King Lear is an overt tragedy in both format and execution; it’s no secret. As soon as you start reading, you see the seeds of deceit being sewn into the seams of this story that will seemingly spell the unsightly demise of these Shakespearean characters. Despite the tragedy being an ever-present theme and it being noticeably rolled out throughout the story, Shakespeare can hide it from moment to moment; and when he does this, you believe (whether you know it or not) that it is true. At certain parts of the story (the storm, Lear’s reconciliation with Cordelia, Edgar’s treatment of Gloucester, and Kent’s treatment of Lear), you forget that you reading a tragedy, a semblance of an ordinary story with linear progression and a happy ending starts to emerge. For example, Lear makes up with Cordelia at the end of the play, and when they are both being arrested, he comforts her in a moment of genuine love and care; Lear is righting his previous wrongs and being a better person and father to Cordelia. While being a decent human being and a good father is an outstanding achievement, this is special. Lear, mere scenes before, could not function as a human on a basic scale; he was incomprehensible, blabbering like a baby for entire pages while those around him tried to help him. He was inconsolable when he went mad, but even before, he was a problematic character to reason with. In any society, certain positions have greater power and, thus, more significant importance in said society. While this rule is not wholly accurate (frontline workers, manual laborers, and many others I’m sure I’m unaware of), it is 100% true in Lear’s case. A king IS the state, and the state serves the king, not vice versa. A king is chosen to be endowed with absolute power by bloodline, political power, or sacred providence; absolute power corrupts absolutely, and Lear was no exception. The play starts with Lear putting his vanity and brash rudeness on full display, making a fool out of himself and being stupid. Lear is nothing but a king, so when he decides to step down from power, he sets in motion his own defeat. When Lear loses his power, he loses himself because all he’s ever had was power; it’s all he knows. Lear stepped down from power, and in doing so, Lear loses his identity; the thing that made Lear King Lear is now gone. His power came from the perception of his power, and the perception of Lear was a king, and a king has great power. To be a king, Lear needs to be powerful, to have others beckon to his every whim, to wait for him to enter rooms, and to wait for him to command them; this exertion of power is only possible due to society giving Lear that power because Lear is king. So when he gives up his power, he gives up being king, and in giving up being king, he gives up being Lear. Alongside Lear losing his identity, he is humiliated, babied, and disposed of whatever semblance of respect and power he has left. This is partly due to the scheming of those around him and his foolishness in exiling Kent and disavowing Cordelia, two people who genuinely care about him and support him. This pushes Lear over the edge into madness and, subsequently, the storm.

The storm is a physical metastasization of the turmoil present within Lear. He loses everything and is cast into madness; he is not in the right mind and cannot take care of himself. Lear’s lowest point is when the Fool leaves his side as the Fool is as dedicated and loyal to Lear as Cordelia and Kent. At this moment, Lear is reduced to nothing, and this is where King Lear’s true genius is shown. The absence of hope is where hope resides; when all the walls come tumbling down, and all you know is lost, that is when you truly begin to see. Lear leaves the storm, still mad but seeing the truth in his madness. Lear learned a lot in the storm; the storm represented the overwhelming power of nature, forcing Lear to acknowledge his own mortality and vulnerability. It symbolized divine justice and the political chaos in Britain. The storm serves to humble Lear and highlights the fragility of power. just like Gloucsters blindness, it makes them aware of the error of their ways and is a literary vehicle to progress their character and give them the growth they deserve. Lear has grown so much from where he began; he has come to understand that it is not about him. Lear is a character that experiences a profound transformation over the course of the play. Through his journey, he learns to recognize the limitations of his power and the importance of humility, compassion, and understanding. He serves as a representation of the transformative power of suffering and the possibility of redemption. The change he experienced gave him the tools to be a great king, a great person, and a great father. We see these changes in Lear start to take hold when he is arrested and imprisoned with Cordelia. If King Lear were a normal story, France would’ve defeated Britain, Goneral, Reagan, and Edmund would have been imprisoned for conspiracy. Lear would rule Britain, and Cordelia and France would rule France. Because, just as Lear had changed, so had Cordelia (kinda).

France is the only one who sees Cordelia in act 1 for what she truly is, and when she returns later in the play, it’s clear that others have begun to realize too. Cordelia is a natural-born leader; she’s a symbol of wisdom, power, and kindness. Most people in King Lear are evil and nasty, which is telling because the characters in King Lear are especially human. Goneril and Reagan juxtapose Cordelia with their power-hungry ways. They use people for their own personal gain and then toss them aside when they are of no use to them anymore; they scheme and plot in the shadows while masking their true intentions. Cordelia is righteous and pure she doesn’t hide who she is and is loved for it. Cordelia is kind to others, something not seen in the play often, and is willing to forgive. She also genuinely cares about people and this characterization of Cordelia as someone whose powerful but vulnerable draws others to her; she draws her power from her vulnerability, she mitigates her weaknesses and effectively utilizes her strengths. She is a much better ruler than Goneril or Reagan. But, we never get to see Cordelia’s righteous rule as she is killed in prison in front of Lear. As Lear walks into the scene holding Cordelia’s lifeless body, he breaks. King Lear learns that justice is an illusion and humans are like animals, but still, he cannot accept his daughter Cordelia’s death. He finds it unjust that other animals are alive while she is dead, and his inability to come to terms with his loss makes his death even more tragic. Despite the newfound wisdom and understanding he has gained, Lear’s inability to cope with Cordelia’s death highlights the emotional toll of loss and the power of grief. Lear’s growth, both personal, and as a king, are lost with him. The kingdom is put into hands that are ill-suited to rule as they did not learn the same lessons. Albany, Kent, and Edgar (assuming Kent doesn’t follow Lear into death) are all good people and good leaders, but none of them have learned how to rule like Lear has. King Lear sets up Lear to grow and to metamorphosize into a great leader, but his life is cut short because of the ugliness of the world. Shakespeare sets up Lear’s story as a great redemption arc, he was supposed to be the leader everyone needed at the time that they needed him, but he dies. Despite Lear’s death, his change is not futile. Revolutions in history often lead to even worse conditions than the ones that caused said revolutions; however, that doesn’t stop people from revolting. Change isn’t pointless due to its inherent futility, if that were true then nothing would ever change. Just because we will all die one day doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try to change. Change is the constant state of human nature, it happens whether you like it or not. Lear’s growth and development was still important because, in the end, he ended a better man than when he started. Change is not futile despite its inevitability of meaninglessness because change itself can bring meaning to life. Even though the universe is ultimately meaningless, change allows individuals to create their own purpose and find meaning in their experiences. Just as Gloucester was given a reason to live because of Edgar tricking him, Lear was given a new purpose to live in the form of Cordelia. At the beginning of the play, King Lear is focused on maintaining his power and authority as a king. He is consumed by his pride and ego and values flattery and material possessions above all else. However, as the play progresses and Lear is stripped of his power and wealth, he begins to search for a deeper meaning in life. Eventually, Lear comes to realize that his relationships with his daughters, particularly Cordelia, are what give his life meaning. His love for Cordelia becomes the central reason for his existence, and her death leaves him devastated and unable to find purpose in life. In the end, Lear’s reason to live shifts from material possessions and power to the love and relationships he has with those around him. He realizes that these relationships are the source of his greatest happiness and meaning in life. While this growth is good and all, if King Lear was not a tragedy and instead had an outcome where Lear lives and happily ruled the kingdom, all of this wouldn’t seem see bleak. However, King Lear being a tragedy also gives it new meaning and a new interpretation. Despite Lears change having different effects on the world in both a tragedy where he ends up dead, and a story with a happy ending where he lives and rules as a just and fair leader, one thing is made clear in King Lear; Lear was the one who mattered most.

“Sing About Me, I’m Dying of Thirst” lyrics

In “Sing About Me, I’m Dying of Thirst,” Kendrick Lamar explores themes of identity, loss, and redemption through his own experiences and observations. The song’s title refers to Lamar’s desire to be remembered and have his story told through music, even after his death.

Throughout the song, Lamar grapples with the complexities of his identity and how it has been shaped by his positive and negative experiences. He reflects on his poverty, violence, and addiction; and how they have impacted his sense of self.

At the same time, Lamar also speaks to the broader disenfranchisement and injustice he sees in the world around him. He speaks about the struggles of marginalized communities and the ways in which they are often overlooked or mistreated by society.

The lyrics are deeply emotional and introspective, and Lamar’s delivery is raw and powerful. Through his music, he confronts his own struggles and encourages others to do the same, offering hope and redemption.

I woke up this morning and figured I’d call you
In case I’m not here tomorrow
I’m hopin’ that I can borrow
A peace of mind, I’m behind on what’s really important
My mind is really distorted
I find nothing but trouble in my life
I’m fortunate you believe in a dream

Kendricks’s reference to death and dreams shows the hopelessness and misanthropic inner monologue he developed in his childhood. Hope is all he has, as he hopes for a better life. The line “I’m fortunate you believe in a dream” may reference Martin Luther King’s 1963 “I Have a Dream” speech, which described his hopes for a future free of racial segregation. Mym find

My plan’s rather vindictive
Everybody’s a victim in my eyes
When I ride it’s a murderous rhythm
And outside became pitch black
A demon glued to my back, whispering “Get ’em!”

As he said before, his “mind is really distorted,” so now that Dave has been shot, his brother wants revenge.

Dave is a friend of Lamar’s who was killed in a drive-by shooting. Dave’s death is a central theme in the song, as Lamar reflects on the loss of his friend and the impact it had on him and those around him.

Lamar uses Dave’s story to explore more prominent themes of identity, mortality, and social injustice. He reflects on how Dave’s death has affected him personally and how it reflects the larger issues of violence and inequality in society. Dave’s story becomes a way for Lamar to explore these broader themes and challenge listeners to think about the impact of these issues on their own lives.

This Piru shit been in me forever
So forever I’ma push it, wherever, whenever
And I love you ’cause you love my brother like you did
Just promise me you’ll tell this story when you make it big
And if I die before your album drop, I hope— [Gunshots]

The term “Piru shit” refers to the Pirus, a street gang based in Compton, California. The Pirus are known for their involvement in drug trafficking and other illegal activities, and the term “Piru shit” is often used to refer to the gang’s activities and culture.

Lamar references the Pirus and “Piru shit” in the song as part of a larger exploration of identity, mortality, and social injustice. He reflects on how the culture of gangs and violence, such as the Pirus, has affected him and those around him and how it reflects larger issues of inequality and injustice in society.

Kendrick also expresses his love for someone else, likely a friend or family member, who has a close relationship with the speaker’s brother. They ask this person to tell their story and share their experiences if they ever become successful or “make it big.”

The reference to the gunshots and the speaker’s hope that they don’t die before Kendrick’s album is released is likely a reference to the violence and danger associated with gang culture and life on the streets. It suggests that the speaker is aware of the risks they face and hopes to see the other person succeed before meeting an untimely demise.

An old Chinese curse goes along the lines of, “May he be blessed to live in interesting times.” Insinuating that times of danger and uncertainty are the most creative times in history. However, I disagree, a simple life is a life worth living. Children when they are born are endowed with a fundamental sense of fairness, right, wrong, and justice. And while they lack the cognitive functions to see the nuances of these issues it’s still a point worth making. Meursault’s life and characterization go against his base human biological state, exemplifying his general lack of moral compass or lack of acknowledgment of said compass. While Meursault is a human, he does miss a certain part of being a human, the innate sense of accountability that almost all humans feel, and this transgression is shown rather brutally. While the court, trial, and justice system is not the perfect example of this innate sense of right and wrong endowed on children, it serves as a sort of caricature of it. Meursault is almost an observer, and when he is yanked out of his orbit and brought down to reality, he is forced to confront the fact that he is not quite like the others. A simple life is often a life living, but too simple of a life seemingly strips away an innate human aspect.

From a normal book/story perspective, The Elephant Vanishes is a good story. It does everything right and hits all hallmarks of an average story. It keeps you engaged, is cohesive, has very presentable and digestible themes, and has a natural logical conclusion (rhetorically wise, it ends with an event that drives a pragmatic person insane). But one thing is different about this story, something stands out, something doesn’t fit in. Perspective.

A story about an elephant and his keeper has a shockingly low amount of dialogue from the elephant and his keeper, it actually has no amount of dialogue directly from these characters. Murakami took a different approach to the telling and perspective of the narrative of this story when he went about writing it. Instead of having the reader come to know, relate, and eventually understand the elephant and the keeper, both individually and their relationship to one another, via dialogue, interactions with themselves, and other characters, it was done entirely through indirect characterization. The narrator is an unnamed man who we come to learn about and understand through traditional methods (direct characterization), everything we know about the keeper and elephant is through the lens of this man. We learn about how the narrator thinks, how he acts, how he lives, and how he adapts. He remarks upon himself at the end of the story commenting on how he has made his company a lot of money because of him, showing he is adept at anticipating and accommodating the ever-evolving needs of the consumer base we know he has 0 relations to. When asked how he feels about his work he mentions that he has a personal and professional opinion. He mentions that in his professional opinion he believes that each kitchen should have a certain unity, and his personal opinion is that he doesn’t really care. To him, a kitchen is a kitchen and it really doesn’t need more than the basic essentials to function. Not only does this display his pragmatism, it also shows that despite not being emotionally invested or relating any way to his work, but he can also still put himself in the place of the consumers and anticipate what they would want. He is a man who is incredibly capable of adapting to his current environment, he logically dissects his situation and responds appropriately. Another way we are shown how he thinks and approaches situations is in his conversation with the unnamed woman he meets at a party. He is very aware of the situation he is in and is acutely aware that the topic would immediately end all real conversations or chemistry they had. Murakami characterized the narrator as someone who is adaptable, pragmatic, obsessive, and aware. This is the lens through which the story is told, and the lens through which this story is taken to a new level.

A story about an elephant and zoo keeper vanishing is not an entirely new, inventive, groundbreaking, or particularly interesting topic. However, the perspective of the story makes it such. We get to see how this event unfolds through the lens of someone we have come to know and have a good grasp on their character. It deeply disturbs him as it is something that cannot be logically explained. It started as something that he would take a bit of his time out of in the morning to keep track of, or an interesting topic to read and ponder about to something that is actively intruding into his personal life and has introduced a chaotic imbalance into his life. When discussing the elephant with the woman at the party, he talks about him glimpsing the elephant shrinking and the keeper enlarging. The woman is perplexed but can fathom this, the narrator, however, trusts what he sees but is disturbed by it. He saw something that could not, should not, and would not have normally happened. And he tries, but ultimately fails to grasp it, and it shows in how he comments on how he doesn’t think he can trust his own perceptions anymore. His sense of normality and comfort in his surrounding has been replaced with a sense of uneasiness and imbalance. And this is where we see the true impact of the elephant vanishes. We as the reader cannot truly fathom the premise of the story, it’s not something we can relate to in any way shape, or form. But through the characterization and progression of the story through the narrative element of the unnamed narrator, we can see the actual effects of the story. Transforming a decent story and premise into a masterclass on how to change a story through perspective.