Ian McKellen: Understanding King Lear, the Character
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 вер 2024
- After a Royal Shakespeare Company production, a world tour, a run in London's West End, and a studio filming of Shakespeare's "King Lear," Ian McKellen explains his understanding of the title character.
I was an English major and studied Shakespeare as an undergraduate. But what McKellen says about Shakespeare is so much more illuminating and insightful than what I heard in class as an undergraduate.
I would pay anything to have him explain all of Shakespeare like I never (ever) heard it talked about so well in any of my classes at school. It’s a true gift he has. Just got back from watching the National Theatre performance and I just stopped ugly crying-and it ended nearly a half-hour ago. His performance is just everything and he’s so gifted.
So many years since having this play, and we will have marvellous insights such as this. The world has changed, people haven't. Our ego, sexuality, decryption, loosing devine belief are still the same. I would like to see other explanations of Lear as wonderful as his. From Syria, from India, from South Africa as modern interpretations of Lear. And as many interpretations already there.. thank you for explaining us and our humanities reaction to King Lear.
Excellent! I didn't get or go along with everything he said, but those last thoughts about Lear's marital back-story and Cordelia were really good.
Very likeable and impressive man.
What a wonderful actor - one of the finest. My opinion of King Lear is that when I was young I thought he was a ridiculous old fool, but now I’m old I see the character more sympathetically!
Lear could have been a bully, but he was also capable of inspiring the strongest, undying loyalty, as evidenced by Kent and Cordelia.
I think that would be determined by how you interpreted it. I like your insight, though.
I think Cordelia and Kent's characteristics is what kept them loyal towards King Lear, even with the bullying from Lear, Cordelia and Kent did not take it as Lear intended them to take it but rather seen Lears ignorance and were prepared to go through great lengths to somehow wake him up and show him the reality of the situation, this is love for Lear, to me its just a display and portrayal of both Kent and Cordelia's personality and character traits
Senility - yes! That is also the way I interpreted Polonius in "Hamlet".
Interestingly, Harold Bloom, in Shakespeare: Invention of the Human, notes that Lear at his most unlovable is really loved. It's a sensible observation.
Tom Palmer I
Divine right to rule
You know, I haven't heard guilgued(?) I butchered that spelling, my name's Ricky bobby, but despite not hearing John's interpretations, and only in passing with Olivier, it still seems like Sir Ian might be the undisputed master, per one estimate. He so clearly with subtle erudition will completely dismantle any of the canon in such a way that can enthrall both the literaratti as well as non theatre types. It's fantastic. Certainly a master, still short of the bard himself, I suppose, but damn he's good.
I just read your comment and it put to mind my favourite production of Lear on UA-cam.
It's a BBC production done back in the 90s, so it's audio only but the actors shine for it.
Sir John Gielgud plays Lear! Give it a listen.
Should you be curious of other productions, there's also one which has James Earl Jones in the lead which also has Raul Julia playing Edmund and Rene Aberjois (Odo of Star Trek DS 9) playing his brother Edgar. Their fight scene is fabulous.
Now that Sir Ian has played Lear, when do we get to see Sir Patrick play him?
+Jennifer Schillig You should check out King of Texas. It's an Americanised version based on King Lear with Patrick Stewart as Lear
I missed it when it was on TNT. Must hunt it up one of these days.
It must also be about the sins of the Father. His ill-treatment of others, e.g., needing to be praised, becomes what is dished out to him at the most inopportune time - his old age.
Michael Chekov talks of King Lear
whos here from ms. alonzi's class
What a pleasure to see how one of the great Shakespearean actors thinks his way into a role. To take just one example, the idea that Lear wears two wedding rings is stunningly simple but so powerful as a way of explaining why his relationships with Regan / Goneril and Cordelia (and why the relationships between the three daughters) are as they are. Utterly absorbing. What an actor!!
I saw Ian McKellen play Lear in Chichester last night, and it was genuinely one of the great theatrical experiences of my life. It was different to the RSC production ten years ago: it was a 300-seat theatre, which allowed him to play it like a TV performance in some ways - much smaller. He barely raised his voice throughout. It was the only time I've seen the play and been genuinely moved. A great production all round, but a truly definitive performance from Sir Ian that I'll always remember.
X Y that’s the one I just saw tonight via the world broadcast from that performance. I wasn’t ready....😭
I envy you. I couldn’t get a hold of any tickets and I’m gutted that I may never get the opportunity to see this legend live ever again
@@soldierside365Hey, get to his "Player Kings" (Henry IV 1&2) if you can! Good luck!
there's just something fascinating in the way McKellen speaks that really draws me into what he's discussing
Drawing the parallel with Richard the Second is absolutely on the ball.
I didn't know McKellan did Richard II, never heard of that I'd love to find it if it's on video.
I am playing king lear in a play at a local play house and this really helped and added to what I already created about the character
I could listen to Sir Ian McKellan talk about anything, but there's something so absolutely mesmerizing about him talking about the craft of acting and his insights into characters.
I love his ideas for Lear's backstory.
Lear might indeed "lose his faith and discover his humanity" through the change in his relationship with the divine, but that's also part of the paradox which Lear himself brings about: if he does indeed rule by divine right, he is only the steward of the kingdom - it is not "his" to divide or to separate authority from responsibility within it. This is Lear's tragic flaw: he considers himself to be synonymous with the state rather than just one link in a pattern of divinely-sanctioned succession, and he allows his ego to interfere with the natural order, with disastrous consequences.
Malt454 sounds familiar.
It was probably pretty much standard behavior among monarchs of the time for them to believe themselves as the embodiment of the state. A monarch who didn't do this was probably a rarity.
@@tompalmer5986 - Perhaps, but if Lear is the embodiment of the state, the separation he wants to create between authority and responsibility within the state parallels the separation he wants between authority and responsibility for himself - he wants the perks without the work - and that imbalance spells trouble. There is a difference between being the head of state and believing that the entire country is your personal property.
Lear surrenders all his kingly authority, and because of that he is helpless when his daughters turn on him. I don't see him as an immoral man. A truly immoral man would have kept his powers and used the state as an instrument of personal power. He was foolish, yes. immoral, no. Probably the majority of monarchs in history did not worry about such messy distinctions between authority invested by the state and that of a king. They probably just did what they had to do to stay on the throne and alive, with varying degrees of morality among them.
@@tompalmer5986- Lear abdicates his kingly responsibility; he really only wants to surrender authority to the degree it suits him - he'll allow others to call the shots... so long as he agrees with the shots they call.
Lear is far more foolish than evil, more sinned against than sinning on a personal level, but Lear tries to have his cake and eat it too and, in so doing, puts the state in the hands of evil as the result of an exercise in personal ego and convenience, and that's his offense.
It's easy to see the play, like many of Shakespeare's others, as just a hopped up family drama of the rich and powerful, but legitimate political order and authority is a real focus in all the plays - which is why none of them ends in chaos for the state, no matter how they end for individuals. Even in Hamlet, with the stage littered with corpses, Fortinbras suddenly appears on the scene to inherit, not usurp, the crown from a dying Hamlet, and so the state is preserved... even as almost no one else is.
The point in Lear's world isn't that he is or isn't better than the world's real rulers, but that he violates rules of implied divine order which are very real within the context of the play. It's that violation which sets events in motion, and events will not stop until that order is restored.
Why do you give up ALL that you have? To WHOM do you give it up? And what do you expect or want in return? These are the first simple question for a Lear. As far as the past, there ARE no mommies in Shakespeare who are prominent except for Gertrude. Mothers are in exile, or dead. Something to help actors/directors out is history - The queen who should have been queen FROM THE BEGINNING is Cordelia/Elizabeth...Goneril&Regan are the ones who WERE, but for just reasons were gotten rid of...Mary&Edward were older than Elizabeth, and she endured a lot before she became Queen. Lear brings Cordelia out dead, but it IS a coronation! It is HIS blessing upon his daughter to rule after him. Quite simple...and I do not agree with the later re-writing rendering Cordelia still alive, which adds up to sentimental nonsense.
Holy crap! That is the best insight into the play I've ever heard! I didn't get it when I was younger and dumber! But now I get it!
You know...I COULD chalk it up to age...but I have met many who are both older AND more foolish than I. The more I think about it, though, the sadder the prospect seems. To whom can I look up?
No, you don't.
i don't know why this point never was made that most of male characters especially the higher ups like' kings' were not sound in their minds...they suffered from tremendous phobias fears and demons and other mental conditions. you can find them all there. Othello, Macbeth it is medical fact that as we grow older every beings strength whether mental or physical reduce tremendously as our harmons and other nurturing natural elements in body decline... mental agility can remain for longer time but eventually that gets clouded too, clouded judgments have done far more harm that is why Governance best age starts from mid 40's[ you have lived a life by then] and ought to end by mid to late 70's after that is consultation work...
A worthy and wonderfully unpretentious discussion.
Lear has a strong theological theme. Most of Shakespeare's audience lived, not in a theocracy, but in a world in which the Church dominated so many aspects of life. Thus, Lear's pagan world was written to be chaotic and filled with misery.
Absolutely fascinating-I could never understand WS without eloquent explanations such as this. Bravo bravo bravo maestro!!!
We Love the Bard
He explains it so well.
this guy is more majestic then Lear himself
how the way he articulates and sums up King Lear is amazing. I havent heard an explanation as good as this from any teacher ive had.
I think it safe to say that I will pass my literature class because of him and this video. :D
Is this from an original interview or is he explaining himself in an almost blog-style manner? If an interview, does anybody know who the interviewer is?
Dear Sir Ian, you are the best teacher of Shakespeare.
Howl, howl, howl!
Seems Ian would make a great Lear. Yes, I'm new to this.
"In losing his faith [King Lear] he's discovered his humanity." So very profound, Sir Ian.
Michael Horden in the 1982 BBC version, was special.
Both great. Olivier is my favorite.
A lovely and unpretentious actor, always a pleasure to hear him discuss his craft with such lucidity and insight.
this damn take home test for english
+wolfcrimesful lol who is this do u go to D'Youville?
+Banjo Adejobi really Banjo?
-.- who is this???
The Real Lear lived in a hut around 600BC and was a tribal leader, not a king.
GreatBigRanz ok
GreatBigRanz k
How enlightening it is to hear one of the greatest exponents of Lear share his own insights and beliefs about Lear. This video is a treasure.
who is ian mckellen? and why is gandalf not wearing his robe?!
Lear had Alzheimer's.
excellent!
Awesome man. xxx
I love him so much. He is such a brilliant actor .
I am no scholar, but I wonder whether Shakespeare was using his plays as social commentary/criticism. I suspect he probably was. Based on this analysis of Lear, it is clear that Shakespeare probably had a problem with the idea that Kings and Queens were able to rightfully claim the throne via "divine right."
S Reilly Oh I'm sure that he was a social commentator no doubt!
S Reilly it actually has been noted time and time again that Shakespeare wanted to discuss social matters and even voice his own opinion via his writing and stageplay
There is actually a lot of of historical theory concerning this matter. Especially because Shakespeare’s King Lear is so departed from the works that it is based upon. “The True Chronicle of King Lear..”, which Shakespeare based his play on, was a comedy. It had a happy ending. Shakespeares change to it being a tragedy is significant in indicating the commentary he wanted to express, especially because this play was written after Elizabeth’s reign, which is important in noting the relationship of divine right or rulers and how Shakespeare expressed this before and after Elizabeth’s reign. Contrary to its popularity for contemporary audiences, however, King Lear was not well received during its original run. In fact, it only really gain popularity in the twentieth century
Look into New Historicist Stephen Greenblatt and his commentary on Shakespeare’s Lear. Tyrant is a really fascinating book.
Pleath Sir McKellen, teach me Shakespeare and replace my teachers ! I have never so much understood a character..!
so brilliant
Wish I could see Sir Ian on stage.
ian is a real poet
What a great Bloke to have a pint with in Witchita Falls, Kansas, USA.
Isn’t he just amazing?
A whole bunch NOT about Cordelia. Weird.
Much to do about nothing.
Is he drunk? 😮
cute
King rich
This video is an oof
GANDALF! 😄