Jack Gleeson aka King Joffrey from Game of Thrones answers every questio...

A brilliant actor and apparently a really down to earth person, Jack Gleeson speaking at my alma mater, University College Dublin. Naturally his real Irish accent is quite different from the 'upper class' English accent used for the part in the series. He is also a gifted scholar and brilliant academic.

Yale Professor and author Harold Bloom on Shakespeare

Professor Bloom, controversial? Certainly! Boring, never. Stimulating and someone who forces us to question many of our certainties and defend them. Professor Bloom is associated with traditional views of literature and is sometimes quite scathing of modern literary theory and its icons. Learn more about him and decide for yourself.

BD SOMANI INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL IB Students working in teams - Mr C's English Class.

Students working in groups discussing the themes of World Literature Texts. The class is set up in teams and students have specific goals and work in teams. After this discussion each team reported back to the whole group.

Thank you NCPA and thank you National Theatre UK for a great performance of "King Lear".

Sam Mendez wonderful production of King Lear in a militarized state. (The fool and Kent converse.)

Note from Mr C:
Our Principal, Mr Don Gardner, shared his memories and insights of many performances of  'King Lear' recalled from  his frequent visits to Stratford over the last few decades.
These special classes for HL1 and HL2 presented students with an excellent opportunity to deepen their own understanding of the text and prepare for a 3 hour viewing of the play.
Our HL students have posted their responses to those classes and our visit to the NCPA to attend the screening of Simon Russell Beale's powerful performance in a National Theatre UK Production directed by Sam Mendez. I am posting Mira Tiwari's reflection here to share with teachers and students and our wider audience for this blog. It's a remarkable piece of writing which conveys so much about the play and conveys it all with a strong personal response to Mr Gardner's teaching and the play as performance. It was emailed to me for inclusion in the comments section but I think it deserves a special place here in the main body of the post. Well done Mira! Indeed congratulations to all students who have posted here meaningful and personal responses to this great play. My thanks to Mr Gardner, who inspires us all with his love of Shakespeare and whose vision led to our special assembly to mark the 450th anniversary of Shakespeare's birthday in April 2014

Comment from MIRA TIWARI.

During a recent English class Mr. Gardner suddenly burst out “King Lear!” and proceeded to ask us, wide-eyed and wholeheartedly, “Can you imagine some people live their whole lives without ever experiencing King Lear?” 

At the time, we all exchanged looks and giggles, well aware of Mr. Gardner’s appreciation of the play and of Shakespeare but unable to place so much life-changing importance on the little book.  Now, a few weeks later, I have paused to think what my life would be like without King Lear and I realise (or rather, am beginning to realise) the effect such a play can have. 

Reading the play and studying it in class already made me enjoy it – the characters’ developments, the connections with people I know, the snide little insults, the poignant monologues and the passages of touching description. But a play has the feature (both an advantage and a disadvantage) or lacking much explicit description. If novels lend themselves to the reader’s imagination, plays rely on it almost exclusively. Personally, my imagination is incapable of conjuring up too much at one time; either I am picturing Goneril’s face and King Lear’s reaction, or the stage directions and the movements of the background characters, but rarely, if ever, both at the same time. In addition, Shakespeare’s language is not the most accessible, especially for beginners, and the often strange use of punctuation can make it even more difficult to decipher who is being addressed, when, and where some phrases end and others begin. Watching the National Theatre’s production of King Lear helped with all of these problems: it clarified the situations, it strengthened the characters, it emphasised the language and it brought the play to life.

Certain things surprised me, perhaps above all Act I Scene I – ironic, because this is the scene we studied the most. I didn't anticipate such a cold, distant setup onstage, dictatorial with the microphones and tall chairs. I imagined something slightly more active, with a certain amount of familial closeness. But perhaps this was just a preconception created by the cover of our copy of King Lear, which shows a bright painting of Lear holding Cordelia in his arms. I came later to realise that Sam Mendes’ interpretation was actually rather appropriate, because it was this militarism and strictness that helped enable Goneril and Regan to orchestrate Lear’s eventual downfall. 

Regan’s character also surprised me, even though Mr. Gardner had already told us about her sensual and playful portrayal. At first it seemed incongruous in Act I Scene I, coupled with an unexpected playfulness from Lear too. But as the play progressed I understood the relationship Sam Mendes had created, one of Regan being “Daddy’s girl” insofar as it benefited her, leaving Lear with a false sense of security and daughterly love. Regan essentially had Lear wrapped around her finger, which served to emphasise Goneril’s comparatively ‘real’ interactions and Cordelia’s almost idyllic but initially under-appreciated relationship with her father. Goneril was so accurate in her expressions and speeches that she made me at times sympathetic with her, understanding of the chaos taking over her home. Edmund was extremely powerful, sweeping the audience up in his monologues and pulling them, if only momentarily, on to his side. He captured the manipulation and the eloquent monologues, such that I went from being engrossed in his latest plan to being moved by his speech about astrology. I agree with what Sam Mendes said about Simon Russell Beale being better suited to acting a kinder part, as I particularly enjoyed the later part of the play, when King Lear gets increasingly madder. Beale really managed to bring out the most delicate nuances, from a little gasp caught in his throat, to a fearful daze in his eyes, to the compulsive rubbing of his knee, to whispered words, sometimes of worry and at other times of reassurance. He took the audience into Lear’s mind and transformed himself entirely into a devastated, hopeful, neglected, loved, conscious, mad and desperate father and King.

Before watching the play I didn’t have much of an understanding of Kent and the Fool, but seeing them as real people instantly changed that, making them two of my favourites. Things like accent, dances and facial expressions made them rather enjoyable and I think they helped tie the play together through their moving, intimate bond with Lear. Similarly, Edgar/poor Tom was vibrantly acted, highlighting and giving him the significance his character deserves and making the ending all the more effective. I finally understand what people mean when they say “Shakespeare is modern.” because so many of the lines of the play have resonated with me, especially after watching it. I find myself connecting real personalities, relating it to movies, books and TOK. And, whether I’m studying logarithms in maths or DNA in biology, I can’t even read the word ‘base’ anymore without replaying “With base? with baseness? bastardy? base, base?” in my head. Posted by Mira Tiwari.

SIMON RUSSELL BEALE conveyed the majesty and the tragedy of Lear's downfall.

STUDENT REFLECTIONS ON THE PERFORMANCE SHOULD BE POSTED HERE BY TUESDAY JUNE 3RD.  300 - 400 WORDS MINIMUM PLEASE.

Thank you to all students who have posted below here - click on comments to see them.