Connection: King Lear and Richard III

Here's a connection...they were both written by Shakespeare.

Only kidding!

But really, the thing that struck me most about both plays is the ambiguity about the "good guys" and the "bad guys." During Richard III as he's basically making a staircase out of the carcasses of his family and friends, Shakespeare intends for the audience member to have a little queasy part of their stomach sympathizing with him. When you watch all he worked and killed for come crumbling down around him, some of the audience is enjoying the karmic retribution, while others are feeling kind of bad for the guy. I mean, he's born a hunchback and nobody likes him, then finally once he gets some power for himself it all gets yanked out from under him.

It's similar in King Lear. I don't know who to feel bad for, who to hate, and who to sympathize with. I'm pretty sure the only person I can 100% qualify as good is Cordelia, and who knows, in an act and a half she can turn out to be a massive jerk. Even though Cornwall gouged Gloucester's eyes out, he was an enemy of Regan, who is turning out to be bad and an enemy of an enemy is a friend, right?

Now do you see where I get confused? There's such a thin line between good and evil and most of the characters are perched precariously on that line.

Thanks, Shakespeare. Now my brain hurts.