Little colour is seen throughout the production. The key colours are black, white and red. This can be interpreted in many ways. I believe that the black and white is to show the alternation between good and evil, and the red is a symbol of anger, betrayal and of family, who of course are only bound by blood.
In the first act Lear paces around the family, who are seated at the table, showing domination over the family. The family dynamics of the play are very apparent. This production has a major focus on the characters and their interaction with each other.
Lear is seen in this production, standing on the table yelling and all who were seated have stepped back from him. Eyre has incorporated such items as a crown and whip to show Lear’s power.
Lear’s vocal and emotional power should force themselves onto the audience. The audience must feel the rage and madness going through Lear’s mind. The contrast between Lear in the storm scene and Lear in Act 5 mourning Cordelia’s death develop a sense of journey and the lessons learnt by Lear. I believe that the more contrast provided, the greater impact the production will have on an audience. I have the capability to perform as such.
Performance criticism of King Lear is the semiotics of theatre and how they are manipulated to give different meaning. The expression of phrases, costumes and gestures all contribute to the main idea shown through the play. The many productions of King Lear I have studied, in pursuit to become an actor mature enough in ability and age to play Lear successfully, have given me an open mind to the capabilities of the play.
Lear’s power transforms throughout the play. In Act 1 Lear is strong. When we see Cordelia challenge that power, “I cannot heave/my heart into my mouth.” (1:1:91) all sense of absolute power is taken from him. In Act 3, Lear orders the storm, an uncontrollable force of nature, to destroy the Earth, the delusions of power become apparent.
Throughout the play, Lear transforms from a responsible adult to some kind of childishness with the storm scene being the pivotal point between the two, allowing Lear to gain greater knowledge of himself and of the world around him.
As the fool bluntly states "Thou shouldst not have been old till thou hadst been wise." (1:5:38)
I do find the performance criticism of King Lear the most persuasive of all.
His madness seen primarily in Act 3 is his feeling stripped of all that had made him who he was. He has no sense of identity, and is back to the “elemental man”, the man with nothing but what nature has provided him with. With nothing more than this, Lear vulnerability begins to be more apparent.
Lear’s status has created security, without this, Lear is vulnerable to the world outside. In Act 3, the storm scene, we see Lear stripped of titles, family and respect, and the elemental bare-assed man is exposed. He strips himself down to plain humanity, and relates himself to Poor Tom. He adopts Tom’s vulnerability and in doing so, creates an understanding of humanity that could not have gained in his castle living as a king.
Lear, as a king, must have a voice of authority. Throughout the play Lear uses a spectrum of emotions and a tone that corresponds to it. Act 1 sees Lear as a powerful leader, dividing his kingdom into three, passing his power onto “younger strengths” (1:1:40)
The emotional instability Lear obtains through his daughters mistreating him as their father, begins in Act 1, where Lear banishes his favourite daughter.
Hysteria, anxiety, depression, obsessive behaviour
Obsessed megalomania delusions of power.
Some productions of King Lear show King Lear and Cordelia at the beginning together, giving a greater contrast and unexpectedness when Lear dismisses Cordelia from his kingdom.
The political criticism of King Lear I find very interesting. The injustice and inequalities in the society are brought to the surface and forces audiences to think their own social context and even bring about positive changes to that context. This criticism is one that shows the belief that political power, historical and social forces are the cause of tragedy.
In 1965, Jan Kott, a Polish critic challenged earlier criticism and argued that history is the cause of tragedy, more so than fate or the gods.
The Brook production of King Lear in 1962 was greatly influenced by Kott’s argument that “All bonds…are broken. Social order…will crumble into dust.” Cruelty is dominating, and redemption or affirmation is hopeless.
“I am a man more sinned against than sinning." (3:2:58)
”As flies to wanton boys are we to th’e gods;/they kill us for their sport.”
(Glouster 4:1:37)
Charles Lamb, an early 19th century critic, said King Lear is “beyond all art”, and I must agree, as King Lear is one of the most valued of all Shakespeare’s plays, and has been read and received in many different cultural and historical contexts. Although Lamb was not correct in saying that “Lear is essentially impossible to be represented on a stage.” I strongly believe, as an actor, that with the director’s clear instruction as to the ideas he or she wish to make visible to the audience, King Lear is the most playable of all plays, and will continue to be replayed, and re-valued for centuries to come.