Talk:King Lear
|
|
| Contents |
Film adaptations
This section seems hard to read. I think the names of the films should be in the front, allowing for quick referencing. Another alternative could be to make a table with year, name, publisher, main actor, etc. Any opinions? DavidMendoza 16:34, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Alas, there is no general template for movie adaptations created yet. In my opinion, "Movie adaptations" section in Othello article looks better, than here. Cmapm 15:02, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Neutral?
"Regan and Goneril have never looked more evil and Holm’s performance is chilling." - This isn't exactly neutral, and is based on opinion. Does it have any place in Wikipedia? - User:Chewyman
- No, it doesn't. I removed it --Tothebarricades.tk 02:40, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Cordelia etymology
Sorry, me again - Is Cordelia really from "ideal heart"? Cor is a romantic rooted word, and the real version of Lear took place centuries before Jesus Christ was born. Also, previous versions (i.e. predating Shakespeare) have given Cordellia as the correct spelling, thus rendering the anagram incorrect. Or am I nitpicking? User:Chewyman
- The anagram seems pretty ludicrous to me. I've edited the Characters list and the appended footnote to reflect the etymology my sources generally agree upon. Asimov's Guide to Shakespeare, where would I be without you?
- Anville 16:43, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
US/British English
Having read the policy of which version of English to use, it seems that this article, being about a British play, should be written in Birtish English. Any objections? Chewyman 13:43, 2 Oct 2004 (NZT)
- Yes. I object to the article being changed into British spelling if it's predominantly in American spelling to begin with. "Articles which focus on a topic specific to a particular English-speaking country should generally aim to conform to the spelling of that country (for instance the British "Labour Party")" is Manual of style policy, but so is this: "If an article is predominantly written in one type of English, aim to conform to that type rather than provoking conflict by changing to another." Moreover, Shakespeare isn't a topic specific to Britain in the way the Labour Paarty is; he's as much part of the heritage of the rest of the English-speaking world.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen (talk)]] 15:03, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Tragic ending
I've described what Nahum Tate's happy-ending version was and how long it ruled the stage (1681—1838), rather than just have Dr. Johnson refer to it in a mystifying way. Also I have removed this sentence: Later yet, Charles Lamb wrote, "To see Lear acted, to see an old man tottering about the stage with a walking stick, turned out of doors by his daughters in a rainy night, has nothing in it but what is painful and disgusting." Perhaps somebody can find another place for it? It's misplaced under this heading. Lamb is talking about the storm scene being painful and disgusting, which doesn't have anything to do with the tragic ending (only Tate's version was staged in Lamb's lifetime).--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen (talk)]] 15:03, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Ever?
In the Tragic Ending section, it reads
We then have the most devastating line ever written by The Bard: "Never, never, never, never, never!"' (Act V, scene iii, line 308)
I don't find this to be substantiable, or really even practical - it doesn't seem like it should be in here, or at least not in this form. Am I wrong?
- You're right. And when you see something like that, be bold. The Singing Badger 14:12, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Character Relationship Diagram
I made this diagram (http://www.wxs.ca/lear) of the complex character relationships in King Lear, and have released it under a Creative Commons license. Any thoughts on whether it would add something to the article? Pdefer | !! 01:31, 2005 Jun 17 (UTC)