nearly always came to a full stop and gathered his escort around him?  Now he was standing there in fine shape; dressed in a smart blue uniform with gold buttons, such as bank messengers wear; his strong double chin bulged over the stiff high collar of his jacket; from under his bushy eyebrows his black eyes darted fresh and penetrating glances; his onetime tangled white hair had been combed flat on either side of a shining and carefully exact parting.  He pitched his cap, which bore a gold monogram, probably the badge of some bank, in a wide sweep across the whole room on to a sofa and with the tail-ends of his jacket thrown back, his hands in his trouser pockets, advanced with a grim visage towards Gregor,” (Kafka 291).

Previously, the father had been lethargic and sickly in his appearance and behaviors; it is likely that he had suffered from depression instigated by the failure of his business.  Now that he has taken a job, both his appearance and vitality have improved.  His attitude towards his son, however, has not changed; having been notified that Samsa has left his room, the father chases him around the living room and bombards him with apples.  The father eventually returns to his former depressed state; he never removes his uniform and falls asleep in his armchair after his family eats supper.  In spite of his strained relationships with his father and his sister, Samsa remains loyal to his family until he dies.  As he lies dying, alone in his room, he “thought of his family with tenderness and love,” (Kafka 300) and reflects on his banishment to his room: “The decision that he must disappear was one that he held to even more strongly than his sister, if that were possible,” (Kafka 300).  As he lies dying, Samsa feels love for his family and believes that his death is in their interests.  These sentiments demonstrate the extent of his familial loyalty and as such add an element of poignancy to his death.

Franz Kafka’s work and home lives were quite similar to those of Samsa.  Kafka was born in Prague, Czechoslovakia to a successful Jewish couple; as he was a secular Jew in a city in which Jews were alienated, he was an outcast in both his city and his religious community.  His older brother died at war, forcing him to assume his responsibilities as the oldest sibling; Kafka also had three sisters, but was only close with one of them, Ottilia (classicnote.com).  As had previously been the case the case with Mr. Samsa, Kafka’s father was a business owner.  Like Mr. Samsa, he was also brash and somewhat oppressive of his son.  In his “Letter to his Father,” Kafka reflects on his relationship with his father, recounting scenes in which his father abused him.  In one such scene, Kafka remembers having annoyed his father and being sent outside (Fischer).  It is worth noting that he uses the German word “winseln” to describe his crying, as this term connotes that he is insignificant and pitiable (Fischer).  Kafka’s father compelled him to study law, and Kafka received his doctorate in this field in 1906.  Upon graduating, he took a job as a legal clerk, but found this job unfulfilling and quit in 1908.  He then began to work as a traveling salesman for an insurance company against his father’s wishes.  Although this stands in contrast to Samsa’s father’s opinion regarding his son’s job, both fathers have interests that conflict with those of their sons.  This conflict of interest is one of the many similarities between the work and home lives of Gregor Samsa and Franz Kafka.

Relationships With Women

Another similarity that the two share is the nature of their interactions—or lack thereof—with women; although both had lovers at various times, neither was able to form a permanent, committed relationship with a woman.  In addition, the romantic lives of both were influenced by their fathers in some way.  Samsa’s loneliness is established when his room is described at the beginning of the novella; among its only furnishings are “the picture which he had recently cut out of an illustrated magazine and put into a pretty gilt frame.  It showed a lady, with a fur cap on and a fur stole, sitting upright and holding out to the spectator a huge fur muff into which the whole of her forearm had vanished,” (Kafka 271).  The fact that this picture depicts a model in a magazine—and not a woman whom Samsa has actually known—indicates that Samsa has not had any committed relationships with women.  This indication is confirmed when Samsa contemplates the advantages and disadvantages of his job, including “‘casual acquaintances that are always new and never become intimate friends,’” (Kafka 271).  The nature of Samsa’s job prevents him from entering committed relationships with women.  However, he appears to have had various lovers during his travels, as evidenced when he reflects on various aspects of his former job, including “a chambermaid in one of the rural hotels, a sweet but fleeting memory, a cashier in a milliner’s shop, whom he had wooed earnestly but too slowly,” (Kafka 293).  Samsa appears to have had several affairs during his travels.  However, he has bittersweet memories of all of these affairs because of their temporary nature.  As the refusal of Samsa’s father to find work compelled him to take this job, the father could be regarded as influencing the nature of his relationships.

As is the case with Samsa, Kafka entered no relationships of note before writing The Metamorphosis.  In 1912, however, the year in which the novella was published, he met Felice Bauer, with whom he was engaged and disengaged twice in the next five years; he entered a relationship with Grete Bloch during the time between these engagements, fathering a child about whom he never knew with her (classicnote.com).  Towards the end of his life, he cohabited and planned to elope with a woman named Dora Dymant.  Their relationship, however, ended when Kafka’s tuberculosis worsened, forcing him to return to Prague for treatment.  Many of Kafka’s relationships were unsound because of his conflicting attitudes about marriage.  Kafka believed strongly in the institution of marriage and felt a need to escape the influence of his father (classicnote.com).  However, he feared the prospect of marriage because it would require him to sacrifice time that he could have otherwise spent writing (Fischer).  These conflicting attitudes about marriage hindered Kafka’s ability to enter committed, long-term relationships with women.

Illness

Many scholars have asserted that Gregor Samsa’s transformation into an insect is not literal, but rather representative of a battle with an illness.  Whether or not this was Kafka’s intention, Samsa’s condition deteriorates as the novella progresses.  The deterioration in his condition begins with his transformation into an insect.  Shortly after his transformation, he responds to his mother in a muddled, almost inhuman voice (Kafka 272).  In Chapter 2, he stops speaking and begins to lose his appetite.  By the beginning of Chapter 3, “hardly slept at all by night or by day,” (Kafka 293) and “was now eating hardly anything,” (Kafka 295).  In addition, “it took [Samsa] long, long minutes to creep across his room like an old invalid—there was no question now of climbing up the wall,” (Kafka 292).  By the time of his death, he “was now unable to stir a limb,” (Kafka 300) and “his whole body was aching,” (Kafka 300).  Samsa’s death serves as the culmination of the decline which began with his transformation into a bug.

Kafka, whose health issues began during his childhood, suffered from “insomnia, recurring coughs, night sweats, and similar difficulties,” (Batson) throughout his life.  He was diagnosed with tuberculosis in 1917, but likely suffered from this disease for some time prior to his diagnosis, as there had previously been no means of identifying the disease (Batson).  His illness forced him to spend much time in sanitariums, where he experienced indignity and isolation (Batson). His tuberculosis forced him to retire from his job in 1922, and he died two years later, completing a decline similar to that of Gregor Samsa in a manner similar to that character’s death.

Conclusion

Perhaps the adjective that most accurately describes Kafka’s life is lonely.  As a secular, German-speaking Jew in a Czech city, Kafka was regarded as an outsider in both his city and his religious community.  He was close with only one of his four siblings, and had a particularly hostile relationship with his father.  He entered many failed relationships with women and spent his life plagued by illness, eventually dying alone in a sanitarium.  Many of his works reflect his own experiences, one such work being The Metamorphosis.  As was the case with Kafka, the main character in that novella, Gregor Samsa, works as a traveling salesman and struggles with illness and flawed relationships, both with members of his family and with women.  Even the most improbable event of the story—Samsa’s transformation into a bug—reflects the manner in which Kafka regarded himself and was regarded by others: lowly, repulsive, and little more significant than a bug.

Works Cited

Batson, Robbie.  “Kafka-Samsa.  Reality Through Symbolism.”  The Kafka Project.  n.p., n.d., Web.  14 Jan. 2015.  http://www.kafka.org.

“Biography of Franz Kafka (1883-1924).  GradeSaver.  n.p., n.d., Web.  5 Jan. 2015.  http://www.classicnote.com.

Fischer, Christian.  “Writing the Unwritable-Exploring the Differend in Kafkas’s Letter to His Father.”  The Kafka Project.  n.p., n.d., Web.  14 Jan. 2015.  http://www.kafka.org/.

Kafka, Franz.  “Metamorphosis.”  The Norton Introduction to the Short Novel.  Ed.  Jerome Beaty.  New York: W.W.  Norton & Company, 1987.  269-303.

Analysis of "Theme for English B" and "Cross" by Langston Hughes

Analysis of "Theme for English B" and "Cross" by Langston Hughes

One of the most notable figures of the Harlem Renaissance was the poet Langston Hughes (1902-1967).  Hughes, whose poetry was influenced by the styles of Paul Lawrence Dunbar, Carl Sandburg, and Walt Whitman, addressed such aspects of African-American life as racial segregation and identity.  Although he focused on the experiences of African-Americans, people of all races can identify with many themes contained in his writing.  Two such poems are “Theme for English B” and “Cross.”  This essay will begin with an analysis of "Theme for English B," before analyzing "Cross" and comparing it to "Theme for English B," and will end by drawing conclusions about Hughes based on the two poems in question.

Langston Hughes (1902-1967).  Photo Courtesy of http://thefrontporch.org/2014/02/what-langston-hughes-lie-can-mean-for-churches/.

Analysis of "Theme for English B"

The speaker in “Theme for English B”—an African-American college student—attempts to fulfill an assignment given by his white professor, in which he is expected to write about himself as openly as possible.  The assignment causes him to contemplate his identity as a college student, as a resident of Harlem, and as a human being.  After fulfilling the assignment, the speaker discusses his relationship with his professor, describing it as both symbiotic and strained because of the cultural differences between the two.  At the beginning of the poem, the speaker is critical of his instructor’s assumption that a page that comes “out of you / …will be true” (ll. 3-4) because his professor is “…older and white / And somewhat more free,” (ll. 39-40) than him.  Because of the racial and generational disparities that exist between the two, the speaker and the professor likely have different beliefs.  This difference in viewpoints deters the speaker from writing about himself in a completely honest manner.  The tension that exists between the two also prevents the speaker from completely fulfilling his professor’s assignment, as a page that “[came] out of [him]” (l. 3) would contain the hostility that he often feels towards his professor.  It is worth noting that the speaker includes age as a factor that alienates the speaker and the professor from each other.  This mention of age indicates that the race is not the sole factor preventing the speaker from fulfilling the professor’s assignment, and that the speaker’s white peers might also be reluctant to do so.  Indeed, people of all races may occasionally be disinclined to share their beliefs and experiences with another person, especially an authority figure with different beliefs and experiences.  By mentioning that factors other than race alienate him and his professor from each other, the speaker relates his experiences as an African-American to those of members of other races.

Although the speaker in “Theme for English B” relates his experiences to those of members of other races, he also clarifies his identity as a resident of the African-American neighborhood of Harlem.  His mentions of both his college class and his commute help to establish this identity:

“I am the only colored student in my class.

The steps from the hill lead down into Harlem,

through a park, then I cross St. Nicholas,

Eighth Avenue, Seventh, and I come to the Y,

the Harlem Branch Y, where I take the elevator

up to my room, sit down, and write this page,” (ll. 10-15).

After briefly mentioning that he is the only African-American student in his class, the speaker describes his commute home, listing specific points along his route.  The comparative lengths of the speaker’s mentions of his mostly white class and his African-American neighborhood indicate that he primarily identifies himself as an African-American.  Although the speaker identifies with African-American culture, he does not let his racial identity completely estrange him from members of other races.  This is demonstrated when he describes himself as having attributes similar to those of any other person:

“Well, I like to eat, sleep, drink, and be in love.

I like to work, read, learn, and understand life.

I like a pipe for a Christmas present.

or records—Bessie, bop, or Bach.

I guess being colored doesn’t make me not like

the same things other folks like who are other races,” (ll. 21-26).

The speaker begins his response by listing physiological needs common to all human beings.  It is likely that he does this in order to remind his audience of the fundamental similarities that exist between all of them.  He then discusses his interests, maintaining the relatable nature of his self-description by listing various genres of music.  Through his self-description, the speaker conveys that he shares many similarities with members of other races, even if the color of his skin and his loyalty to his African-American neighborhood indicate otherwise.

Although the speaker in “Theme for English B” appears to write for his professor, he is in fact addressing Americans of all races.  This is demonstrated by the speaker’s efforts to relate to members of other races.  The fact that the speaker addresses all Americans is also supported by the fact that, toward the end of the poem, the speaker discusses the disadvantages of segregation to racial groups other than his own.  One way in which he does this is by appealing to patriotic sentiments.  When the speaker wonders about the nature of his assignment, he concludes that it will contain contributions from both him and his professor, and describes this amalgamation as American:

“So will my page be colored that I write?

Being me, it will not be white.

But it will be

a part of you, instructor.

You are white—

yet a part of me, as I am a part of you.

That’s American,” (ll. 27-33).

The speaker contends that his writing is influenced not only by his own experience as an African-American, but also by the instruction of his white professor, who in turn is influenced by him.  He describes this collaboration as American, echoing the idea of America as a medley of different cultures and implying that segregation is inherently un-American.  This appeal to patriotism indicates that the speaker is addressing the American populace.  The speaker also decries segregation through his description of his professor as “…older and white / And somewhat more free,” (ll. 39-40).  His description of the professor as merely “somewhat” freer than him indicates that members of other races are constrained by the system of segregation that favors them; the professor would probably be chastised by his peers if he were more amiable to the speaker.  The fact that the speaker in “Theme for English B” attempts to make himself relatable to members of other races while clarifying his identity with his own race, his appeal to patriotism, and his mention of the disadvantages of segregation to ethnic groups other than his own indicate that his audience includes all Americans.

Analysis of "Cross" and Comparison to "Theme for English B"

“Cross” focuses on the racial tension that abounded in the speaker’s biracial family.  The speaker recalls having become enraged with his parents as a child, and apologizes to them.  Although he has reconciled with his parents, the reason for his anger persists: his lack of racial identity.  The speaker establishes the tension that existed in his family at the beginning of the poem:

“My old man’s a white old man

And my old mother’s black.

If ever I cursed my white old man

I take my curses back.

If ever I cursed my black old mother

And wished she were in hell,

I’m sorry for that evil wish

And now I wish her well,” (ll. 1-8).

The speaker recalls having become angry with his parents, and apologizes to them.  As in “Theme For English B,” the speaker expresses regret over the dysfunctional nature of his relationships with authority figures.  However, whereas the tension between the speaker in “Theme for English B” and his professor is motivated by the fact that the two are of different races, the familial tension in “Cross” is due to the fact that the speaker has no race with which to identify.  The speaker conveys this at the end of the poem, after mentioning the conditions in which his parents died:

“My old man died in a fine big house.

My ma died in a shack.

I wonder where I’m going to die,

Being neither white nor black?” (ll. 9-12).

After mentioning the conditions in which his parents died, the speaker expresses uncertainty regarding where he will die.  As the conditions in which the speaker’s parents died reflect the circumstances of their respective races, the speaker’s concern regarding where he will die indicates concern over his lack of racial identity.  His description of himself as “neither white nor black”—as opposed to both white and black—is worth noting, as it reinforces his lack of racial identity.  It is likely that this lack of identity caused the speaker to become angry with his parents (although it is quite possible that he was also angry at his father for betraying his mother).  As is the case with “Theme for English B,” people of all races can identify with many aspects of “Cross”: people of all races grow up in dysfunctional households, and most people feel a profound sense of regret or a burdensome fear similar to those expressed by the speaker.  Although “Theme for English B” and “Cross” share many similarities, several differences exist between the two poems.  The speaker in “Theme for English B” acknowledges that he has been lucky enough to attend college, unlike his peers.  He also expresses a sense of attachment to African-American culture, but believes that racial boundaries are arbitrary.  The speaker in “Cross,” on the other hand, is tormented by the fact that he does not belong to any racial group.  Although he apologizes to his parents, his apologies are meaningless, as both of his parents are dead.  The manners in which the speaker’s parents died—the white father in luxury, the black mother in poverty, both parents separate from each other—indicate that racial boundaries are everlasting.

Conclusion

Based on both “Theme for English B” and “Cross,” it is likely that Langston Hughes considered writing an inward journey.  The stream-of-consciousness writing style in “Theme for English B” gives the impression of the speaker relating his thoughts as they occur.  This reflects the fact that the speaker in the poem attempts to fulfill an assignment in which he has to “let that page come out of you,” (l. 3).  Although the speaker in “Cross” does not explicitly depict his thought processes, he indicates that he has felt many profound emotions.  When he apologizes to his parents, for example, it can be inferred that his apologies are a means of assuaging guilt that he may feel over never having reconciled with them.  Similarly, when he wonders where he will die, he indicates that he is greatly troubled by his lack of identity, even though he does not explicitly mention this pathos.  Based on the introspective nature of “Theme for English B” and the intense emotions alluded to in “Cross,” it is likely that Langston Hughes considered writing not only a means of release, but an inward journey.

Many similarities exist between Langston Hughes’ poems “Theme for English B” and “Cross.”  The speakers in both poems reflect on their strained relationships with authority figures and try to reconcile with these people.  They also discuss their identities, conveying the desire for others to see them differently.  However, several differences exist between the two poems.  In “Theme for English B”, the speaker expresses a sense of belonging to his African-American community, but also a belief that segregation is arbitrary.  In “Cross,” the speaker laments his lack of identity, and, by relating the different manners in which his parents died, a belief that segregation is eternal.  In spite of the differences that exist between the two poems, both “Theme for English B” and “Cross” portray the experiences of African-Americans in such a manner that members of all races can relate to those experiences.

"Men o' Their Words": The masculinity of Goneril and Regan in Shakespeare's King Lear

"Men o' Their Words"

The masculinity of Goneril and Regan in Shakespeare's King Lear

From left to right: Goneril (Domini Blythe), Regan (Lucy Peacock), and Lear (Christopher Plummer) in the Jonathan Miller-directed version of King Lear.  Photo Credit: Joan Marcus.  http://www.theatermania.com/new-york-city-theater/reviews/03-2004/king-lear_4450.html.

At one point in the tragedy King Lear, by William Shakespeare, the title character declares that his two older daughters, Goneril and Regan, are “not men o’ their words,” (Shakespeare IV.vi.123).  The use of the word “men” to describe two female characters is certainly noteworthy, but may at first appear to be an error that Shakespeare overlooked.  However, it is more likely that this syntax reflects the fact that Goneril and Regan’s characters occupy roles typically reserved for male characters during Shakespeare’s lifetime (Shakespeare was born in 1564 and died in 1616).  Indeed, Goneril and Regan own land, eagerly wield power, “are very outspoken, and do not behave as the property of their father or their husbands,” (Jansen 24), all of which would have been highly unusual for women in Shakespeare’s time.  Their masculinity is also evident in their unmotivated villainy, which prevents them from redeeming themselves before their demises at the end of the play.

King Lear, set in pre-Christian Great Britain, follows the decline of the title character as a result of his decision to allocate control of his kingdom to Goneril and Regan while disinheriting Cordelia, his youngest daughter and the only one loyal to him.  Upon receiving control of Lear’s kingdom, Goneril and Regan seek to decimate Lear’s remaining authority for reasons that are never clarified.  While these events unfold, Edmund—the illegitimate son of the Earl of Gloucester, a nobleman loyal to Lear—betrays both his father and his legitimate half-brother, Edgar.  The fact that Goneril and Regan possess male attributes is first evident when Lear allocates control of his kingdom to them based on the extent to which they flatter him:

“…Tell me, my daughters—

Since now we will divest us both of rule,

Interest of territory, cares of state—

Which of you shall we say doth love us most,

That we our largest bounty may extend

Where nature doth with merit challenge,” (Shakespeare I.i.52-58).

Lear plans to entrust the most desirable portions of his kingdom to the daughters who flatter him most.  In distributing portions of his kingdom in this manner, he essentially gives each daughter the ability to determine her inheritance.  In addition, the manner in which he addresses Goneril and Regan indicates that they—and not their husbands, the Dukes of Albany and Cornwall—will receive dominion over their inheritances in addition to the ability to determine which portions of their father’s kingdom they receive.  In her BA Thesis, titled “Shall I compare thee to modern day feminism?: A comparison between Shakespeare’s original plays and modern screen adaptations regarding feminist characters,” Liz Jansen emphasizes the uncommonness of Goneril and Regan’s acquisition of their father’s property: “…It was sometimes possible for lower class women to own property during the Renaissance.  However Goneril and Regan are of high social class,” (26) and as such would not typically have owned property. 

However, they are not only granted the opportunity to own property, but willingly seize this opportunity.  Both sisters exaggerate their love of their father; Goneril, demonstrating her self-assurance by speaking in blank verse, claims to “love you more than word can wield the / Matter,” (Shakespeare I.i.60-61) and Regan, also speaking in blank verse, asserts: “I find [Goneril] names my very deed of love; / Only she comes too short,” (Shakespeare I.i.78-79).  Their excessive flattery of Lear demonstrates a desire for property incongruous with their positions as women of the time, whether “the time” refers to the Renaissance, during which the play was written, or to the pre-Christian era in which the play is set.

In his essay “Some Remarks on the Suicide of King Lear’s Eldest Daughter,” M.D. Faber describes Goneril as “void of innocence, cruel, cunning, Machiavellian, murderous,” (qtd. in Cupitt).  These characteristics become evident when Lear resides in her palace in Act I, Scene iv.  During this scene, Goneril dominates her male counterparts, including Albany and Lear’s Fool:

“ALBANY

I cannot be so partial, Goneril,

To the great love I bear you—

GONERIL

Pray you, content.—What, Oswald, ho!—

You, sir, more knave than Fool, after your master,” (Shakespeare I.iv.329-332).

Goneril silences Albany after he proclaims his love for her, and proceeds to command the Fool (who, although inferior to her, is not under her control) to return to Lear.  As Jansen explains, women of the time “had to be faithful to their husbands always, even when their husbands were not,” (8).  Given this historical context, there appears to be an inversion in the gender roles of Goneril and Albany; in this case, the male is faithful to his wife, who does not reciprocate this loyalty.  Later in that scene, Goneril demands that Lear reduce the size of his retinue; her insubordination to her father—and the fact that she essentially wages a struggle for the power typically denied to women of the time—also demonstrate her masculinity.  Regan demonstrates a similar irreverence towards her father; when notified that Lear plans to reside in her castle, she and Cornwall relocate to that of the Earl of Gloucester, a nobleman loyal to Lear.  Then, when Lear follows her to Gloucester’s castle, she demands that he return to Goneril:

“REGAN O, sir, you are old.

Nature in you stands on the very verge

Of his confine.  You should be ruled and led

By some discretion that discerns your state

Better than you yourself.  Therefore, I pray you

That to our sister you do make return.

Say you have wronged her.

LEAR Ask her forgiveness?

Do you but mark how this becomes the house:

    He kneels.

‘Dear daughter, I confess that I am old.

Age is unnecessary.  On my knees I beg

That you’ll vouchsafe me raiment, bed, and food,’” (Shakespeare II.iv.165-176).

Regan advises Lear to return to Goneril’s castle and apologize for leaving.  Her refusal to accommodate Lear—and her attempt to justify this refusal on the basis of his advancing age—stands in contrast to the archetype of the hospitable, devoted female.  In addition, the manner in which she compels Lear to kneel in front of her demonstrates her insubordination to and authority over her father.  In these ways, the manner in which Regan addresses Lear demonstrates the masculinity of her character.

At the end of King Lear, both Goneril and Regan perish as a result of their shared lust for Edmund.  Goneril poisons Regan, presumably with the intention of furthering her quest to win Edmund’s attentions.  She subsequently commits suicide after Albany questions her about a paper—presumably the one containing Edmund’s order to kill Cordelia—preferring to die rather than implicate Edmund.  Unlike Edmund, who while dying attempts to rescind his order commanding Cordelia’s assassination, neither Goneril nor Regan manages to redeem herself before dying.  This discrepancy can best be explained by the motives—or lack thereof, in the case of Goneril and Regan—of each antagonist.  Edmund reveals his motives in his soliloquy at the beginning of Act I, Scene ii, in which he expresses anger with the inferior social status associated with his illegitimacy:

“…Why ‘bastard’?  Wherefore ‘base,’

When my dimensions as well compact,

My mind as generous and my shape as true

As honest madam’s issue?” (Shakespeare I.ii.6-9).

Edmund feels that his illegitimacy has unfairly deprived him of the respect that he would otherwise enjoy.  He questions the rationale behind his inferior social status, asserting that the circumstances of his conception have rendered him neither physically nor mentally handicapped.  In these ways, his soliloquy establishes his longing for the appreciation that he has been denied due to his illegitimacy.  At the end of the play, as he lies dying, Edmund realizes that he has received this high regard in the form of Goneril and Regan’s lust for him and the actions that each took to seduce him: “Yet Edmund was beloved. / The one the other poisoned for my sake, / And after slew herself,” (Shakespeare V.iii.287-289).  Edmund’s realization that Goneril killed both Regan and herself in order to seduce him fulfills his desire for admiration.  As this desire, which had prompted his previous villainous actions, is assuaged, Edmund no longer has any reason to commit such actions, and as such attempts to rescind the order commanding Cordelia’s assassination.

Unlike Edmund, Goneril and Regan lack any real motivation for their villainous actions, and for this reason fail to redeem themselves.  In fact, it could be argued that their lack of complexity is a manifestation of their masculinity.  Cathy Cupitt discusses the superficial nature of Goneril and Regan’s characters in her essay “Daughters of Chaos: An examination of the women in King Lear and Ran.”  She cites the essay “Partite, Mutuality, and Forgiveness in King Lear,” by Marianne Novy, who writes: “Goneril and Regan are much less psychologically complex than most Shakespearean characters of comparable importance.  Few of their lines carry hints of motivations other than cruelty, lust or ambition, characteristics of the archetypal fantasy image of woman as enemy,” (qtd. in Cupitt)  Novy contends that Goneril and Regan are one-dimensional, purely evil characters, attributing this portrayal of them to the negative manner in which Shakespeare and his contemporaries viewed women.  However, Cupitt contradicts the argument that she raises by citing Novy when she references the essay “The Symbolic Role of Cordelia in King Lear,” by J. Satin, who asserts that Cordelia exemplifies “the religion of beauty in women,” (qtd. in Cupitt).  Since Cordelia, whose actions stand in stark contrast to those of Goneril and Regan, exemplifies the literary trope of feminine purity, Goneril and Regan’s unadulterated villainy is due not to their status as women but to their functions as men.  Therefore, it could be argued that Goneril and Regan’s masculinity prevents them from redeeming themselves.

The implications of the roles of Goneril and Regan have served as the subject of intense scholarly debate over the years.  Some scholars, such as Cathy Cupitt, argue that the portrayal of Goneril and Regan as villains reflects Shakespeare’s misogynistic attitude towards women.  Others, such as Liz Jansen, contend that Shakespeare was not a misogynist but was rather “more of a modern day feminist or female-friendly than some modern day filmmakers,” (Jansen 32).  Interestingly, the general consensus among these scholars is that Goneril and Regan are extraordinarily atypical female characters, such that it could be argued that they occupy roles usually reserved for male characters.  Indeed, their desire for power and demonstrations of irreverence towards their male counterparts were highly unusual for women of their time period and social standing.  In addition, their evil actions stand in stark contrast to the goodness of Cordelia, who exemplifies the literary trope of feminine goodness.  For these reasons, all of the scholarly debate regarding the implications of this phenomenon cannot change the fact that Goneril and Regan are female characters who occupy male roles.

Works Cited

Cupitt, Cathy.  “Daughters of Chaos: An examination of the women in King Lear and Ran.”  Cathy Cupitt.  N.p., 4 Oct. 2010.  Web.  25 Mar. 2015.  http://www.cathycupitt.com/.

Jansen, Liz.  “Shall I compare thee to modern day feminism?: A comparison between Shakespeare’s original plays and modern screen adaptations regarding feminist characters”.  BA Thesis.  University of Utrecht, 2014.  Print.

Shakespeare, William.  The Tragedy of King Lear.  Ed. Barbara A. Mowat and Paul Werstine.  New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2009.  Print.