King Lear is often considered Shakespeare's most nihilistic play. This term, however, is a bit of a misnomer when describing a text from the early modern period, as the philosophical concept of nihilism as it is known today did not formally arise until the eighteenth century. However, some philosophers maintain that nihilism is not a specific philosophy or school of thought but instead a combination of ideologies that existed long before Shakespeare's time.
Put simply, a nihilistic perspective interprets everything in the world – including mankind – as inherently meaningless. Nihilism maintains that concepts like morality, ethics, values, knowledge, and objective truth are nonexistent and unattainable. Modern conceptions of nihilism are traditionally based on the work of German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, who famously coined the term "crisis of nihilism." This idea posits that nihilism is composed of two main objectives: destruction of higher values and rejection of the affirmation of life. In this way, scholars across disciplines have come to associate nihilism with cynicism, apathy, and resignation.
King Lear is often read as a nihilist play because of the sheer extent of its tragedy, as well as its focus on nothingness and lack of meaning. Gloucester himself expresses a nihilistic point of view when he compares mankind to flies that the gods enjoy killing for sport – rendering all higher values irrelevant and meaningless. Many maintain, however, that Lear is not a nihilist play at all, but is instead a narrative about old age and man's decline into senility, a decline that inherently forces reflection and a reevaluation of life. Perhaps the best way to reconcile these viewpoints is to consider King Lear a play that is interested in nihilistic inquiry, but that does not necessarily endorse a nihilistic worldview as a whole.
