Customer Reviews

King John (Folger Shakespeare Library)

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Although I didn't really take pleasure in reading this one, it absolutely confirms the timeless nature of Shakespeare's works.

A king of England (who arrived at the throne under a cloud only hinted at in the play) leads his nation in war with France, and in the process orders ugly things be done in his name. Sycophants, schemers, and cynics critique his every move (without really accepting any responsibility themselves). An illegitimate cousin is the harshed critic and the voice of reason throughout. In the end, the innocent lose their lives, the king has to make sleazy deals, and it draws to a grim conclusion.

If you are a passionate fan of the Bard's comedies, you might give this one a pass.

Even in my four sentence summary, the timeless and unchanging reality of international politics comes through. There is a bit of dark relief though; whatever you think of politicians today, regardless of the hyperbole of people who exercise their First Amendment rights without exercising common courtesy or rational thought, the current crop of political leaders are neither better nor worse than the inspirations for a play written four hundred years ago.

Historically, the mildness of the political rhetoric is worthy of note, in contrast to the venom of others in England in the time. This is another play that benefits from an appreciation of the complexities and conflicts of Elizabethan England.

Reading this one was not pleasure, but possessed a grim satisfaction.

E. M. Van Court

If you like other Shakespeare works then you will like this. If you don't like Shakespeare's plays or if you need a more modern translation then don't get this. King John is a great play, which has war, double dealing, murder, suicide and intrigue. It is on par to some of his more well known plays such as Romeo and Juliet and Macbeth, if not better.

This is the most isolated of all of Shakespeare's history plays. To be sure, "King Henry VIII" does not directly follow "Richard III." However, there is only a 35 year time span between the 2 plays, and King Henry VIII and Buckingham are both sons of characters in "Richard III." "King John" ends 182 years before its closest neighbor "King Richard II." (King John is in fact King Richard II's great, great, great, great, grandfather.) Well, onto the play. The play begins with John protecting his title in front of outside forces. While certain parties feel John's nephew Arthur is the true king, the truth of the matter is that the terms of succession had not been fully established. Richard I felt the young and impressionable Arthur would be too much of a puppet of the French King, and so Richard I named John as his heir. We then meet Phillip. In a dramatic scene, he forces a confession out of his mother. (That she had an affair with Richard I, and that Richard I is thus his father.) Onto Act 2. King John and the French King argue over who is the rightful king. Here, John comes off rather well in his defiance of those who challenge his claim to the crown. Constance (Arthur's mother) is flat out detestable in several ways. For one thing, she seems under the impression that the French King is supporting Arthur out of the kindness of his heart, when in fact any half way intelligent observer can see that the French King wants an English king who he can manipulate. Isaac Asimov says: "Phillip, (the French King, not Richard's son) after all, had upheld Arthur's cause in the first place only as far as it would serve his self interest." Well, John and the French King come to an agreement in that John's niece marries the French king's son and peace is made. As much as Richard's illegitimate son supports John, he reveals a fault. (He would rather solve problems by fighting than diplomacy. Sometimes fighting is required, but diplomacy is obviously the preferable choice if possible.) Onto Act 3. Constance maintains her unlikable and detestable behavior. She is actually upset that peace has been made. And she is far too obtuse to understand that the French King is only after what will serve him. (Unintelligence carried to the extreme is nothing short of annoying.) Well, due to complications with the church, war breaks out again. (King John did not recognize the Arch Bishop of Canterbury appointed by Rome.) John is often praised for defying the church's authority here, but it probably was not the safest move. The French King (after some hesitation) betrays John. At first, things go well for John. His mother is captured, but rescued. Arthur himself is captured, and all looks well. (In actuality, Arthur lead a siege, and John himself rescued his mother and captured Arthur.) Now things start to go bad. John's enemies calculate that John will kill Arthur and alienate his own people, and that will turn the tide in France's favor. Onto Act 4. Hubert has the orders of blinding Arthur, but Arthur pleads to the point where Hubert can not bring himself to do the deed. Soon afterwards, Arthur dies trying to escape, and this is when things start to go bad for John. (No one will believe Arthur's death was accidental. Even though it was in the play at least.) Though, we can see that John is not exactly a Richard III. Unlike Richard III, he does not delight in this. John clearly regrets it and suffers for it. More bad news comes as John's mother Eleanor dies. Though Richard's illegitimate son remains touchingly loyal to John as trouble mounts. (We may wish to note that Arthur died 12 years before the French invasion. In reality, Arthur had nothing to do with the French invasion.) What really happened was some disloyal barons made a treaty with the French King. And in all honesty, King John fought the outside invasion as well as the treason on his own front with tremendous energy and courage. History is actually starting to acknowledge that John really was not such a bad king. Onto Act 5. John swears allegiance to the church and makes England papal territory. He is often criticized for this, but Winston Churchill refers to it as 'political genius.' This actually kept things quiet for some time, and it was followed by the Magna Carta. But treason was still brewing. The French invasion starts well, but John and Richard's son hold their ground. Eventually, the English traitors get word that Lewis is planning to kill all the English traitors. (This is not exactly what happened, but it's not impossible to digest. Political gratitude is often shortlived.) John is poisoned, and we are permitted some sympathy for him. His 9 year old son Henry III is crowned, and Richard's illegitimate son prepares to defeat the French. If it's any comfort to King John, his son succeeded him, and all of England's monarchs (to this day even) are his descendants. It's an alright play, but I honestly can not place it on the same level as any of the history plays that follow.