The character if Edgar

Hey Chaps! I am new to this website, and just want a little bit of help with my King Lear coursework if thats ok!! =] Please can someone help me in telling me how I can develop this piece of writing! :

There are differences in opinion as to whether Lear is the Tragic Hero of the play or whether it may actually be Edgar, or even Cordelia. The two latter characters are both far more ‘heroic’ than Lear is; they defend their country and do not lose their nerve in times of trouble demonstrating their stoic nature, “Give me thy arm. Poor Tom shall lead thee.” This statement shows how Edgar is leading his father both literally by the arm, but also metaphorically on. Through Gloucester’s literal blindness Edgar is able to show him how to “see better” and have faith in the gods. Here, Edgar’s bravery and independence shows; he remains calm and keeps his disguise in order to teach his father the goodness of life and that he should be thankful. By the end of the play Edgar is able to restore the balance of good to the world of King Lear by heroically killing his brother in a replay of the battle of righteousness over corruption. In addition, the frequent change of role and use of disguises help his character to develop and improve. While being Poor Tom, even in the bad state he is in, he finds compassion and develops an understanding of other peoples suffering, “My tears begin to take his part so much”. This appreciation leads him to help, both Lear, and his father whom he becomes guide to showing his progress into becoming a leader, foreshadowing his later title as King.
Alternatively, Edgar mirrors Lear’s own journey throughout King Lear, but unlike a tragic hero he begins as arguably weak and pathetic “on whose foolish honesty /My practices ride easy” and can be seen as the reverse of a tragic hero. His naivety does not allow him to see things as they really are, also a parallel with Lear’s blindness, both character’s becoming victims of their own doing. As a result he is presented as having no virtues or heroism established at the beginning, R. Adams’ remarks on Edgar as “unimpressive”, with many critics complaining he takes on too many roles within the play and displays too many functions. Consequently, Edgar can be seen as merely a plot device for Shakespeare to be able to move his play along, “Edgar is a superfluous character: indeed it would probably be a better play if Gloucester and both his sons were eliminated” (Orwell). Edgar’s overall demeanour only leads to the endings downfall; by leaving him at the end with Albany, both characters having very weak and feeble tendencies, left to run the country into another division. Leaving the audience unsatisfied, especially added to the unimportance of Lear’s death.

ThankYouThankYouThankYou!! =D xx

Here's a couple of comments on your text, which seems well developed already:

Lear and Gloucester are the tragic heroes of the play. Edgar lives happily ever after, while the angelic Cordelia is flawless, her death a travesty. Neither Edgar nor Cordelia lead the tragic existence of Lear and Gloucester after their downfall.

Edgar and Albany, 'with weak and feeble tendencies', are left to run the country following Lear’s barely significant death. As rulers, are they worse than King Lear? (What becomes of noble Kent, the lily-white hero?) Perhaps, we expect far too much from our rulers?

Is gullibility the only flaw in Edgar's character?

ThankYou Gladys - that really helped actually!
=] Wheyyy :)