You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Apart from Mark Kanzer, critics have failed to recognize the structural importance of splitting in King Lear1. I maintain that, in conjunction with the reflective development within the narrative progression, splitting defines a startling cohesion within the tragedy.
Lear's three daughters represent split ambivalence: Cordelia is the benevolent mother; Regan is the withdrawing, and Goneril the devouring, thanatic mother2. The less important father figure is split, again through inversion (son as father, father as son). Edgar functions in a dual role—not only may one role be split; two roles may be condensed, and it is always the province of the benevolent father, as well as that of the guiltless son, to suffer at the hands of the thanatic father. Edgar is the benevolent father as well as the guiltless I (Edgar is not only punished by his father, he also cares for him, leads him, etc.); Edmund is the phallic, and the Duke of Cornwall is the castrating, thanatic father. (Cf. Kanzer, King Lear).
For each of these two yous we get a doubled I. Lear is, of course, the I for the you (mother), just as the Earl of Gloucester is the I for the you (father)3. Edgar is a double