King Lear Essays (1042 words) - King Lear, Films, British Films

King Lear Shakespeare's dynamic use of irony in King Lear aids the microcosmic illustration of not only 16th century Britain, but of all times and places. The theme that best develops this illustration is the discussion of fools and their foolishness. This discussion allows Shakespeare not only to portray human nature, but also to elicit a sort of Socratic introspection into the nature of society's own ignorance as well. One type of fool that Shakespeare involves in King Lear is the immoral fool. Edmund, for instance, may be seen as a fool in the sense that he is morally weak. His foolishness lies in the fact that he has no sense of right or justice, which rewards him with an untimely, ironic death. He discusses this as his father, Gloucester, leaves to ponder the "plotting" of his son Edgar. Edmund soliloquizes, "This is the excellent foppery of the world, that when we are sick in fortune... ...we make guilty of our disasters the sun, the moon, and stars, as if we were villains on necessity; fools by heavenly compulsion." (I. ii. 32) for the sole purpose of illustrating his wickedness. Edmund realizes that his evil is self- taught. This soliloquy shows the audience Edgar's foolishness in his belief that malevolence is the force that drives one to greatness or prosperity. It also illustrates the bastard's mistaken belief that by fooling his father, he might be able to eliminate Edgar, the competition for Gloucester's title, and possibly rid himself of his father in the same act. This is a prime example of immoral foolishness in King Lear. Another type of fool in King Lear is the ignorant fool. Whereas characters such as Goneril, Regan, and Edmund are fools because of their tendency to harm others for self- gain, the ignorant foolish are not necessarily driven to evil. However, the evil are almost always driven to foolish actions. Gloucester, arguably Lear's foil, puts forth an interesting perspective in the play. His character is presented as one who is blind to the truth, and ironically, one who becomes physically blind in the end. In actuality, it is his blindness to the truth of Edgar's love and Edmund's greed and apathy that ultimately brings about Gloucester's demise. When he says, "I have no way and therefore want no eyes, / I stumbled when I saw" (IV.i.173), he seems to be illustrating the realization of his own foolishness. Gloucester illustrates, through his use of verbal irony, that his foolishness lies in the fact that he never truly saw anything (e.g. the true nature of Edmund or Edgar) until he was blind. Another example of Gloucester's ignorant foolishness is the misfortune he predicts at the beginning of the play. He says, "These late eclipses in the sun and moon portend no good to us. Though the wisdom of nature can reason it thus and thus, yet nature finds itself scourged by the sequent effects. Love cools, friendship falls off, brothers divide...in palaces, treason; and the bond cracked 'twixt son and father" (I, ii, 103-109). This statement ironically predicts the vast majority of the play with uncanny accuracy. Shakespeare seems to be using Gloucester as a tool to provide more insight into the nature of foolishness. Another ignorant fool, and obviously one of the most important, is King Lear himself. Shakespeare deliberately uses Lear as a representation of the darker side of human foolishness. He appears to be illustrating the folly of not listening to one's inner voice, as well as discussing the corruption of power and wealth. He first demonstrates his foolishness by saying to his daughters, "Only we shall retain the name, and all the addition of a king" (I, i, 15). His wish is to maintain the kingdom without all the accompanying responsibility of the crown. However, in a more complicated manner, Lear's foolishness is derived from his inability to see that although he was king, he was a simple man as well. As a king, he wished to have his daughters openly display an undying affection for him. He shows that his practices are derived from that of a king, in that he can only see life through the eyes of a king, not a simple man. Unfortunately for Lear, his reason comes to him in madness. He states "When we are born, we cry that we come to this great stage of fools" (IV.vi.178-179) as if he finally had come to realization that everyone is a human being, be they king or beggar. By far the most influential medium used by

Understanding a Criminal Battery Charge

Understanding a Criminal Battery Charge Battery is any unlawful offensive physical contact with another person, with or without his or her consent. The contact does not have to be violent for the crime of battery to take place, it can be merely any offensive touching. Unlike the crime of assault, battery requires that actual contact is  made, while assault charges can be brought with only the threat of violence. Basic Elements of Battery There are three basic elements of  battery that are generally consistent among most jurisdictions in the U.S.: The defendant had offensive physical contact with the victim.The defendant is aware that their actions will result in offensive touching.There was no consent from the victim. Different Types of Battery The laws regarding battery vary from state to state, but many jurisdictions have different classifications or degrees of the crime of battery.   Simple Battery Simple battery generally includes all forms of contact that are non-consensual, harmful or insulting. This includes any contact that results in injury or non-injury to the victim. The battery is not criminal unless willful intent to inflict an injury or another unlawful act on the victim exists. For example, if a neighbor becomes angry at another neighbor and purposely throws a rock right at the neighbor resulting in injury and pain, then throwing the rock could result in criminal battery charges. However, if a neighbor is cutting their grass and a rock hits the blade and spins out and hits their neighbor causing injury and pain, then there is no willful intent and there would not be grounds for a charge of criminal battery. Sexual Battery   In some states, sexual battery is any non-consensual touching of the intimate parts of another person, but in other  states,  a sexual battery charge requires actual oral, anal, or vaginal penetration. Family-Violence Battery In an effort to cut down on  domestic violence, many states have passed  family-violence  battery laws, which require that cases of family violence be adjudicated whether the victim decides to press charges or not. Aggravated Battery Aggravated battery is when violence against another person results in serious bodily injury or disfigurement. In some states, aggravated battery can be charged only if the intent to do serious bodily harm can be proven. This includes a loss of a limb, burns resulting in permanent disfigurement, and the loss of sensory functions. Common Defense Strategies in Cases of Criminal Battery No Intent: Common strategies used in criminal battery cases include the most defense which is to prove that there was no intent to cause harm on the part of the defendant. For example, if a man rubbed up against a woman on a crowded subway in a way that the woman felt was sexual in nature, the defense could be that the man did not intend to rub up against the woman and only did so because he was pushed by the crowds. Consent: If consent can be proven, sometimes referred to as mutual combat defense, then the victim may be considered as being equally responsible for any injuries that resulted.   For example, if two men get into an argument in a bar and agree to take it outside to fight it out, then neither man can claim that their injuries were a result of criminal battery if they both agreed to participate in what could be viewed as a fair fight. There may be other criminal charges that apply, but probably not criminal battery. Self-Defense: If a defendant can prove that bodily harm inflicted on the victim was a result of the victim attempting to cause bodily harm to the defendant first and the defendant protected themselves  within what would be considered reasonable, but resulted in the victim being physically harmed, then it is likely that the defendant would be innocent of criminal battery. The key to this defense is that the self-defense was reasonable. For example, if two women were riding on a bus and one woman began harassing the other woman and then began hitting the woman in an effort to steal her purse, and the woman reacted by punching the attacking woman in the nose, causing her nose to break, then the woman that was first attacked used reasonable self-defense  measures and would likely not be found guilty of criminal battery.