The State of Aging and State vs. Age

         In this short essay, I will consider the variation of a single line between the two versions of William Shakespeare’s King Lear. Evaluating this minor textual difference leads to some interesting insights about the play as a whole. I will consider the implications of both variants for their context, deciding in the end which version to adopt in a collated edition. The line in question is in Lear’s first speech: “To shake all cares and business from our age”(Folio 1.1.45) In the Quarto, it reads “…off our state.” If the difference seems trivial, the impression disappears after examining some of the meanings of “age” and “state” in Shakespeare’s time.

         First, we’ll consider the more common Folio version. In what is essentially his abdication speech, Lear announces his division of the country into three parts, as well as his plans “to shake all care and business…”  Choosing the “age” line would tend to concentrate our attention on Lear himself, on his agedness. “Age” implies mortality and weakness; it can be both “the latter part of life, when the physical effects of protracted existence become apparent”(OED 2nd Ed, s.v. I. 6) and “the physical effects or qualities themselves; oldness, senility” (OED 2nd Ed, s.v. I. 7). Both meanings could be in play around Shakespeare’s time. Lear’s apparent weakness and impaired judgment are clearly stated. Indeed, they appear both as the reasons for his abdication and, later, for his older daughters’ seizure of his vestiges of power. Age also brings with itself the implications of obedience, of patriarchy, of an established order of succession that is being disrupted in the play, both in Lear’s situation and in the Gloucester subplot.  

          The other available alternative, “state,” is, in many ways, just as relevant. It highlights many problems that are to develop out of the opening act and scene; it foreshadows strongly the outcome of this speech itself. On the surface, “state” means simply condition. However, in the early 17th century, “state” could mean “a person's condition or position in life; a person's natural, social or legal status, profession or calling, rank or degree” (OED 2nd Ed. s.v. 15a). “Off” could then be seen as an alternative spelling for “of”, and Lear would be relinquishing his social, legal, and professional status while simultaneously going against his own nature. Although Lear’s condition may be affected by his age, he is jeopardizing himself and also his “state,” his land. By relinquishing the power of the king, he deprives himself of his status in life, disturbs his “state.” Interestingly, as Lear intends to keep “The name and the addition to a king” (1.1.136), one of the meanings of “state” underlines that possibility. “Costly and imposing display, such as befits persons of rank and wealth” (OED 2nd Ed. s.v. “state” 17a). Relieving himself of the responsibilities, Lear wants to retain the mere display of power. Perhaps the most fruitful meaning of “state” is the following: “Original, proper or normal condition; a sound, healthy, flourishing, prosperous condition. Chiefly in phrases, as to be (or stand) in state: to be firmly established or flourishing; to be intact; also, to remain ‘in statu quo’” (OED 2nd Ed. s.v. “state” 6). Although Lear is not aware of the fact, “cares and sorrows” are a necessary part of the “state,” of government. By relinquishing power, he breaks himself and his state, losing the status that he hoped to maintain in spite of his virtual abdication.

          Although my collated edition uses the folio line, I would prefer the one from the quarto, for its richness of sub-context; arguably, both produce a significant amount of appropriate implications. However, it seems that the two can in some sense be reconciled by yet another meaning of “state” from the Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd ed.: “a person's condition or status as determined by his years”(15b). However, as it is “state” that includes “age,” and not vice versa, I would still chose the quarto version of the line.