Kent

A flash banner.

In the Globe Theatre Company's production of King Lear, Kent was played by Bruce Alexander.

About Bruce Alexander

Bruce has appeared in many RSC productions – All's Well That Ends Well, Cymbeline, Twelfth Night, The Taming of the Shrew, Troilus and Cressida, As You Like It, Merry Wives of Windsor and Henry VIII. Bruce plays the regular role of Superintendent Mullet in the television drama A Touch of Frost, while his film work includes The Innocents, A Christmas Carol and The Thing About Vince.

Click on the numbered links to follow Bruce's journey as he creates and plays the character of Kent in the Globe Theatre.

Bruce Alexander - Character Notes 1

These comments are the actor's thoughts or ideas about the part as s/he goes through the rehearsal process – they are simply his/her own interpretations and frequently change as the rehearsal process progresses.

The cast of King Lear has been finding out about each other this week and the common ground that we share in the play. We are using the Quarto edition of the play whereas the Folio is most usually used for productions. It is also the text that is used for most editions of the play.

The most important thing about working at the Globe is about finding out about the space. Usually, when you rehearse a play, you feel that the stage is something that can ‘take care’ of itself. However, the Globe is such an unusual space and Shakespeare's plays were written for playhouses of this sort. It is very unusual for modern actors to have to grapple with idea of having to tell a story for a particular space.

We are all thinking about how this works. There are certain things that the stage dictates about the play. Usually, when you see a Shakespeare play, it is like a picture being presented to the audience. There is then a sense of distance between the actor and the audience, and the production presents a carefully designed picture. There is a huge scope for design at the Globe, but the focus is really on the words themselves and the cast's ability to tell the story of the play. At the Globe you realise that your job, as an actor, is to be a storyteller, not to be part of a moving picture.

One of the very first things that Mark (Rylance, Artistic Director) said to our company was that the audience of the early 17-century went to hear the plays rather than see them. The word ‘audience’ comes from the Latin word ‘alderi’, which means to listen or to hear.

One of the things I remember from my gap year was a visit to North Africa, and Algeria. I remember coming across a man in a market who was being paid to tell a story. That was his job, he was a storyteller. He unrolled his carpet, which was his stage, and stood on it. He told his story to the crowd who just naturally stood around him in the shape of a horseshoe. He got everyone involved in his performance and it was terribly exciting. I didn’t understand Arabic, so I didn’t understand what was going on, but I knew that there was something compelling and wonderful about it.

The same thing happens at the Globe. You have the audience in the shape of a horseshoe around you. On other stages, you are concentrating entirely on playing a scene, allowing the audience to ‘eaves drop’ into a situation. It is as if the audience looking through a keyhole. However, at the Globe, the performance is more about coming up to the audience, involving them and being bold.

When you stand on Globe stage it seems huge and can be daunting. You are much higher up than you would think. As a member of the audience, in the yard and on the seats, the place becomes a very intimate space. As an actor I feel I will need to draw the audience into my character. To do that I will need to ensure that I tell the story of the play.

I have seen King Lear before, but had never been involved in it. I think that the character of Kent seems to be a good man, quite boring, like everybody's favourite uncle. I have been asking lots of questions about the role such as what happens to Kent, where does he go after he is banished? Actually, it is when you start reading the play that you begin to realise what an amazing journey Kent has and what a startlingly ‘oddball’ of a brave man he is! He just stands up and defies Lear, an autocratic monarch, and tells him that he is wrong.

During the 17th century, that would have been like inviting execution. However, Kent is given the next worse thing to a death sentence, he is banished. That does not mean that you go and have a holiday in the Seychelles, it actually means that you are outside of the law. It means that anyone, who may hate Kent, for any personal or private reasons, can stick a knife in his throat if they wish to do so. Lear is saying that Kent is outside his law and protection. Therefore, Kent goes away in order to be safe. When he comes back in disguise it is an amazingly dangerous thing to do, because he is ‘fair game’ for anyone. And of course he cannot reveal who he is, because Albany, Cornwall, Goneril, Regan or anyone else who ‘has it in’ for Kent could take this opportunity to murder him.

We have started to look at costume. Kent has got to be established as an Earl in the beginning of the play, equal in status to Gloucester. He is possibly one step down from the dukes, who through their marriages with Lear's daughters run the kingdom. When Kent returns, he says that he will change his voice and he says that he "raz’d my likeness" (I think most people would say that he shaved his beard off). I am thinking about the type of disguise he should adopt but feel at the moment that probably the best disguise would be to appear to be from another class, no one then would associate Lear's new companion with Kent.

I am working on the basis that when Kent returns to the stage dressed as somebody completely different and says that he is Kent, the audience are not sure of his purpose. If he were a really nice man, which he is at heart, you would know instantly that he has come back to protect Lear. However, I thought it would be quite interesting if it flickered through the minds of the audience (if they don’t know the play) that Kent may have returned to take revenge on Lear for exiling him. I think that we should try and keep the ideas of rebellion, revolution and anarchy predominant throughout the play. As Lear abuses his power, anarchy does break out. I don’t think that an actor or audience should start off thinking that Kent is a ‘pushover’ and that he will just be sweet natured.

To prepare myself for the role, I have been reading the play again and again, trying to fully understand what it means. As an actor you are a detective. You have to get to grips with the script and try to find out what everything in the storyline means. All of the answers are in the text.

We have also been talking about various items of research. I started thinking about what happens to Kent and looking at the stocks scene. Stocks are actually a very violent form of restraint. When you were in the stocks you were completely paralysed, and anyone could do anything they wanted to you, from throwing a tomato to cutting your ears off. It is a way of imposing law by humiliation. Through rehearsals we are finding out what a dangerous world the world of the play is, there are so many potential different life or death situations.

What is tricky, is when people know the play beforehand and come with preconceived ideas about the play and what it might be about. That makes it much more difficult for us as actors to tell the story. What we have got to do is grab the audience's attention and make them experience the story in a way that they never have before. The production can’t be different just for the sake of being different; it must serve the story. It must be so immediate that people think that it is the first time they have seen the play.

Activities

Telling the story

One of Bruce's main concerns is to ensure that the story of the play is clear to the audience. What do you think are the most important aspects of the story of King Lear? Try either to summarise the story in 50 words or tell the story of the play to a partner in only 60 seconds.

Kent's Journey

Actors often talk about their character's journey through the play i.e. how they change from the beginning of the play to the end and the key events that effect them. What do you think is Kent's journey through the play? Write a list of events with an explanation of how you think they might effect Kent. Try to give textual evidence to support your ideas. Send your versions of Kent's journey to Bruce so that he can compare them with his own.

Disguise

After his exile Kent returns to Lear in disguise. Bruce is not sure what form this disguise should take. How do you think Kent should disguise himself? (You can include use of props, costume and accent). Make sure you have evidence from the text to support your suggestions. Send your ideas to Bruce.

Is Kent wholly good?

Bruce would like the audience to be momentarily unsure of Kent's motives for returning from exile. Can you find any textual evidence to suggest Kent may not be a completely good character?

Back to top

Bruce Alexander - Character Notes 2

These comments are the actor's thoughts or ideas about the part as s/he goes through the rehearsal process – they are simply his/her own interpretations and change frequently as the rehearsal process progresses.

The company has been sitting together and discussing what individual lines in the text mean and how they fit into the play as a whole. I have been exploring Kent's function in the play. Discussions with the entire company are not specific to a particular character; therefore this focus on Kent has been quite general.

In my research, I have found that the portrayal of Kent in the Quarto (which is what we are using) is different from his portrayal in the Folio. I think that this is because the language and phrases in each are slightly different. In the Folio, the character of Kent begins to diminish; however in the Quarto he appears to maintain a greater presence.

An interesting point emerged from the discussion work. Kent is the only character, in the play, who does not have family. There are two main families in King Lear: Lear, his three daughters, and their husbands, and Gloucester and his two sons. Oswald and the Fool are the only other characters who do not have families. However, they are both members of a household, or are closely aligned to a household. In the play, there is no mention of Kent having a wife or children. Thus, to an extent, Kent has nothing to lose when he is exiled; yet he still returns through his loyalty and his love for Lear.

Kent has a dual role when he returns. The first is as a carer for Lear, the importance of this role increases as Lear's health degenerates. The second is a political role as he helps France and Cordelia.

There are many different ways in which we rehearse. Currently, the actors who are part of a particular scene sit together and read the scene through and then do a line-by-line analysis. We ask questions about the scene such as:

  • What is the meaning behind the scene?
  • What do the lines mean?
  • What is the aim and the function of the actor/character in that particular scene?

We have been exploring one of the ‘storm’ scenes in this way. I am in four of the storm scenes. This particular ‘storm’ scene (Act III Scene IV) is when Kent first takes Lear to the hovel. Kent has been solicitous towards Lear, and is trying his hardest to get him to enter the hovel. It is at this point that Edgar appears disguised as a madman. Lear blames Edgar's madness on the way that his daughters have treated him, alluding to his own situation. Kent says that Edgar has no daughters. After saying this, Kent does not have any lines for about three pages.

I do not understand why Kent suddenly becomes quiet and so we have been discussing this. We have speculated that the reason for his silence is that Lear is so outraged at Kent's response (that he has no daughters) that Lear says "Death, traitor! Nothing could have subdu’d nature, To such a lowness but his unkind daughters", and he hits Kent, knocking him out. It is when Kent comes to that he asks Lear, "How fares your Grace?" This is the first time that Kent calls Lear "your Grace" while he is in disguise (he always calls Lear "my Lord"). I think that he says these words in his own voice, rather than any voice assumed as a disguise.

I have been exploring the nature of Kent's disguise. What costume does he wear? What voice and accent does he assume? Before Kent leaves, his costume is similar to Gloucester's costume. This is because they are of equal status as they are both Earls. When he returns, he is disguised as someone of a ‘lower’ social status and he calls himself Cius.

Kent is a good man. However, the audience cannot simply be told this, they must discover it for themselves as the play progresses. There are other dimensions to Kent's character. He is independent and brave. This is displayed in Act I Scene V, when he asks Lear to employ him. I think that Kent is also a ‘military’ man. He is brusque and so perhaps he could be disguised as a NCO. Barry (Kyle, Master of Play) however does not particularly like this idea!

We received the ‘cut’ version of the play before rehearsals began. Since then, a few pieces of the text have been reinstated. As we continue with the rehearsal process, other cuts may be suggested or other ‘swaps’ made. I recently suggested a swap of lines for Act II Scene II, when Kent and Oswald have been parted. After Oswald says, "I am scarce in breath, my Lord" my line was "No marvel, you have so bestirr’d your valour" and the following line, "You cowardly Rascal", had been cut. However, I thought that the point would be clearer if the line was changed to, "No marvel, you cowardly rascal."

What effect does the nature of Kent's disguise have on his character? This is a complicated issue in the plot, which I have related to certain events in the play. Lear sends Kent to Gloucester's house with the letter to Regan. When Kent is in the stocks he explains that he went to see Regan, and delivered the letter (as the King's messenger) and was elbowed out of the way by someone delivering Regan a letter from Goneril. Regan is happier to receive Goneril's letter then her father’s. As soon as Regan reads her Goneril's letter she and her husband go to see Gloucester, telling Kent to follow on. I think that Kent is angry to be treated in this manner, but because of his disguise cannot express this.

I would like the students to consider the following points: Why does Kent let his emotions over-ride his political sense? Why did Kent get into a fight with Oswald? I think that one of the answers to these two questions is - the element of disguise. When you wear a mask, you become a different person and therefore you can act out of character. A disguise can extend or limit certain parts of your personality. Kent may also act this way because he has a sense of security and safety due to his disguise.

Masks and disguises effect everyone. This can in seen with clowns. They have a particular persona, but you are aware that they are different in reality. I read about an article Graham Norton in the newspaper. To me he seems very bubbly and outrageous, however the article said that he was actually a very quiet and restrained man. Kent, like Graham Norton, becomes a different person when he is required to present an image of himself to others.

The company has been considering the staging of the storm. In other ‘regular’ theatres, there is always an amazing soundtrack (of thunder, rain) and so the staging purely becomes about turning knobs on the sound-system so that the actors can be heard. In the Globe this cannot be done we often perform in broad daylight, on a sunny afternoon. Barry had a wonderful idea of the company creating the storm with our voices. We have to ‘act’ the storm, rather then rely on effects. We have to think about what would happen to our bodies in a storm. What would we do if there were high winds or hard rain? A picture and a feel of a storm must be created.

Activities

Bruce's List of Questions

Look again at Bruce's bullet point list of questions. Go through a scene or sections of a scene of your choice and try to answer Bruce's questions. Send your answers to Bruce so he can compare them with his own.

Quarto Vs Folio

The company is working from the quarto edition of the play. Sometimes this varies from the folio. Look at Kent's speech in the first storm scene which begins ‘Sir, I do know you’. Read it in the folio edition (most editions of the play are based on the folio) and in the quarto version supplied with this Character Notes.

Kent:
Sir, I do know you,
And dare upon the warrant of my art
Commend a dear thing to you. There is division,
Although as yet the face of it be covered
With mutual cunning, ’twixt Albany and Cornwall;
But true it is. From France there comes a power
Into this scattered kingdom, who already,
Wise in our negligence, have secret feet
In some of our best ports, and are at point
To show their open banner. Now to you:
If on my credit you dare build so far
To make your speed to Dover, you shall find
Some that will thank you, making just report
Of how unnatural and bemadding sorrow
The King hath cause to plain.
I am a gentleman of blood and breeding,
And from some knowledge and assurance offer
This office to you.

What are the differences? Which version do you prefer and why? Would you combine parts of the speech from the quarto with parts from the folio? Send your ideal version of the speech to Bruce.

Disguise

Bruce is exploring the type of disguise he should use for Kent. How do you think Kent would disguise himself? How do you think Kent's chosen disguise might effect his character? Refer back to the text and try to find evidence to support your ideas.

Back to top

Bruce Alexander - Character Notes 3

These comments are the actor's thoughts or ideas about the part as s/he goes through the rehearsal process – they are simply his/her own interpretations and change frequently as the rehearsal process progresses.

We had a run-through of the play.The run-through was very useful as it gave us the opportunity to see the overall story. The second run was marvellous and quite strong, but because there are 24 scenes it almost became 24 single act performances. Everyone was individually performing their own bits, but it will slowly come together. The first have of the run-through was 2h 5m and the second half was over 1h.

At this stage of the rehearsal process we have understood what is happening in individual scenes, now we have to look at the play as a whole and find the function of our characters. What is required of the part? Why is Kent in the play? This is a good question because it is more specific to understanding the function of Kent. It is not enough to think that Kent is a good man or a worthy man, I have to try and find his purpose.

In Act I Scene I, Lear is hurt because he thinks that Cordelia has rejected him. How far does Kent consider how Lear may be feeling? Kent cannot prejudge if he will antagonise Lear with what he says. He does not want to confront Lear or bluntly say ‘you are wrong’, instead he is trying to teach him and help him. I think that, ultimately, this is the act of a good man.

I have been thinking about when Kent returns in disguise. I have changed my mind about the nature of the disguise. Previously I thought that Kent might be dressed as a NCO and assume a cockney accent, however I do not think so anymore because his character is not that abrupt. As Kent is a blunt and plain speaking man I thought that I would try a Yorkshire accent, but this did not seem right. Finally we decided on a West Country accent, which will be assumed in Scene IV.

As we have progressed in the rehearsal process I think that the nature of the disguise has come to play a smaller element in the play. There is never a point in the play that suggests that Kent's ‘mask’ might be slipping. If Shakespeare had wanted it to be played like that then he would have written in. Kent holds on to his disguise and the other characters accept it.

I have only realised this after seeing the play as a whole, but before the run-through I was too concerned with accents and costumes. This is not what it is all about. I have to concentrate about what Kent is doing in a scene rather than who he is meant to be. This can be seen in Act I Scene VII in the confrontation between Kent and Oswald. Kent says a list of insults to Oswald and at this point you see that he is not so ‘good’ or ‘kind’. It could be said that Kent acts like this because Oswald has insulted Lear, this may justify his behaviour. I think that the important part in this scene is portraying how Kent is feeling about Oswald rather then him worrying about his disguise slipping.

I think that the stage is frightening when it is empty because it looks so huge. I have already said a few lines on stage when we were exploring the ‘storm’ scene. We are not trying to create a realistic meteorological storm, so we will not be having thunder rolls, or other associated noises. Instead there will be unsettling sounds, like human voices wailing to create the effect of the wind. At the beginning of the storm scene both Roger (McEnry, Gentleman/Curan) and I have long speeches. It seemed very scary to have to do these speeches, however saying the lines in context, and experiencing the acoustics of the Globe space, made the speeches seem manageable and possible to do.

During the run-through, tour groups were passing through the theatre. This was sometimes difficult because we were experimenting with different ideas and techniques, and so it could make you feel vulnerable. On the other hand, it can be very positive to have an audience.

I have had some lovely sessions on verse with Giles (Block, Master of Verse). He encouraged me to carry on with the way I was working. Kent's speech is interesting, as the lines always end in full stops. I think this shows that he is always straightforward and to the point. He seems to be 100% sure of what he says. This can be seen in Act I Scene IV when Kent is asking King Lear for a job:

"I can keep honest counsel, ride, run, mar a curious
tale in telling it, and deliver a plain message bluntly;
that which ordinary man are fit for, I am qualified in,
and the best of me is diligence."

There are points in the storm that Kent seems to be lost like the other characters and this is reflected in his speech. On four occasions he repeats "Good my Lord, enter." I think that it is exasperating for him because he wants to help Lear to get under cover, but Lear is not listening, as he almost seems suicidal.

Activities

Creating the storm

There are no lighting effects or electronic sound effects in the Globe to help the actors create the storm. How might the company then do this? Re read some of Bruce's ideas and in-groups experiment with your own.

Back to top

Bruce Alexander - Character Notes 4

These comments are the actor's thoughts or ideas about the part as s/he goes through the rehearsal process – they are simply his/her own interpretations and change frequently as the rehearsal process progresses.

We have gone from technical rehearsals to performances. Previously we had been running through the play in its entirety, getting the general feel of the story, but once the technical rehearsals began the play was taken apart again for various reasons. I began to think that I would never remember all of the technical points. You can feel swamped by the technical details and that is when you lose site of the play. By the end of the technical week you feel like you cannot remember the first scene.

After the tech we had the dress run. At first this is always very shaky and difficult. Then, slowly, you begin to reclaim the play and all of the emotions that go with it. Everything slows down because people start dwelling on moments, trying to recreate the feelings they had in rehearsals.

The first preview was a good show, but two things became clear after it had finished. Firstly, it was played in a very safe way. People seemed to be ‘tip-toeing’ around being very careful to get things right, which was not good considering the nature of the play (as I think King Lear is a play with huge emotions). Secondly, the play was very long because people were being so careful.

The second preview was also long, but it was a bit better than the first. Barry (Kyle, Master of Play) has a saying, which he kept saying to us: "Let the dogs out". He is encouraging us to get back in the flow of the story and the extraordinary things that happen to the people in it. I think that we have to forget that we know what will happen next, and not to anticipate what is to follow.

At the next preview, everyone got the message that the play had to be faster. Indeed, we lost about fifteen minutes off the end of the show. Nothing was cut out; it was just due to the sheer pace that we performed, because we had got back into the rhythm. The play is now running at 1h 49/50m for the first part and 1h 6m for the second half.

King Lear is a huge play. In some cases the audience stand in the yard for nearly two hours before there is an interval. When should the breaks come? The play is such a ‘roller-coaster’; it is difficult to decide where to put it. We could put the interval before the storm, but this would detract from this sequence of scenes. So the interval has to come after the storm scenes. The first scene of the second half of the play is the ‘Dover’ scene. This marks the next part in the story, which is more political and personal to Lear. It is a change of gear in the story. I hope that the audience will take this huge journey on board.

Kent's role in the second half takes on a different quality. In the first half he takes on the role of the Lear's carer, a job that no one else wants to do, however the Fool takes his place in Lear's affection and attention. In the second half, Kent's role becomes more political with his involvement in the French army.

In a ‘regular’ theatre a play like King Lear is clearly categorised as a tragedy, and from that you can expect it to be very serious. At the Globe the dynamic can be slightly different as the audience is involved with the story and there is more love and response to different situations. The audience sees more of the quirky side to people's behaviour. Sometimes moments that can be very shocking, at a conventional theatre, are not at the Globe. There are many entrances made from the yard, with some horseplay from the knights who run through the audience. The fact that the play is happening all around the theatre keeps things alive. I join Lear from the yard in the storm scene. There is no signal that I will appear, and I have to yell at the top of my voice "Who's there?" The audience standing in front of me always jumps in the air out of surprise!

The circular shape of the theatre makes you turn around to face all directions, as you are aware of people surrounding you. However, there is no scene where the audience can see everything due to the pillars and other objects that restrict the view. I think that the audience gets the feeling that they are eavesdropping on the events on the stage.

Activities

Intervals

Bruce has been thinking about the placing of the interval in King Lear. He feels although there is approximately 2 hours of action before the interval it is structurally in the correct place. Re read Bruce's notes on the above. Where would you place the interval in King Lear and why?

Back to top

Bruce Alexander - Character Notes 5

These comments are the actor's thoughts or ideas about the part as s/he goes through the rehearsal process – they are simply his/her own interpretations and change frequently as the rehearsal process progresses.

Everything is going very well. King Lear is a long show and we are working non-stop. However, we are doing one show per day. When I was with the RSC, I was doing two shows everyday. At a ‘regular’ theatre, you usually perform eight performances every week (at the Globe you do six shows maximum per week).

If you are doing two shows everyday they normally last for about two hours, which is not very long. You find that you begin the matinee very excited and enthusiastic, however by the end of it you are exhausted. The evening show is actually good, because you are in the role of your character. You find that you think less and use your instincts more, and this makes the actions and reactions seem more genuine.

I prefer performing evening shows, as I find that the concentration being channelled onto the stage is better. The conditions of the theatre are also better (at the Globe), particularly as it is dark. During the day you are more aware of crashes from the building site, or of helicopters and planes flying overhead. Despite the noises, you still have to hold onto telling the story. This is hard if you are in the middle of a powerful scene, caught in the moment of the play and character…when suddenly the sound of a plane interrupts you! Concentration is very important.

Different types of audiences can effect your performance. Often in matinees you feel that you have to make your character ‘bigger’ by projecting yourself. This is because there are many school children in the audience and you worry that they do not fully know the play. However, they do understand it because they are usually studying it. The other day there were some very small children in the Yard, who were tiptoeing to put their faces up to the stage so that they could see over.

I always wonder if people are sure to what is happening in the play. When I come on stage in the disguise, do they realise that it is still Kent, or do they think it is another character? You can never be 100% confident.

There have been some performances that have stood out from the rest. Changes take place by degree from one performance to the next.

At the moment I am exploring the despair that a character as constant as Kent could feel. Does he ever want to give up, particularly in the storm scene? Does Kent despair when Lear strips off and is sharing in the angst and madness of Poor Tom? I think that Kent and Lear were quite close before the banishment.

Back to top

Bruce Alexander - Character Notes 6

These comments are the actor's thoughts or ideas about the part as s/he goes through the rehearsal process – they are simply his/her own interpretations and change frequently as the rehearsal and performance process progresses.

The play is getting more and more ‘fluent’. The play was rehearsed very well and when we began the performances we went on stage with a solid story and structure. At this stage in the run we are looking for effects (moments that create a reaction from the audience) rather than trying to change the story or structure.

When I begin a play, my understanding of the character I am playing comes from looking at the play as a whole. My research for Kent was essentially getting to grips with every line that he said, the situation that he is in and the decisions he is making due to these situations. I believe that a person/character is typified by an accumulation of their actions. I did not do much research outside of the play when exploring the character of Kent (such as looking at Earls in the Elizabethan times). I did research the themes related to the play from external sources. I remember researching the stocks, because Kent is put in the stocks.

My current ideas on Kent have changed from my preconceived ideas of him. I now feel that I can play his actions as more ‘urgent’ rather than calm. The entire play has become more extreme, in relation to the actions of the characters, as they no longer seem at ease with everything.

Shakespeare's language can be difficult and there is no substitute for the hard work of going through the speeches line by line. It is useful to refer to dictionaries and glossaries that are often at the back of the text. There is a very good book that I use called ‘Onions, a Shakespearean Glossary’ (edited by Mr Onions), he talks about all of the phrases and words in the plays that have gone out of common use, and puts them into context. There are even times now during performances that I will suddenly realise exactly what something means. The way in which you speak the language is also very difficult, but the verse can help you with this as it puts emphasis on certain words. Learning lines is a real challenge and you can only remember them if you understand them and if you are familiar with the situations that they are spoken in.

I remember the first preview performance of King Lear was very frightening. But I realised that it is my role to deliver the story as clearly as possible to an audience who may not know the story. During the last month the play has really started to ‘hum’. Each actor in the play needs to be sure of what is going to happen next and if an actor is still doubtful then he will not have the impulsiveness that many characters need. It takes a long time for the actions of the character you are playing to feel like second nature.

The company is going to the Tokyo Globe once this run has finished. We will be there for two weeks performing King Lear. We may have to make changes in terms of entrances and exits through the Yard. I have been told that the Tokyo Globe is a modern building with the same floor plan as this Globe. It does not have a high stage, and although the Yard is the same shape, the area has seats in it. Therefore it may not be possible to make entrances and exits through it. I am very excited about going, however, I am not sure what to expect!

This has been a long run, and it is challenging to keep the performance fresh. You have to remember that there is a new audience in every show, and therefore the story is new for them and they have to be able to understand what is going on. It is the audience that helps to keep the performance fresh as each one brings out a different quality in the show. At the Globe in particular the audience is very dominating and you cannot pretend that they are not there as you can in other theatres.

If I could play any other character in King Lear then I would play the Fool (But I would have to know how to play the ukulele). I think that Albany is also an interesting character.

There is no other playwright who is quite like Shakespeare. People sometimes think of Johnson as being similar to him. However, I think that Johnson is very different because he does not seem to like his characters. I get the impression that Shakespeare does like his characters, or at least has an interest in them. I do think that Sean O’Casey is similar to Shakespeare. He to loves all of his characters, and there seems to be a care and concern for them present in his writing.

King Lear is a tragedy and therefore the characters do not deserve what happens to them in the end, despite how bad they have been. I think that people might not be disappointed to see Edmund, Goneril or Regan dead. I think that the death of the other characters seems like a real waste, but that is why it is considered to be a tragedy. There is no justice in tragedy.

In this production we seem to really push at a negative ending of the play. However, in the actual play I think that there is a feeling of hope in the form of Edgar and Albany. They have both learnt something, and we hope that they will be able to rule the country together. Our production does not emphasise a hope for the future, and I do not know how true this is to Shakespeare. I think that he is quite a didactic writer, historically his drama overlaps with a period dominated by Morality plays. These plays carried the idea that you always learn something from drama. I think that he wants the audience to come to a conclusion about the characters, ideas and issues in the play on there own.

Back to top