Enter Goneril and her steward Oswald
GONERIL
Did my father strike my gentleman for chiding of his fool?
OSWALD
Ay, madam.
"Ay" is the hinge or pivot point of the play. In most plays there is a major point where the action turns direction and one might assume that King Lear also hinges on a major point. But that is not so. It hinges on a triviality completely unrelated to the big issues."Ay" is the first word Oswald utters in the play. Is it the truth or is it a lie? At this stage, we know nothing about Oswald. He might be the most honest person you could ever wish to meet, or he might be an out an out liar. We ought not assume either way but let future events and an analysis of past events guide us in judging his veracity. Goneril doesn't bother with this approach but automatically assumes Oswald is telling the truth. Sad to say, some of the world's greatest authors, academics and scholars who have written articles, study notes and in-depth analyses have, without exception and with no jutification, whatsoever, assumed Oswald spoke the truth. No surprise, then, that they agree with Goneril's negative comments about Lear and his knights and, by and large, justify her actions.
Prior to Oswald saying "Ay", Goneril had done nothing more than look after Lear in accordance with what he had required of her when he gave her her realm. In other words, she had been passive and unconcerned about Lear. Indeed, so unconcerned that when told Lear had struck her gentleman she had doubts and sort Oswald to confirm or deny. Only after Oswald's "Ay" does she becomes active.
GONERIL
Did my father strike my gentleman for chiding of his fool?
OSWALD
Ay, madam.
GONERIL
By day and night he wrongs me; every hour
He flashes into one gross crime or other,
That sets us all at odds: I'll not endure it:
If you come slack of former services,
You shall do well; the fault of it I'll answer.
OSWALD
He's coming, madam; I hear him.
Horns within
Almost simultaneously, this conversation takes place.
KnightTo focus on the salient points here are very abbreviated versions of the previous two conversations:
My lord, I know not what the matter is; but, to my judgment,
your highness is not entertained with that ceremonious
affection as you were wont; there's a great abatement of
kindness appears as well in the general dependants as in
the duke himself also and your daughter.
KING LEAR
Ha! sayest thou so?
Knight
I beseech you, pardon me, my lord, if I be mistaken for my
duty cannot be silent when I think your highness wronged.
KING LEAR
Thou but rememberest me of mine own conception: I have
perceived a most faint neglect of late; which I have rather
blamed as mine own jealous curiosity than as a very pretence
and purpose of unkindness: I will look further into 't.
But where's my fool? I have not seen him this two days.
Knight
Since my young lady's going into France, sir, the fool hath
much pined away.
KING LEAR
No more of that; I have noted it well.
GONERIL
Did my father strike my gentleman for chiding of his fool?
OSWALD
Ay, madam.
KING LEAR
But where's my fool? I have not seen him this two days.
Firstly Goneril's side:
Goneril did not see the alleged striking but has heard about it days later. But why didn't she
hear about it from Oswald at the time? He is supposed to know her mind, so why didn't he tell
her about it when it happened? It is beyond belief that he would think it of no consequence
considering the importance that she places on it. Why doesn't Goneril ask Oswald to explain
why he failed to tell her of this extremely important event that she finds so damning of Lear?
And when did the alleged striking take place? We will see shortly that it would have had to occur at least two days ago, that is, assuming it actually happened! Oswald and Goneril would have talked together on several occasions over the last few days, so why didn't he tell her about it two days ago, or yesterday, or earlier today? Yet she has to come to him about it. Was he ever going to tell her? It seems that Oswald has found no recent complaints against Lear or his knights or he would surely have told her of the striking at the same time, it being by far the most important black mark to bring against Lear. It seems that nothing has actually happened. Goneril's 'By day and night he wrongs me' appears to be groundless and her 'every hour he flashes into one gross crime or other' seems ridiculous but shows her irrational train of thought and her determination to degrade her father.
Note that it is while Goneril and Oswald are talking together that Lear returns from a day's hunting. One of the first things Lear says is that he has not seen his Fool for two days which places the alleged striking at least two days back from the present. Note also that this is said within moments of Oswald telling Goneril that the striking event did occur, or rather, confirming what someone else has told her. The striking episode smacks of fabrication aimed at putting Lear and his knights in a bad light.
Now Lear's side:
When we examine Lear's side of the story, we find that he has not seem his Fool for two days.
The alleged striking, therefore, would have had to occur at least two days back. Now consider
the Knight's words about 'a great abatement of kindness' and Lear's response. Both
express sensitivity to a changed attitude toward them by Goneril's household. If Lear had
really struck Goneril's gentleman and if his knights had really been riotous consider what
Lear might have said in response to his Knight's remark. Surely it would have gone something
like this: "I am amazed that you draw my attention to a great abatement of kindness. Isn't
it to be expected? What, with you fellows kicking up a shindig day and night, and not
forgetting that a few days ago I struck Goneril's clotpoll and nearly kicked him to death."
In fact, Lear says nothing like this, but only says that he will make inquiries into the
cause of neglect is proof enough that Lear did not strike Goneril's servant, nor that his
knights are riotous.
Now consider how the 'great abatement of kindness in the general dependents' may have come about. From the Knight's and Lear's remarks, it would seem to have started a few days ago. But who gave the orders a few days ago for this change in attitude? The orders did not come from Goneril! It is only just NOW that she orders Oswald to neglect Lear by not providing 'former services.'
GONERIL
If you come slack of former services,
You shall do well; the fault of it I'll answer.
Put on what weary negligence you please,
You and your fellows; I'll have it come to question:
If he dislike it, let him to our sister,
....... Remember what I tell you.
OSWALD
Well, madam.
GONERIL
And let his knights have colder looks among you;
What grows of it, no matter; advise your fellows so:
I would breed from hence occasions, and I shall,
That I may speak: I'll write straight to my sister,
To hold my very course.
There seems little doubt that Oswald has been running his own anti-Lear campaign, without any instruction from Goneril. Such a campaign would not be as overtly hostile as that now ordered by Goneril. Oswald, with his lackeys as accomplices, may have invented the 'striking' story to get Goneril's reaction. Goneril is so obsessed with degrading Lear that she does not think rationally. Goneril's 'By day and night he wrongs me', therefore, is not only groundless, but utterly ridiculous. Oswald is lying, plain and simple, but in doing so is able to influence Goneril by telling her what he knows she wants to hear. It has the desired effect because only a little later she makes these outbursts.
GONERIL [to Lear]
You strike my people;
GONERIL
other of your insolent retinue
. . . . . Here do you keep a hundred knights and squires;
Men so disorder'd, so debosh'd and bold,
. . . . . your disorder'd rabble
LEAR
My train are men of choice and rarest parts,
That all particulars of duty know,
We come to the issue of the riotous knights. But are they riotous? Where is the least evidence of riotous or insolent behaviour? There is none! We can only take note of what people say, and by comparing pro and con, form a reasoned opinion. According to Goneril they are riotous but Lear says they are not. Why is Goneril to be believed in preference to Lear, when we know how she reacts to hearsay and in this case has, more than likely, been lied to by Oswald and his underlings? Goneril responds with precipitate action.
Even when no danger exists, she fears what she imagines. She even admits that she does! Lear's followers are men of choice and rarest parts, only a few are soldiers, the rest being gentlemen and squires. Goneril refuses to listen to Albany who, though a soldier himself, has noticed nothing untoward.
GONERIL
a hundred knights!
'Tis politic and safe to let him keep
At point a hundred knights
ALBANY
Well, you may fear too far.
GONERIL
Safer than trust too far:
Let me still take away the harms I fear,
Not fear still to be taken:
Oswald serves Goneril with utter loyalty through thick and thin, and becomes her right-hand man. By doing her every bidding, she trusts him without question. Why does Oswald serve Goneril with such devotion? But whose interest does he really serve? Goneril's or Oswald's?
REGAN++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
..... I know you are of her bosom.
OSWALD
I, madam?
REGAN
I speak in understanding; you are; I know't:
CORNWALLUnfortunately, Oswald's lies are believed by Cornwall and Regan, particularly when they note what he has just said is supported by what they have read in Goneril's letter. This is hardly surprising given that Goneril's letter was written by Oswald. Hardly would his verbal story conflict with what he had written , therefore, the letter also contains lies. The effect of Oswald's lies result in Regan and Cornwall acquiring a negative opinion of Lear and his knights.
What was the offence you gave him?
OSWALD
I never gave him any:
It pleased the king his master very late
To strike at me, upon his misconstruction;
When he, conjunct and flattering his displeasure,
Tripp'd me behind; being down, insulted, rail'd,
And put upon him such a deal of man,
That worthied him, got praises of the king
For him attempting who was self-subdued;
Coleridge's opinion of Oswald: The steward should be placed in exact antithesis to Kent, as the only character of utter irredeemable baseness in Shakespeare. Even in this, the judgement and invention of the poet are very observable; - for what else could the willing tool of Goneril be? Not a vice but this of baseness was left open to him.Coleridge got it wrong. Oswald was not the willing tool of Goneril. In reality, Goneril was the unsuspecting tool of Oswald! ©