A.L. Kennedy and Hazlitt on King Lear: Life, Loss, and Madness
This paper examines two critical perspectives on Shakespeare's King Lear: A.L. Kennedy's essay "King Lear: Very Much Like Life" and William Hazlitt's analysis of the play. Kennedy argues that Lear mirrors humanity's deepest fears—loss of family, betrayal, and madness—drawing on key passages to support that claim. Hazlitt, in turn, contends that King Lear is Shakespeare's greatest and most earnest work, praising its portrayal of passion, lucidity, and human emotion. Together, these two critics illuminate the enduring power of the play as both a theatrical achievement and a mirror of lived human experience.
- Kennedy's Argument: Lear as a Mirror of Life's Darkest Fears: Kennedy's thesis that Lear reflects primal human fears
- Textual Evidence for Human Fear and Loss in King Lear: Play quotations supporting fear, betrayal, and madness themes
- Hazlitt's View: King Lear as Shakespeare's Greatest Work: Hazlitt argues Lear is Shakespeare's most earnest drama
- Conclusion: Kennedy and Hazlitt offer complementary critical perspectives
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper integrates direct textual quotations from King Lear with critical commentary, grounding its claims in specific dramatic moments rather than vague generalizations.
- It moves logically from one critical source to another, treating each essay on its own terms before drawing comparative insight.
- The use of act and scene citations (e.g., Lear II.iv, IV.i) demonstrates engagement with the primary text alongside secondary criticism.
Key academic technique demonstrated
This paper demonstrates source-driven literary analysis: the student uses two secondary critical sources to frame and organize an argument about a primary text. Rather than simply summarizing what critics say, the paper tests each critic's claim against quoted passages from the play, showing how evidence supports or complicates the interpretive position.
Structure breakdown
The paper is divided into two main analytical sections, each devoted to a single critic. The first section covers A.L. Kennedy's thesis about Lear reflecting primal human fears, supported by three direct quotations from the play. The second section turns to Hazlitt's argument that Lear is Shakespeare's most earnest and powerful work. A brief conclusion ties the two perspectives together. This source-by-source structure is well suited to a comparative critical reading assignment at the undergraduate level.
Kennedy's Argument: Lear as a Mirror of Life's Darkest Fears
In his article "King Lear: Very Much Like Life," A.L. Kennedy discusses how the play King Lear mirrors life — or, more precisely, the darkest sides of life. Furthermore, because it is such a complex play, not all productions of it are successful. Kennedy acknowledges these difficulties, but maintains that "Lear's beauty remains — unforgettable, terrible, heart-shocking. Think of everything you're most deeply afraid of; it's here in Lear. Think of everything you couldn't stand to lose; you'll see it lost in Lear. And you'll see humanity survive, nonetheless, the play rising above life's most devastating certainties to sing and burn" (Kennedy).
Kennedy supports his thesis by demonstrating some of the horrors that exist in the play. He mentions primal fears and discusses how Lear addresses each of them. The first of those fears may be the loss of a child or the loss of a parent — both of which Lear and Cordelia experience at the play's opening: Lear suffers when Cordelia refuses to publicly declare her love for him, and Cordelia suffers when she is banished. The next fear is betrayal, which Lear experiences when Goneril and Regan turn against him, and which reaches its apex when Goneril poisons Regan. The most potent fear of all, however, may be the fear that one will lose one's mind, and Lear is, at its heart, the tale of a man gone mad.
Textual Evidence for Human Fear and Loss in King Lear
Kennedy's article accurately reflects how King Lear speaks to basic human fears. As a landmark of Western dramatic literature, the play confronts its audience with loss, injustice, and the fragility of the mind. Before Lear ever descends into madness, he voices his fear that he might do so. Faced with betrayal by Goneril and Regan, he cries:
"No, I'll not weep. / I have full cause of weeping, but this heart / Shall break into a hundred thousand flaws, / Or ere I'll weep. O fool, I shall go mad!" (Lear, II.iv, 283–286).
Gloucester, speaking of the injustice of the world after he has been betrayed and blinded by Regan and Cornwall, remarks: "As flies to wanton boys are we to th' gods, / They kill us for their sport" (Lear, IV.i, 36–37). This observation makes the audience aware that the characters themselves recognize the events of the play as both capricious and unjust.
Finally, Lear addresses the injustice of the world, and the specific injustice done to Gloucester, by asking: "What, art mad? / A man may see how this world goes with no eyes" (Lear, IV.vi, 150–151). Taken together, these three passages demonstrate that the play depicts tremendous loss while also showing that humanity can endure and even triumph over that loss. King Lear remains one of Shakespeare's most searching explorations of suffering and resilience.
Conclusion
Both Kennedy and Hazlitt illuminate the enduring power of King Lear by approaching it from different but complementary critical angles. Kennedy focuses on the play's reflection of universal human fears — loss, betrayal, and madness — while Hazlitt prizes its intellectual and emotional earnestness. Together, their analyses confirm that King Lear speaks to something fundamental in human experience, and that this is precisely what makes it, as Shakespeare's text itself demonstrates, so enduringly powerful.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.