The relation between shadow and substance, the double motif and the questioning of identity are among the major and most recurring themes in Shakespeare’s works. Such themes feature prominently in King Lear, where they take on a particular significance from a political point of view, as they are inextricably connected with the legal fiction of the King’s Two Bodies. Drawing on Ernst Kantorowicz’s essential study on the subject, the essay offers, in the first place, a comparative analysis of King Lear and Richard II, particularly focusing on what Tudor jurists termed “demise”, i.e. the migration of the immortal part of kingship from a king’s “body natural” to the “body natural” of his successor. The principal aim of the comparison is to demonstrate the anomalous and imperfect character of the “demise” which takes place in King Lear, as opposed to the one depicted in Richard II. The essay then goes on to show the relevance of this point in order to understand Lear’s definition as a “shadow” after the division of the kingdom, as well as the widespread disruption of identity and the exceptional proliferation of doubles that can be found in the play.
Il rapporto tra ombra e sostanza, il motivo del doppio e l’interrogazione dell’identità sono temi centrali e ricorrenti in tutta l’opera shakespeariana. Essi si ritrovano, in modo evidente, nel King Lear, dove assumo speciale significato dal punto di vista politico in quanto inscindibilmente connessi con la finzione legale dei “due corpi del re”. A partire dal fondamentale studio di Ernst Kantorowicz su tale argomento, il saggio propone, innanzitutto, un’analisi comparativa del King Lear e del Richard II, concentrandosi in particolare su quella che i giuristi Tudor definivano “demise”, ossia la migrazione della parte immortale della regalità dal “body natural” di un sovrano al “body natural” del suo successore. Lo scopo principale del confronto è di dimostrare il carattere anomalo e imperfetto della “demise” che si realizza nel King Lear rispetto a quella rappresentata nel Richard II. Il saggio esplora poi la rilevanza di questo aspetto per comprendere la definizione di Lear come “ombra” dopo la divisione del regno, così come la pervasiva alterazione delle identità e l’eccezionale proliferazione di doppi che caratterizzano il dramma.
"Lear's shadow": l'ombra della regalità e il doppio nel King Lear / Talarico, Laura. - STAMPA. - (2013), pp. 309-332. [10.4458/2287-12].
"Lear's shadow": l'ombra della regalità e il doppio nel King Lear
TALARICO, Laura
2013
Abstract
The relation between shadow and substance, the double motif and the questioning of identity are among the major and most recurring themes in Shakespeare’s works. Such themes feature prominently in King Lear, where they take on a particular significance from a political point of view, as they are inextricably connected with the legal fiction of the King’s Two Bodies. Drawing on Ernst Kantorowicz’s essential study on the subject, the essay offers, in the first place, a comparative analysis of King Lear and Richard II, particularly focusing on what Tudor jurists termed “demise”, i.e. the migration of the immortal part of kingship from a king’s “body natural” to the “body natural” of his successor. The principal aim of the comparison is to demonstrate the anomalous and imperfect character of the “demise” which takes place in King Lear, as opposed to the one depicted in Richard II. The essay then goes on to show the relevance of this point in order to understand Lear’s definition as a “shadow” after the division of the kingdom, as well as the widespread disruption of identity and the exceptional proliferation of doubles that can be found in the play.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.