Paper 2, Lithum
Paper 2, Lithum
Paper 2, Lithum
Konstantina Zanou
Literature Humanities
28 April 2017
King Lear by William Shakespeare, and Don Quixote by Miguel De Cervantes, at least in some
respect, tell a tale of madness. Madness is told to us through the perspective of the protagonists:
King Lear and Don Quixote. For King Lear, madness manifests shortly after the play starts. His
mental state deteriorates as his familial bonds begin to break down, and the breaking apart of his
family sends him down a spiraling path of deliriousness. For Don Quixote, madness manifests
into him through reading fiction on chivalry. However, the discussion of madness inherently
forces us into defining reason, as madness and reason are both relative. Within both texts, the
juxtaposition of the protagonists with their respective counterparts gives rise to the definition of
madness and reason. The interaction of The Fool with King Lear, and of Sancho Panza with Don
Quixote gives the reader an objective sense of the narrative. To effectively lay down the
foundation for the argument to follow on these key themes, I propose that the mad within King
Lear are identifiable and unique, and madness comes into fruition with conflicts/losses in
identity. Whereas in Don Quixote identifying the mad is not as easy; madness has more to do
with delusions and alternative versions of reality rather than with the loss of self. In the defined
framework and respective form of madness within each work, we can also propose that reason
and madness are often hard to differentiate. The mad in King Lear are often the wiser, whereas in
William Shakespeares King Lear shows the downfall of a King, from a position of power to a
state of madness trigged by the rising disruptions within his Oikos. The play starts with a
meeting held by King Lear to split the kingdoms land between his daughters. But prior to doing
so, he demands words of praise and admiration from each of his daughters, expressing their deep
and sincere love for him. Goneril, being the eldest, is the first one to start, followed by Regan.
Both of them do their duties justice by putting on a faade depicting false love, and gaining their
share of inheritance. However, upon Cordelias turn, things go awry. Her inability to falsify and
exaggerate her real, genuine love for her father leads to a conflict with the King. A conflict that
sees Cordelia leave the Kingdom with the Lord of France, and the triggering of a butterfly effect.
King Lear ends up losing all his dearest familial bonds starting from Cordelia, followed by
Goneril, and eventually ending with Regan. Each broken bond leads to a slight deterioration of
Lears mental health, as he begins to feel hopeless and frustrated. Lear foreshadows his later loss
of identity in the lines: Does any here know me? This is not Lear while sarcastically arguing
with Goneril. What adds more meaning to these lines is the Fools reply- Lears shadow.;
implying something about what Lear was like, and the Lear we see (Act I. Scene IV. 220-225).
The rational Lear who ruled as King is no longer present. The Fool brings about objective
commentary on the novel and its characters as he seems to be unique in his arguments, and his
thoughts.
The Fool is ironically the most reasonable character within King Lear to observe rationality, and
to assess the mental state of Lear. The relationship between the Fool and King Lear is
fascinating; the Fool compliments Lears personality. He acts as his pillar of support, while also
serving as his advisor. Hence, the Fool is the voice of reason to Lears inarguable madness. The
Fool is what keeps Lear from passing the threshold to a complete loss of identity and
Mann 3
deliriousness; he is the only aspect of Lears life that remains constant and unchanged during this
heavily volatile period. This is why its obvious we witness the drastic impact of the Fools
departure from the play on King Lear. After saying that he will go to bed at noon, the Fool
takes his leave from the play, and this marks the point where Lear delves entirely into madness
and loss of his identity (Act III. Scene VI. 84). This is proven by the fact that the next time Lear
enters the play, he is introduced to us explicitly as mad, bedecked with weeds (Act IV. Scene
VI. 80). Clearly, Lear has lost his identity, and his sense of reason.
The appearance of the storm and tempest is highly symbolic of conflicts within the play for King
Lear, both internally and externally. The internal conflict comes as a showdown between his
rationale and his building madness, which unfortunately ends with his loss of reason. The
external conflict is the breaking of his Oikos, as he is forced to leave his household during the
storm. However, Lear is not the only one experiencing this loss of identity. The appearance of
the storm also serves as a plot device for the convergence of the two characters that venture into
the concept of madness. Edgar, the real son of Gloucester, later disguises himself as Tom o
Bedlam and pretends to be mad. The two characters Lear and Edgar, explore the depths of
madness first hand, doing so in a similar manner. They both showcase a dual or confused sense
of identity. Hence, with Edgars introduction as Tom, the argument for madness manifesting as a
conflict in identity becomes more plausible. As Lear and Edgar (Tom o Bedlam) are the
characters who experience madness and a loss of identity, we can conclude what madness is in
King Lear having identified the mad. And having laid out the character of the Fool, we can
conclude what reason is, having identified the reasonable. Although one might consider the other
characters within the play reasonable, they fail to meet the mark as they all share a sense of
Moving on the question to Don Quixote by Miguel de Cervantes, reason and madness are not so
clearly defined. Madness is better defined as a misconception of reality, rather than a sense of
confusion or restriction in thoughts and identity. Don Quixote is introduced to the reader as a
gentleman from La Mancha, someone who is greatly influenced by his readings of chivalrous
novels. He fantasizes about being a knight, slaying a great many enemies, winning battles with
other knights, and saving damsels in distress; Don Quixote creates a mini world for himself in
which he defines reality as he pleases. To accompany him on his quest to achieve fame, he
saddles up his shriveled old horse and names him Rocinante, and appoints Sancho Panza, a local
farmer as his designated squire. Together, they both embark on adventures; one with the hope of
eternal glory, the other with false promises of fortune. To give meaning to his quests, Don
Quixote brings up his past infatuation with a woman called Aldonza Lorenzo, whom he decided
to name Dulcinea of Toboso as she was from Toboso, a name, to his mind, that was musical
and beautiful and filled with significance (p.24). Already, we have been introduced to two
versions of reality- one that is told by the narrator, and the other fantastical one created by
Quixote. Does it matter whether Dulcinea of Toboso exists, and is in love with him? Or is the
fact that he believes so enough? These are some of the questions that lead to the debate of
madness within Don Quixote. Its clear that Don Quixote is mad, but his intellect is not in
The reason why we can only comment and analyze madness within Don Quixote, and not reason,
is due to the fact that there is no sense of reason through the novel. Characters that could be
considered reasonable fall into the same traps of madness by indulging in it through their
fascination with Don Quixotes delusions. Sancho Panza, a simple man and inarguably most
loyal to Don Quixote, primarily serves as the voice of reason early on in the book. However, he
Mann 5
too begins to blur the lines within his reality and Quixotes fantasies. Sancho Panza gives the
reader an objective sense of the narrator as he continually differentiates the reality for the reader
from the delusions of Quixote; whether it be to tell giants from windmills, or to deceive Don
Quixote into believing a false Dulcinea of Toboso. But at the same time, he also takes active part
All characters alike, whether it be the priest, or the barber, take part in madness and false
realities. Several characters that make up the world Don Quixote lives in tend to venture into
madness as well. A prime example of it arises from the encounter between Don Quixote and
Vivaldo. As the goatherds were about to leave for the funeral with Don Quixote, they come
across six shepherds, including Vivaldo on horseback. As we are told by the narrator that
Vivaldo along with his companions considered [Don Quixote] mad, we get to see the apparent
madness of Quixote. But the reason this debate gets nuanced is because, to learn more and see
what sort of madness this was, Vivaldo asks him further about the meaning of Knight errantry
(p.87). Clearly, although people can identify his madness they cant resist it either; they are all
equally fascinated by it and dont give up the opportunity to experience it for themselves. This
Don Quixotes encounter with the Duchess and the Duke in the second part of the book, who
have apparently read the first part, add further advancements to the discussion of madness and
reason. It is important to note how characters that are within the book, are aware of the books
existence. This is very relevant because our framework for the definition of madness within Don
Quixote relies on versions of reality. Since, we now have characters that are aware of the reality
portrayed in the first part to us, it makes it very hard to be able to tell the where the world
Mann 6
Cervantes has created exists, and whether anyone is really mad or sane at all. The Duke and
Duchess, again, extremely fascinated by Don Quixotes madness due to the monotony of their
own life, indulge him further by funding his crazy fantasies. They play on his madness by
constructing elaborate plots for their amusement. Again, the reason why the mad and the
reasonable are not all that different here is because, in indulging Quixote and Sancho Panza to
that extent, they end up spending enormous resources as well as efforts just to watch delusional
characters live their fantasies. Hence, the reality that could only existed in Quixotes mind was
The relationship between the protagonists and their respective counterparts, with Sancho Panza
for Don Quixote, and the Fool for King Lear, gives the reader an ability to form opinions on
these themes within the works. Without the interaction of these contrasting characters, it would
be hard to form an actual narrative in Don Quixote, and it would be hard to determine the
reasonable from the irrational in King Lear. Both the works tell the concept of madness very
differently. In one, we witness the characters (Edgar and Lear) turn towards deliriousness hence
allowing us to identify them. However, in Don Quixote, madness flows within everyone;
although Quixote is the only one who acts upon his fantasies, all characters are guilty of dipping
The character arcs of the protagonists, King Lear and Don Quixote, are also indicative of the
kind of madness they lived; both of their stories end with their deaths. However, they do not die
the same way. Lear for once feels compassion and care for someone other than himself. Since he
lost his identity and sense of self, we are shown how he was able to reconstruct his being adding
personality traits that were previously not possible for him to display. Don Quixote, for all his
Mann 7
talk of chivalry and glory, dies from a fever. He dies having acquired his grip on reality back and
having been able to realize his former madness, I was mad, and now I am sane; I was Don
Quixote of La Mancha, and now I am, as I have said, Alonso Quixano the Good (p.937). Hence,
both these form of madness complete their arcs and cycles. These forms of madness were
developed by our protagonists, they were not inherently present in them. Hence, with much time
and effort, they were able to get past their developed manias.
Both these texts are fiction, but the reason their stories resonate within us is due to the presence
of these phenomenon within our lives too. Our sense of identity gets easily muddled as we start
to distance ourselves from long-held bonds and relationships. We lose our former selves, and in
the process discover aspects of our being we couldnt before. Just as King Lear delved into the
depths of madness only to recover himself back through the same bonds he broke off, we too go
through these differences and phases within our lives in our homes. The disconnection Don
Quixote experiences in his life, from what is true and what he wants to be true, is also a path
everyone alike walks down upon. We have no real objective sense of what is true, what we call
green could easily be an entirely different color for someone else. Our sense of reality is what we
can experience, and we can never really step into anothers body, and see what they see through