Oldal 71 [71]
RHETORICAL AND POETICAL CONVENTIONS
But if for lacke of naturall and proper terme or worde we take another, neither
naturall nor proper and do vntruly applie it to the thing which we would seeme to
expresse, and without any iust inconuenience, it is not then spoken by this figure
Metaphore or of inuersion as before, but by plaine abuse [...] as ne said very pretily
in this verse. J lent my love to losse, and gaged my life in vaine. Whereas this worde
lent is properly of mony or some such other thing, as men do commonly borrow,
for vse to be repayd againe, and being applied to loue is vtterly abused, and yet very
commendably spoken by virtue of this figure. For he that loueth and is not beloued
againe, hath no lesse wrong, than he that lendeth and is neuer repayde.?””
As Puttenham highlights, the ideas of money and love are incompatible.
Consequently, if Cordelia’s “bond” is used in a manner similar to “lent,” then it
calls attention to the abuse of figurative speech itself. Nevertheless, there is one
conventional trope that connects love to bond, but it refers to attachments ofa
social type, and interestingly enough, this reference failed to catch Freeman’s
attention. The trope “bond of charity” was often cited in Early Modern England
from the Gospel (Colossians 3:14), and it was used, for example, in sermons
in Shakespeare’s days, as it stood for the force of Christian love, which bonds
the members of the community into an organic whole. As John Winthrop
memorably explained in his Modell of Christian Charity:
The deffinition which the Scripture giues us of loue is this. Love is the bond of
perfection, first it is a bond or ligament. 2ly it makes the worke perfect. There is noe
body but consists of partes and that which knitts these partes together, giues the
body its perfection, because it makes eache parte soe contiguous to others as thereby
they doe mutually participate with each other, both in strengthe and infirmity, in
pleasure and paine.?”®
Taking “bond” as an allusion to charity is perfectly in line with the idea
proposed above, namely that Cordelia, unlike her sisters, does not define
her relationship to Lear in terms of her personal emotions, but rather on
the basis of her position within the social structure of the community. This
interpretation gains support from the special setting of the 1606 performance
on Saint Stephens day celebrating a martyr whose figure embodies the idea of
Christian charity. Moreover, Cordelia’s relation to Lear from a societal point
of view also represents a subject’s attachment to the head ofthe country and
the Church at the same time, due to the political and religious unity of the
Church of England.
277 Puttenham: The Arte, 150.
278 John Winthrop: A Modell of Christian Charity, Boston, Collections of the Massachusetts
Historical Society, 1838, 40.
+ 69 +