The Absent Mother inKing Lear CoppéliaKahn FleeingGoneril’s“sharp-tooth’dunkindness,”LeararrivesatGlou- cester’s house in search of Regan, still hoping that she will be “kind andcomfortable,”althoughshewasinexplicablynotathomewhenhe calledbefore.Hefindshismessengerinthestocks,ahumiliationthat herightlytakesasdirectedathimpersonally.Atfirsthesimplydenies what Kent tells him, that Regan and her husband did indeed commit thisoutrage.Thenheseekstounderstandhow,orwhy.Kentrecounts thestudiedrudeness,thesuccessiveinsults,thefinalshaming,thathe hasendured. Foramoment,Learcannolongerdeny orrationalize;hecanonly feel—feelatumultofwoundedpride,shame,anger,andloss,whichhe expressesinastrikingimage: O! how this mother swells upward toward my heart! Hystericapassio!down, thou climbing sorrow! Thy element’s below. (2.4.56-58)1 By calling his sorrow hysterical, Lear decisively characterizes it as feminine, in accordance with a tradition stretching back to 1900 b.c. whenanEgyptianpapyrusfirstdescribedthemalady.Fifteenhundred yearslaterinthewritingsofHippocrates,itwasnamed,anditsname succinctly conveyed its etiology. It was the disease of the hyster, the womb.Fromancienttimesthroughthenineteenthcentury,womensuf- feringvariously fromchoking, feelingsofsuffocation, partialparaly- sis, convulsions similar to those of epilepsy, aphasia, numbness, and lethargyweresaidtobeillofhysteria,causedbyawanderingwomb. Whatsentthewombonitserrantpaththroughthefemalebody,people thought,waseitherlackofsexualintercourseorretentionofmenstrual blood.Inbothcases,thesameprescriptionobtained:thepatientshould The Absent Mother inKing Lear 239 getmarried.Ahusbandwouldkeepthatwanderingwombwhereitbe- longed.Iftheafflictedalreadyhadahusband,concoctionseithernox- iousorpleasantwereappliedtoforceorenticetherecalcitrantwomb toitsproperlocation.2 InShakespeare’stime,hysteriawasalsocalled,appropriately,“the mother.”AlthoughShakespearemaywellhaveconsultedatreatiseby EdwardJordancalledABriefDiscourseofaDiseaseCalledtheSuffo- cation oftheMother,published in1603, likeanyone inhisculturehe would have understood “the mother” in the context of notions about women.Forhysteria isavivid metaphorofwomaningeneral,asshe was regarded then and later, a creature destined for the strenuous bodily labors of childbearing and childrearing but nonetheless physi- callyweakerthanman.Moreover,shewas,likeEve,temperamentally and morally infirm—skittish, prone to err in all senses. Woman’s womb,herjustificationandherglory,wasalsothesignandsourceof her weakness as a creature of the flesh rather than the mind or spirit. Theverydiversityofsymptomsclusteringunderthenameofhysteria bespeaksthecapriciousnatureofwoman.Andtheremedy—ahusband andregularsexualintercourse—declaresthenecessityformalecontrol ofthisvolatilefemaleelement.3 *** Psychoanalysiswasborn,onemightsay,fromthewanderingwomb of hysteria. Anna O., the star of Studies in Hysteria, published by Freud and Joseph Breuer in 1895, was its midwife. It was she who named psychoanalysis “the talking cure” and in a sense even discov- ered it. Afflicted with a veritable museum of hysterical symptoms, whenBreuervisitedhershespontaneously sankintoarapt,semicon- sciousstateinwhichsheinsistedontalkingaboutwhatbotheredher, thus showing the way to freeassociation asthe distinctly psychoana- lytic technique of treating mental disorders. For psychoanalysis and hysteriaboth,thediscoverythatitsstrangelydisparatephysicalsymp- 240 Critical Insights tomswereinfactsymbolicrepresentationsofunconsciousmentalcon- flictconstitutedacrucialbreakthrough.Relocatingthecauseofhyste- riaintheheadinsteadofinthewomb,BreuerandFreudwereableto makesenseofit,treatit,and,toanextent,cureit.Yet,intheViennese women they treated, we can see that hysteria does indeed comefrom the womb—if we understand the womb as a metaphor for feelings and needs associated with women. As Dianne Hunter suggests, what Anna O. talked out was her specifically female subjectivity.4 She ex- pressed through the body language of her paralyzed arm, her squint, and her speech disorders the effects on her as a woman of life in a father-dominatedfamilyandamale-dominatedworldthatsuppressed thefemalevoice.Thematrixofherdiseasewasbothsexualandsocial: thepatriarchalfamily. Becausethefamilyisboththefirstsceneofindividualdevelopment and the primary agent of socialization, it functions as a link between psychicandsocialstructuresandasthecrucibleinwhichgenderiden- tityisformed.Frombeingmotheredandfathered,welearntobeour- selvesasmenandwomen.TheanthropologistGayleRubindescribes psychoanalysis as “a theory of sexuality in human society . . . a de- scription of the mechanisms by which the sexes are divided and de- formed, or how bisexual androgynous infants are transformed into boysandgirls...afeministtheorymanqué.”5AgreatShakespearean critic,C.L.Barber,callspsychoanalysis“asociologyofloveandwor- ship within the family.”6 Freud, of course, viewed this family drama fromthestandpointofason;heconceivedthedevelopmentofgender as governed primarily by relationship with the father. Because Freud grounds sexual differentiation in the cultural primacy of the phallus, withinthecontextofafamilystructurethatmirrorsthepsychological organization of patriarchal society, he enables us to deconstruct the modesoffeeling,theinstitutions,andthesocialcodesinwhichmuch ifnotmostofEnglishliteratureisembedded. ButtouseoneofFreud’sfavoritemetaphors,toexcavatepatriarchal sensibility in literature, we must sift through more than one layer. In The Absent Mother inKing Lear 241 the history of psychoanalysis, the discovery of the Oedipus complex precedes the discovery of pre-oedipal experience, reversing the se- quence of development in the individual. Similarly, patriarchal struc- tures loom obviously on the surface of many texts, structures of au- thority,control,force,logic,linearity,misogyny,malesuperiority.But beneaththem,asinapalimpsest,wecanfindwhatIcall“thematernal subtext,”theimprintofmotheringonthemalepsyche,thepsychologi- calpresenceof the motherwhether or not mothersareliterally repre- sentedascharacters.7InthisreadingofKingLear,Itry,likeanarchae- ologist,touncoverthehiddenmotherinthehero’sinnerworld. Now,itisinterestingthatthereisnoliteralmotherinKingLear.The earlier anonymous play that is one of Shakespeare’s main sources opens with a speech by the hero lamenting the death of his “dearest Queen.”8 But Shakespeare, who follows the play closely in many re- spects,refersonlyonceinpassingtothisqueen.Inthecrucialcataclys- micfirst sceneof his play, fromwhich allits lateraction evolves, we areshownonlyfathersandtheirgodlikecapacitytomakeormartheir children.Throughthisconspicuousomissiontheplayarticulatesapa- triarchal conception of the family in which children owe their exis- tencetotheirfathersalone;themother’sroleinprocreationiseclipsed by the father’s, which is used to affirm male prerogative and male power.9ThearistocraticpatriarchalfamiliesheadedbyGloucesterand Lear have, actually and effectively, no mothers. The only source of love, power, and authority is the father—an awesome, demanding presence. Butwhattheplaydepicts,ofcourse,isthefailureofthatpresence: thefailureofafather’spowertocommandloveinapatriarchalworld and the emotional penalty he pays for wielding power.10 Lear’s very insistenceonpaternalpower,infact,beliesitsshakiness;similarly,the absenceofthemotherpointstoherhiddenpresence,asthelineswith whichIbeganmightindicate.WhenLearbeginstofeelthelossofCor- delia,tobewoundedbyhersisters,andtorecognizehisownvulnera- bility, he callshis stateof mindhysteria, “themother,”which Iinter- 242 Critical Insights pret as his repressed identification with the mother. Women and the needsandtraitsassociatedwiththemaresupposedtostayintheirele- ment, as Lear says, “below”—denigrated, silenced, denied. In this patriarchal world, masculine identity depends on repressing the vul- nerability,dependency,andcapacityforfeelingwhicharecalled“fem- inine.” RecenthistoricalstudiesoftheElizabethanfamily,itssocialstruc- tureandemotionaldynamics,whenconsideredinthelightofpsycho- analytictheory,provideabackdropagainstwhichLear’sfamilydrama takesonnewmeaningasatragedyofmasculinity.11Recently,several authors have analyzed mothering—the traditional division of roles withinthefamilythatmakesthewomanprimarilyresponsibleforrear- ingaswellasbearingthechildren—asasocialinstitutionsustainedby patriarchy,whichinturnreinforcesit.12Notably,NancyChodorowof- fers an incisive critique of the psychoanalytic conception of how the earlymother-childrelationshipshapesthechild’ssenseofmalenessor femaleness.Shearguesthatthebasicmasculinesenseofselfisformed throughadenialofthemale’sinitialconnectionwithfemininity,ade- nialthattaintsthemale’sattitudestowardwomenandimpairshisca- pacityforaffiliationingeneral.MyinterpretationofLearcomesoutof thefeministre-examinationofthemotheringrolenowbeingcarriedon in many fields, but it is particularly indebted to Nancy Chodorow’s analysis. According to her account, women as mothers produce daughters withmotheringcapacitiesandthedesiretomother,whichitselfgrows outofthemother-daughterrelationship.Theyalsoproducesonswhose nurturant capacities and needs are curtailed in order to prepare them to be fathers. A focus on the primacy of the mother’s role in ego- formationisnotinitselfnew.Itfollowsupontheattemptsoftheorists such as Melanie Klein, Michael and Alice Balint, John Bowlby, and MargaretMahlertocastlightonthatdimpsychicregionwhichFreud likened to the Minoan civilization preceding the Greek, “grey with age, and shadowy and almost impossible to revivify.”13 Chodorow’s The Absent Mother inKing Lear 243 account of the mother-child relationship, however, challenges the mainstreamofpsychoanalyticassumptionsconcerningtheroleofgen- derandfamilyintheformationofthechild’segoandsexualidentity. Because I find family relationships and gender identity central to Shakespeare’s imagination, the most valuable aspect of Chodorow’s workformeisitscomparativeperspectiveonthedevelopmentofgen- derinthesexes.Forboth,themother’sratherthanthefather’sroleis theimportantone,ascrucialtothechild’sindividuation(development ofasenseofself)astothechild’ssenseofgender.Itisonlyforthepur- poseofanalysis,however,thatthetwofacetsofidentity canbesepa- rated. Both sexes begin to develop a sense of self in relation to a mother-woman.Butagirl’ssenseoffemalenessarisesthroughherin- fantileunionwiththemotherandlateridentificationwithher,whilea boy’ssenseofmalenessarisesinoppositiontothoseprimitiveformsof oneness. According to Robert Stoller, whose work supports Cho- dorow’s argument, “Developing indissoluble links with mother’s fe- maleness and femininity in the normal mother-infant symbiosis can onlyaugmentagirl’sidentity,”whileforaboy,“thewholeprocessof becomingmasculine...isendangeredbytheprimary,profound, pri- malonenesswithmother.”14Agirl’sgenderidentityisreinforcedbuta boy’sisthreatenedbyunionandidentificationwiththesamepowerful female being. Thus, as Chodorow argues, the masculine personality tendstobeformedthroughdenialofconnectionwithfemininity;cer- tainactivitiesmustbedefinedasmasculineandsuperiortothemater- nalworldofchildhood,andwomen’sactivitiesmust,correspondingly, bedenigrated.Theprocessofdifferentiationisinscribedinpatriarchal ideology,whichpolarizesmaleandfemalesocialrolesandbehavior.15 The imprint of mothering on the male psyche, the psychological presenceofthemotherinmenwhetherornotmothersarerepresented in the texts they write or in which they appear as characters, can be foundthroughouttheliterarycanon.ButitisShakespearewhorenders thedilemmasofmanhoodmostcompellinglyandwiththegreatestin- sight,partlybecausehewroteatacertainhistoricalmoment.Aspartof 244 Critical Insights awide-rangingargumentfortheroleofthenuclearfamilyinshaping whathecalls“affectiveindividualism,”LawrenceStoneholdsthatthe family of Shakespeare’s day saw a striking increase in the father’s power over his wife and children. Stone’s ambitious thesis has been strenuouslycriticized,buthisdescriptionoftheElizabethanfamilyit- self,ifnothisnotionofitsplaceinthedevelopmentofaffectiveindi- vidualism,holdstrue.16 Stonesumsupthemodeofthefather’sdominancethus: Thissixteenth-centuryaristocraticfamilywaspatrilinear,primogenitural, andpatriarchal:patrilinearinthatitwasthemalelinewhoseancestrywas tracedsodiligentlybythegenealogistsandheralds,andinalmostallcases viathemalelinethattitleswereinherited;primogenituralinthatmostof thepropertywenttotheeldestson,theyoungerbrothersbeingdispatched into the world with littlemore than a modest annuity or lifeinterestin a smallestatetokeepthemafloat;andpatriarchalinthatthehusbandandfa- therlordeditoverhiswifeandchildrenwiththequasi-absoluteauthority of a despot.17 Patriarchy, articulated through the family, was considered the natural orderofthings.18Butlikeotherkindsof“naturalorder,”itwassubject tohistoricalchange.AccordingtoStone,between1580and1640two forces,onepoliticalandonereligious,convergedtoheightenpaternal powerinthefamily.AstheTudor-Stuartstateconsolidated,ittriedto undercutancientbaronialloyaltytothefamilylineinordertoreplace it with loyalty to the crown. As part of the same campaign, the state alsoencouragedobediencetothepaterfamiliasinthehome,according to the traditional analogy between state and family, king and father. JamesIstated,“Kingsarecomparedtofathersinfamilies:forakingis truly parenspatriae,thepoliticfatherofhispeople.”19Thestatethus hadadirectinterestinreinforcingpatriarchyinthehome. Concurrently,Puritanfundamentalism—theliteralinterpretationof Mosaic law in its original patriarchal context—reinforced patriarchal The Absent Mother inKing Lear 245 elementsinChristiandoctrineandpracticeaswell.Astheheadofthe household,thefathertookovermanyofthepriest’sfunctions,leading hisextended familyofdependents indaily prayers, questioning them astothestateoftheirsouls,givingorwithholdinghisblessingontheir undertakings. Although Protestant divines argued for the spiritual equalityofwomen,deploredthedoublestandard,andexaltedthemar- riedstateforbothsexes,atthesametimetheyzealouslyadvocatedthe subjectionofwivestotheirhusbandsonthescripturalgroundsthatthe husband“beareththeimageofGod.”Heavenandhomewerebothpa- triarchal. The Homily on the State of Matrimony, one of the sermons issuedbythecrowntobereadinchurchweekly,quotesandexplicates thePaulineadmonition,“Letwomenbesubjecttotheirhusbands,asto the Lord; for the husband is the head of the woman, as Christ is the headofthechurch.”20Ineffect,awoman’ssubjectiontoherhusband’s willwasthemeasureofhispatriarchalauthorityandthusofhismanli- ness. The division of parental roles in childrearing made children simi- larly subject to the father’s will. In his study of Puritan attitudes to- wardauthority andfeeling,DavidLeverenzfindsanemphasisonthe mother’s role as tender nurturer of young children, as against the fa- ther’s role as disciplinarian and spiritual guide for older children. Mothers are encouraged to love their children openly in their early yearsbutenjoinedtowithdrawtheiraffections“atjustaboutthetime thefather’sinstructionalrolebecomesprimary.”Thusthebreakingof the will is accomplished by the father, rather than by both parents equally. This division of duties, Leverenz holds, fostered a pervasive polarity, involving “associations of feared aspects of oneself with weaknessandwomen,emphasisonmalerestraintandthemalemind’s governanceoffemaleemotions,theseparationof‘head’from‘body,’... alanguageofmaleanxiety,ratherthanoffemaledeficiency.”21 AcloselookatthefirstsceneinKingLearrevealsmuchaboutlord- linessandthemaleanxietyaccompanyingit.Thecourtisgatheredto watchLeardividehiskingdomanddivesthimselfofitsrule,butthose 246 Critical Insights purposesareactuallyonlyaccessorytoanotherthattoucheshimmore nearly:givingawayhisyoungestdaughterinmarriage.WhileFrance andBurgundy waitinthewings,Cordelia,forwhosehandtheycom- pete, also competes for the dowry without which she cannot marry. As Lynda Boose shows, this opening scene is a variant of the wed- dingceremony,whichdramatizesthebondbetweenfatheranddaugh- terevenasitmarkstheseveranceofthatbond.Thereisnopartinthe ritualforthebride’smother;rather,thebride’sfatherhandsherdirectly toherhusband.Thustheritualarticulatesthefather’sdominanceboth asprocreatorandasauthorityfigure,totheeclipseofthemotherinei- ther capacity. At the same time, the father symbolically certifies the daughter’svirginity.Thustheceremonyalludestotheincesttabooand raises a question about Lear’s “darker purpose” in giving Cordelia away.22 InviewofthewaysthatLeartriestomanipulatethisritualsoasto keephisholdonCordeliaatthesametimethatheisostensiblygiving heraway,wemightsupposethattheemotionalcrisisprecipitatingthe tragic action is Lear’s frustrated incestuous desire for his daughter. Forinthecourseofwinningherdowry,Cordeliaissupposedtoshow that she loves her father not only more than her sisters do but, as she rightly sees, more than she loves her future husband; similarly, when Lear disowns and disinherits Cordelia, he thinks he has rendered her, dowered only with his curse, unfit to marry—and thus unable toleavepaternalprotection.Incontrast,however,Iwanttoarguethat the socially-ordained, developmentally appropriate surrender of Cor- deliaasdaughter-wife—therenunciationofherasincestuousobject— awakens a deeper emotional need in Lear: the need for Cordelia as daughter-mother. The play’s beginning, as I have said, is marked by the omnipotent presence of the father and the absence of the mother. Yet in Lear’s schemeforparcelingouthiskingdom,wecandiscernachild’simage ofbeingmothered.Hewantstwomutuallyexclusivethingsatonce:to haveabsolutecontroloverthoseclosesttohimandtobeabsolutelyde- The Absent Mother inKing Lear 247 pendent on them. We can recognize in this stance the outlines of a child’s pre-oedipal experience of himselfand his mother as an undif- ferentiateddualunity,inwhichthechildperceiveshismothernotasa separate person but as an agency of himself, who provides for his needs. She and her breast are a part of him, at his command.23 In Freud’sunforgettablephrase,heis“hismajesty,thebaby.”24 Asman,father,andruler,Learhashabituallysuppressedanyneeds forlove,whichinhispatriarchalworldwouldnormallybesatisfiedby a mother or mothering woman. With age and loss of vigor, and as Freudsuggestsin“TheThemeoftheThreeCaskets,”withtheprospect ofreturntomotherearth,Learfeelsthoseneedsagainandhintsatthem inhisdesireto“crawl”likeababy“towarddeath.”25Significantly,he confesses them in these phrases the moment after he curses Cordelia forhersilence,themomentinwhichhedeniesthemmoststrongly.He says, “I lov’d her most, and thought to set my rest/ On her kind nursery”(1.1.123-24). When his other two daughters prove to be bad mothers and don’t satisfyhisneedsfor“nursery,”Learisseizedby“themother”—asear- ingsenseoflossatthedeprivationofthemother’spresence.Itassaults him in various ways—in the desire to weep, to mourn the enormous loss,andtheequally strongdesiretoholdbackthetearsand,instead, accuse, arraign, convict, punish, and humiliate those who have made him realize his vulnerability and dependency. Thus the mother, re- vealedinLear’sresponsetohisdaughters’brutalitytowardhim,makes her re-entry into the patriarchal world from which she had seemingly been excluded. The repressed mother returns specifically in Lear’s wrathfulprojectionsontotheworldabouthimofasymbioticrelation- ship with his daughters that recapitulates his pre-oedipal relationship with the mother. In a striking series of images in which parent-child, father-daughter,andhusband-wiferelationshipsarereversedandcon- founded,Learre-enactsachildlikerageagainsttheabsentorrejecting motherasfiguredinhisdaughters. HereIwanttointerjectaspeculationinspiredbyStone’sdiscussion 248 Critical Insights