As I sat in seat number K47 at "The Crucible" in Sheffield watching one of Shakespeare's greatest plays, I couldn't help comparing the character King Lear with the current US President. Both are old men in decline, losing the plot.
Lear likes flattery and that is why he asks his three daughters to publicly declare how much they love him before dividing up his kingdom. In a similar manner, the current US President seems to enjoy fawning declarations of loyalty and admiration from his cabinet appointees , underlings and visitors.
When Cordelia refuses to play the flattery game, Lear rages and banishes her. He does the same to a loyal nobleman - The Earl of Kent when he attempts to offer sound advice. Of course the current US President has a long history of firing high profile members of his administration when they appear to challenge him or veer from the path of absolute devotion.
Both men are narcissistic and too puffed up with self-belief to listen to voices of reason. Their misplaced pride leads them to believe that only they know best. It's effectively them against the world and so they scorn wise counsel.
Lear contends that he has been unfairly treated, claiming that he is "more sinned against than sinning". This is echoed in the behaviour and claims of the current US President. No politician in history has been treated as unfairly as he has and the "fake news" outlets that pose tricky questions are of course out to get him. He is being victimised - at least in his demented imagination.
I first read "King Lear" at the age of sixteen. I studied and wrote about it at university. I taught it to A level students and I have previously seen it in performance on both stage and screen so it is a play I know very well - better than any other Shakespeare play in fact.
The production at The Crucible had many fine qualities and showcased several talented actors but, unlike some reviewers, I was not entirely convinced by Ian McDiarmid's portrayal of Lear himself. It seemed somehow restrained and flimsy. He never really dominated the auditorium, raging upon the heath as I believe Shakespeare intended the character to do.
However, physical contortionist Max Revell was brilliant as The Fool and I was also impressed with the actors who played Gloucester, Kent and Regan. In addition, I admired the minimalist set and the effective use of lighting. During the interval, tubs of soil were scattered all over the stage and quite literally, they added to the play's bleak, earthy atmosphere where lightning flashes over the benighted heath.
Finally, back to the current, increasingly demented, US President:-
Apparently narcissists and sociopaths have been around for a long time.
ReplyDeletePlaying Lear is a rite of passage for any aging male lead actor in the theatre. Just like Hamlet is for younger male leads.
ReplyDeleteYou always come up with a good comparison of things
ReplyDeleteThe only thing I know about King Lear is the name.
ReplyDeleteYou're a better man than I am, YP.* Lear and Othello are two Shakespeare plays that I don't think I can really face up to, I think because they are so pregnant from the outset with the terrible end.
ReplyDelete[*Kipling reference footnoted in light of K's declining literary profile.]
I think that's what a modern theatre production is meant to do, make the audience think and draw parallels to their lives or the world around them. It probably helped that you know this play so well; I wonder what someone's take would be who has never read or studied it at school.
ReplyDelete