More Past, Less Tragedy

Tragedy is the core of this class, quite obviously because we are studying Shakespeare’s tragic plays.  But for the first time in class we actually sat down and tried to sort out the true tragedy in the play we were reading, and the causes and moral implications that could be determined from it. 

What I found interesting was that King Lear was a much more tragic work than Ran, at least in my opinion.  One of the influencing factors was that we got insight into Hidetora’s past, while Lear’s was left up to speculation.  Truly, in my mind, it’s Hidetora’s past that makes him less worthy of my pity.  Let’s break it down: he’s a crazy monarch who mutilated and murdered the families of two different young women, then proceeded to make those two women brides for his sons.  And that’s only the stuff we know about; the audience is perfectly capable of making assumptions about what the rest of his reign was like.  So what do we know about Lear?  He’s an old guy, possibly getting a little loopy in his old age.  He’s prideful, yes, and a little naïve among other things.  But is he a ruthless murdering warlord?  So really, I find it much easier to pity Lear.  His story is more tragic because of this, while on other hand I feel Hidetora got what he deserved.

So Hidetora’s past didn’t really define the tragedy of the movie, or even give a cause for it, but it certainly had an effect on how tragic his story was.  Was that what Kurosawa was after?  If Hidetora had a different history, the story certainly would have been perceived differently.  Perhaps that was Shakespeare’s idea all along.  Maybe he wanted people to question whether Lear was tragic or not.  Or maybe he wanted the opposite effect.  With no positive or negative past to give shape to Lear’s character, the audience is forced to make assumptions about him based solely on what little insight we get.