Comparing The Boundary Between Good And Evil In Shakespeare's King Lear

The boundary between good and bad cannot be defined easily -- too many aspects are involved in deciding what is considered to be correct and what is considered wrong. To different individuals, their definition of what is good could differ based on the education they received and their personal beliefs, leading to conflicts and debates that continue to this day. Laws are passed and rules are enforced in an attempt to consensually define what is good or bad; however, the boundary still remains unclear. Individuals will motivate their actions, in an attempt to provide a reasonable explanation -- if found guilty by the law, they blame irrelevant external influences. In a time where the majority of people believed in the cosmological implications in the world, William Shakespeare challenged this idea of celestial influence upon human behavior in his play, King Lear. Shakespeare uses the antagonists of the play to prove that evil is really the result of choice and not a coincidental lining of the stars. Their willingness to go too far is what makes them evil -- they don’t respect the boundary between good and bad. Like it was mentioned previously, completely defining the boundary between good and bad is pretty much impossible; however, Shakespeare’s characters in the play possess a sense of …show more content…
Kent is compelled to tell Lear -- during Lear’s madness -- that he is not afraid, to tell the truth by stating, “Thinkest thou that duty shall have dread to speak / When power to flattery bows? To plainness honor’s bound / When majesty falls to folly” (1.1.156-158). Kent doesn’t hide his true opinion about the king’s rashness in those moments. He knows the truth hurts sometimes, but his honour -- his loyalty to the king -- doesn’t waver even in these moments. Kent’s goodness is evident by his honesty and unchanging values even in a risky