The author's hypothesis is that, through psychoanalytical investigation, it is possible to find in Shakespeare's King Lear a unifying theme even if no ultimate interpretation is possible. The play is in many respects the tragedy in which Shakespeare unites the many tangled strands of authoritarian pathology, to be considered not so much as regards the repression of drives as an incapacity to work through the depressive position. Lear's narcissistic isolation is furthered by internal attacks that inhibit his awareness that he has a tremendous primitive need for love from his daughters.

The stereotypes which the major dramatic interpretation and traditional criticism give to the play's characters and plot are discussed and analysed. In counterpoint to Bradley's view, quite a different reality is presented: those who catalyse Lear's ruin are Cordelia and Kent, and the character who attacks him the most violently is the Fool, the omnipotent perverse part of the King, his 'sadistic narcissism'.