King Lear Essays (1598 words) - Stock Characters, King Lear, Jester

King Lear In the play King Lear there are many characters and they all have their own roles. Some roles are more obvious than others. The one that catches my attention the most is the role of the Fool. In the dictionary the definition of a fool is someone who lacks sense or judgement. Does the Fool lack sense or judgement? Or is he the opposite and everyone just perceives him as a fool. These questions come down into one ultimate question, was the Fool a madman or a prophet. Personally I think that he was a prophet. The Fool knew every outcome of the King's decisions. Since the Fool was not taken seriously everyone just disregarded him. This leads me to believe that the Fool was not as foolish as people thought. Besides bringing "foolishness" to the play the Fool also brought irony. He was the smartest person in the play but was treated as the stupidest. How ironic is it that by the middle of the play the king was loosing his mind and the Fool was giving him advice. The ironic theme of the play makes the irony of the Fool more prevalent. His irony made the reader more inclined to understand and realize how far from foolish he really was. I think that the Fool also had the role of being the voice of reality in Lear's life. The King let the Fool say whatever he wanted because he was "crazy". This gave the Fool the opportunity to say what he wanted and no matter how crazy it sounded. The King didn't take his advice but he listened. The Fool gave the king what he needed, clarity and reason. He gave the King a new perspective on things, too bad it was a little late because the damage had been done, the King had lost his power. The Fool came into the play after the King divided up his kingdom. The placement of the Fool in the play is important. The Fool comes in after the King's daughters had already thought up their evil plan. Also the Fool leaves the play when the King is safe with Kent and Cordelia. This leads me to believe that the Fool is like a safety blanket for the King. He is there for him in his times of need but when he is not in trouble the Fool is not there. The Fool looks out for the King's best interest. The Fool thinks very highly of himself, even though no one else does. The comments he makes lead the reader to believe that he knows he is right. Even though I know he is right the characters in the play don't and treat him disrespectfully. In the Fool's first speech he says, "Have more than you should, speak less than you know and lend less than you need". This quote can be taken two ways. The Fool can be speaking about the King saying that he should have more because he doesn't have anything including his daughters and his kingdom. The King also should not be so trusting and not be so giving. If he was less trusting and giving then maybe he wouldn't have gotten taken advantage of. These to me are true about the King. This quote can also be directed toward the Fool. He has more than people think he should be, to them he speaks less than they know and he only gives a little. This is also true about the fool. Although the Fool is probably talking about the King and the mess that he made but he could also be directing the statement toward himself. The Fool has an insight that others don't see. One example of this is he knows that Goneril and Reagan are really evil people. He knows they lie and do not like them because of that. He says, "they'll have me whipped for speaking true". The Fool knows the extent of their meanness and also knows that the King does not see it. The Fool realizes that Goneril and Reagan will take over the whole kingdom and leave nothing left for the King. This makes them corrupt and the Fool lets them know that he does not like them. He tells Goneril to her face that he is better than she is for what she had planned. Of course him telling Goneril this means nothing because he is "Just the Fool." The Fool has many roles in this play. I

Drood Analysis essays

Drood Analysis essays While watching a performance of *BANG* The Mystery *BANG**BANG* of Edwin Drood *BANG* the work of the director was quite clear. I often have trouble trying to determine how much of an influence the director actually has on a production by observing acting choices and design choices. What made the directorial choices so clear was the unison of the production. All of the choices fit so well together that a well-informed audience member easily saw the directors work. One of the more interesting design choices that I noticed early on was the lack of sufficient masking. The black curtains hanging on each end of the stage barely hid the double doors to the well-lit stairwell from the audiences vision. Whenever any actor walked through the double doors, the audience was distracted for an instant and reminded that they were attending a show; a performance. This seemed to be a recurring theme throughout the night and seemed to be large part of the directors concept. The next scenic design choice that tied in well was the fact that the flats were all just a little to small in width. As an audience member, I was allowed to see the edges of scenery and into areas that should have been forbidden. Set pieces that werent in use were sometimes visible through the cracks as well as stagehands, and fire extinguishers; actors getting into place and waiting for their cues were often seen in the wings. These specifics also tied in well with the directors concept and interpretation. They really werent all that distracting and only reinforced the feeling of a live performance at a music hall. Along the same lines was the use of footlights. Of course, the script makes a direct reference to an actor not appearing up here under the footlights but such a line could be considered an expression like in the lime light. The poorly covered footlights often shined in the eyes...

Cancellation of U.S. Air Force Tanker Program Essay

Cancellation of U.S. Air Force Tanker Program - Essay Example The program however has difficulty getting off the ground and had undergone several calls for Requests for Proposals (RFPs) as controversies and contentious issues regarding contracts and acquisitions had long riddled. In 2004, the program was compelled to shut down when the main players in the negotiation were revealed to be involved in highly unethical issues and in 2008, the program was re-shelved one more time as one of the parties in the negotiations filed a bidding protest with GAO. At present, the AF prepares for its third attempt to hold a bidding of the project. The US Air Force tankers are aircrafts whose primary function is to refuel other aircrafts like fighters, bombers, surveillance aircrafts and other planes used by the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps while those aircrafts are airborne. The importance of the tankers is that they obviously give US aircrafts power even beyond US borders because they allow these aircrafts to go longer distances and prolong their airborne time. Aerial fueling capability therefore is of critical importance to the country to sustain its superior aerial firefighting and firepower capability in the world (O’Rourke 2009 1). The present tanker fleet of the US Air Force consists of 453 KC-135 Stratotankers (see Fig. 1) built by Boeing, many of which were acquired by the Air Force (AF hereafter) as early as 1957 with the latest batch acquired in 1967. The average age of the Stratotankers is 47 years old. A much younger model, the KC-10 was also acquired by the AF in 1981 but there are only 59 of them (O’Rourke 2009 2-3). US policymakers had been concerned with the ageing state of the Stratotankers since the 1990s but it wan in 2002 that concrete steps were taken to remedy the situation. US Congress passed the Leasing Authority Act 2002 which authorized the AF to lease 100 Boeing 767s for a period not more than ten years and modify them into aerial fuel tankers. The