“King Lear” is arguably one of the best examples of a true tragedy in literature, a status that Shakespeare was able to achieve through his masterful use of a plot and subplot that mirror each other. The subplot complements the main plot by intensifying its action and dramatic effect, allowing us as readers to stay engaged with the play while also allowing us to understand the different themes, characters and characters’ motives to a deeper level. Both Lear and Gloucester suffer and come to realise their fatal flaws, however, these traits manifest differently in both men, demonstrating the clever use of simplicity and complexity to allow for deeper understanding. Additionally, the theme of blindness is also illustrated throughout the play both metaphorically and literally in these same two characters. And finally, the parallels between Goneril, Regan and Edmund are adamant, as their evil motives to turn against their greying fathers can be accredited to their upbringing.

Lear and Gloucester can be compared in many ways: both are men of noble origin and both are fathers but most importantly, both possess the same fatal flaw: they are unable to see what is right in front of them. The mistakes they make in regard to their children and those they trust force them to face hard truths. However, this theme manifests itself differently in Lear and Gloucester. Lear is quick to disown Cordelia when she is unable to proclaim her love for him as extravagantly as her sisters, saying “The bow is bent and drawn. Make from the shaft”. Gloucester also rashly disowns a loyal child on the basis of flimsy evidence, believing his darling Edgar to be an “unnatural, detested, brutish villain”. This is the perfect example of their fatal flaw which leads to both men ending up in emotional turmoil as they battle their inner demons.MI 

However, Lear is slower to come to the full realisation of his faults in comparison to Gloucester due to his gradual descent into madness, yet in spurs of realisation of how badly Goneril and Regan are treating him, he concludes that he has treated Cordelia wrongly, “O most small fault, how ugly didst thou in Cordelia show”. Whilst Lear is constantly struggling with his grip on reality, Gloucester is suffering too, only realising that Edgar was the one who truly loved him when he brutally gets his eyes plucked out by Cornwall and Regan, “O my follies! Then Edgar was abused. Kind gods, forgive me that, and prosper him!”. Overall, Lear’s suffering and realisation are a lot more complicated than that of Gloucester, whose journey is very literal. Edmund deceives him using a forged letter, he suffers by getting his eyes plucked out and he realises his fatal flaw (trusting Edmund) when it’s too late. I think the mirroring of the plot is interesting and adds to my engagement with the play as it allows for a deeper understanding of the theme of suffering and realisation.MI 

Lear’s own suffering and thought process is complex and hard to understand due to his deteriorating mental state whereas Gloucester’s emotions and thoughts are much easier to comprehend. Once you identify the parallels between Lear and Gloucester’s characters and see their shared common flaw, it allows you to read more into Lear’s character and the complexities that come with his madness. As both men find themselves in very similar situations, through Gloucester’s suffering you can begin to understand why Lear acts how he acts, as at the end of the day both men are grieving their own ill-made mistakes and the loss of their only child who truly loved them.MI

Another example of complexity vs simplicity between Lear and Gloucester can be observed through the theme of blindness. Shakespeare cleverly uses metaphorical and literal blindness to allude to Lear and Gloucester’s fatal flaw once again, using the subplot to heighten the drama, and in order to simplify Lear’s lack of insight for readers in the form of Gloucester’s blinding, as he acts as Lear’s mirrored character. 

The theme of blindness is first explored early in the play with Goneril successfully flattering Lear by claiming her love for him is “dearer than eyesight” - an unnatural and disturbing comparison that suggests that value is placed on eyesight. This can be viewed as a form of foreshadowing as both Lear and Gloucester soon lack insight and actual sight which would be of great value to them to help them deal with the challenges they face. When Goneril eventually turns on her greying father, Lear is so shocked that he questions, “Does any here know me? This is not Lear, does Lear walk thus? Speak thus? Where are his eyes?”. Even though Lear is going mad, he proves to us that he is acutely aware of his lack of insight from the beginning, sometimes disregarding this fact and sometimes acknowledging it. For example, he seems to get frustrated by his madness and seems unable to escape his own blindness to the truth. “O Lear, Lear, Lear! Beat at this gate that let thy folly in and thy dear judgement out!”. Paradoxically, Lear’s growth in wisdom correlates with his loss of sanity. This greater understanding of himself and the world around him is reflected in these images of sight and blindness. In comparison, Gloucester is too ‘blind’ to the truth initially, ironically saying “Let’s see” three times when asking Edmund to show him the letter but of course, he does not realise what he sees is nothing like the truth. When Gloucester is physically blinded by Cornwall, who mocks his lack of insight by saying, “Out, vile jelly!” as if his eyes are something to be loathed, it symbolises not just his own metaphorical blindness, but also that of Lear. They see too late the loving and honest nature of Edgar and Cordelia respectively. Overall, the theme of blindness added to my engagement personally as it honestly caused me to mourn with the heartbroken pair that they did not gain such insight earlier in the play, saving them from all their suffering. It is also interesting to read back on all the foreshadowing of eyesight and lack thereof and how it manifests itself later in the play as everything takes a turn for the worse. Although Gloucester had to suffer physically as he got his vision taken from him, I equally feel bad for Lear as he too has no true ability to see the truth and also no ability to escape his own madness. MI 

Finally, there are many parallels to be seen between Goneril and Regan, and Edmund “the base”. It is known from the start of the play that Cordelia was Lear’s golden child who was highly valued in his eyes and whom he “loved [her] most”, wanting to live out his days in her care. It is clear to us that Goneril and Regan, although given the chance to receive a third of the kingdom each, were less loved by their father growing up and as a result, they never bonded with him as Cordelia did. They did not hold the same unwavering love for their father, meaning that they did not care to deal with any of his crazed outbursts as he descended into madness but instead used it as an opportunity to seize power, “We must do something, and in the heat”. This similar upbringing seemed to have been experienced by Edmund too; Gloucester jokes about his creation, “Yet was his mother fair; there was good sport at his making, and the whoreson must be acknowledged”. Although it is clear that Edmund received support from Gloucester growing up, he too was not loved as devotedly as Edgar was, leaving him detached from Gloucester and craving power, saying “The younger rises when the old doth fall” as he plans his father’s downfall and cunningly makes him turn on Edgar.MI Edmund takes advantage of Gloucester’s naivety using a forged letter whilst the sisters take advantage of Lear’s insanity by driving him out into the storm and working as a team, they all achieve power in terms of land and titles. Their motives for getting rid of their fathers are clear due to the neglect they felt growing up at the hands of a favoured child, causing them to only know love for themselves. MI Everything that Goneril and Regan do is in order to gain power, control or to obey the lust they feel, as they both can’t truly love their husbands, they are incapable of it. Edmund is also completely self-serving and cares nothing for the suffering he inflicts on those close to him. His betrayal of Gloucester seems unnatural to those reading but if he has never known true love, how is he to know? These parallels between the evil sisters and Edmund contributed to my overall engagement as it allowed for a deeper understanding of the motives of the children and why they carried out the seemingly evil deeds against their fathers.MI It also leaves you wondering who they would have been if they had been equally as loved by their fathers as Cordelia and Edgar. Additionally, they created a vital link between the plot and subplot to add to the overall complex nature of the play, contributing important plot lines that illustrated the fascinating evil tendencies of the characters and how they too were able to help each other through acts of lust and pure evil.

The plot and subplot of “King Lear” mirror each other in so many fascinating ways, that each contributes to the enjoyment of the reader and enhances the overall engagement with the text. But it is hard to talk of Shakespeare’s genius in this sense without discussing the clever use of complexity and simplicity to illustrate themes such as suffering, realisation and blindness. Parallels between characters involved in the plot, subplot and both are also very engaging to observe as it allows you to understand why they act the way they do. Overall, King Lear is an extremely engaging play to study, as you are always kept on your toes, looking for the hidden meanings and subtle ties, and there is always more to discover.