Forum: Featured Discussions: What is wise counsel?

by Keith Whitaker, Defining Wisdom Grantee
Wise Counsel Research—www.wisecounselresearch.org

Wise counselors or good “seconds” appear in a bewildering variety of guises, from Wooster’s Jeeves to Lear’s Fool, the immoral Talleyrand to the saintly More. In a recently established reading group, we discussed select historical and dramatic passages to see what themes or commonality we could find among these uncommon counselors.

We kicked off our discussion group on wise counsel looking at Shakespeare’s King Lear. Counselors play a major role in the plot of Lear—think of Kent, the Fool, Edgar, and even Oswald, Goneril’s attendant.

We focused on the Fool. The questions we started with were, What do we know about the Fool? And why does Lear like him?

We also asked participants for their own sense of what wise counsel is. In response to this question we discussed the difference between seeing wisdom as embodied in counsel (wisdom “as” counsel) and wisdom as something that exists apart from counsel and gets “applied” in specific situations (wisdom “in” counsel). Do you think wisdom can exist apart from its taking shape (actually or potentially) in counsel?

Regarding Lear’s Fool, we noted some of his characteristics that seem to identify him as a wise counselor: He speaks the truth. He is brave and loyal. He alone of the characters appears to see what’s coming around the corner for Lear. He even speaks a prophecy (and likens himself to a magician, Merlin), raising the question, What’s the difference between a prophet and a wise counselor?

Also, the Fool is powerless, and by not rivaling Lear in any way appears better situated to speak the truth to him. His obvious use of jokes led us to discuss the importance of “indirection” to wisdom. Perhaps we find wisdom most readily in jokes or games or “plays”? And perhaps comedy can present wisdom more readily than tragedy?

We would love to hear our fellow Wisdom Network members’ thoughts on these questions. Is the best place to find wisdom in counsel? Or in jokes? In comedy or in tragedy?

We also talked about other possible examples of wise counselors, including Tiresias, Seneca, and Franklin. What examples would you nominate? Why? Our next discussion is going to continue to look at wisdom in comic guise. We’ll be talking about P.G. Wodehouse’s Jeeves in late April. Please feel free to join our online conversation!

Photo from Flickr Creative Commons.

Great picture!

I wonder how much the Fool’s powerlessness, the fact that he is not even remotely a rival to Lear, makes him, as you say, “better situated to speak the truth to [Lear].”  Is this the problem with Kent?  Is it really because Lear believes that Kent is angling to usurp his place that he rebukes him for his bluntness?  I think Lear actually is not as resistant to truthful counsel as he seems.  We are not told but so much about the play’s prehistory, but it must be the case that (1) Kent has been part of Lear’s inner circle for a long time and (2) Kent is accustomed to speaking his mind to Lear without being booted out.  Lear had developed a neatly orchestrated succession plan which the scene with the three daughters was supposed to seal.  Cordelia throws everything off and Lear’s reaction to Kent’s plain speaking is part of the wild chaos that ensues. 

Another interesting way to pose this question is, who is the more effective counselor in King Lear?  Do we have evidence that either Kent or the Fool teach Lear anything at any point in the play?  Where does Lear benefit from the advice of Kent or the Fool?  Where do they change his mind or his actions?  We do have an example of Lear being deeply influenced by another character, namely Edgar (disguised as Poor Tom).  Lear before meeting Edgar on the heath and Lear afterwards are two totally different men.  Whatever it is that Edgar teaches Lear (a fascinating but also difficult question), nothing similar results from Lear’s relations with the Fool and Kent. 

Who is the Fool?  How does he benefit Lear?  Shakespeare gives us Kent to contrast with the Fool, and Edgar to contrast with both Kent and the Fool. 

“Literature teaches us about human nature”: this is what that means.  It doesn’t mean something like “Reading King Lear teaches us to listen to others” or “Hamlet teaches us about the danger of indecision,” but rather that we gain a philosophical education through engaging in the seemingly idle exercise of thinking about (great) fictional characters and plots.  Sorry to be so trite as to suggest that “the journey is the end,” but it’s the exercise of thinking seriously about literature that’s what’s most valuable.  Its true lessons do not come in the form of neat little moral maxims (“Listen to others,” “Make up your mind”).  Great literature’s benefit is seen in how much sharper and more sophisticated we become in thinking about human nature, about ourselves and others, after having been guided by Shakespeare.  Shakespeare teaches us how to think about human nature more than he teaches us what to think about it.  That’s his wise counsel.