Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by dag3700
King Charles III by Mike Bartlett
4.0
It feels so odd to have to call something from 10 years ago a "relic of the past."
Now, I don't mean that in the derogatory way. It doesn't hold outdated ideas, it doesn't call anyone anything that, by today's standards, would be considered a slur.
Instead, it's a relic of the past simply because Mike Bartlett isn't a fortune teller. There are plenty of things in this play that he "got wrong" surrounding the coronation of Charles III and the following months... Because, of course there are. Mike Bartlett isn't a time traveler. He couldn't accurately guess every little thing that would happen.
But, that being said... He did nail some of his predictions. In 2014, Harry and Meghan weren't together yet, but Bartlett's creation of Jess, Harry's love interest in the play, ends up being eerily similar to the relationship between Harry and Meghan. Even down to Harry questioning his place in the monarchy.
He nailed the modern concerns about the freedom of the press.
He nailed the immaturity of government when they're told no. (This is, of course, me speaking as an American... Where there's the threat of a "government shutdown" about once every two weeks, because our Congress is staffed with a bunch of whining toddlers who pout and refuse to do anything when they don't get their way)
I think this play is absolutely, without a doubt, worth a read. It was incredibly written, with beautifully poetic iambic pentameter all throughout. And it's interesting to read something that was subtitled "A Future History Play", but has now become "An Alternate History Play". I say that Mike Bartlett got several predictions wrong, but who knows what would have happened if Elizabeth II died in 2014?
Now, I don't mean that in the derogatory way. It doesn't hold outdated ideas, it doesn't call anyone anything that, by today's standards, would be considered a slur.
Instead, it's a relic of the past simply because Mike Bartlett isn't a fortune teller. There are plenty of things in this play that he "got wrong" surrounding the coronation of Charles III and the following months... Because, of course there are. Mike Bartlett isn't a time traveler. He couldn't accurately guess every little thing that would happen.
But, that being said... He did nail some of his predictions. In 2014, Harry and Meghan weren't together yet, but Bartlett's creation of Jess, Harry's love interest in the play, ends up being eerily similar to the relationship between Harry and Meghan. Even down to Harry questioning his place in the monarchy.
He nailed the modern concerns about the freedom of the press.
He nailed the immaturity of government when they're told no. (This is, of course, me speaking as an American... Where there's the threat of a "government shutdown" about once every two weeks, because our Congress is staffed with a bunch of whining toddlers who pout and refuse to do anything when they don't get their way)
I think this play is absolutely, without a doubt, worth a read. It was incredibly written, with beautifully poetic iambic pentameter all throughout. And it's interesting to read something that was subtitled "A Future History Play", but has now become "An Alternate History Play". I say that Mike Bartlett got several predictions wrong, but who knows what would have happened if Elizabeth II died in 2014?