Many critics call King Lear Shakespeare's tragic masterpiece, but the public has never ratified that judgment. Hamlet, Othello, Macbeth and Romeo and Juliet have more mass appeal. Maybe the reason people don't love Lear as much as the others is because it has a major problem with plausibility. Shakespeare gives us almost no text to explain Lear's rashness when he disinherits his most beloved daughter because she won't make a flattering speech, nor does the playwright adequately explain why Cordelia so stubbornly refuses to say a few nice things to the father whom she genuinely loves. It is left to actors to telegraph a subtext to us.
In my experience, only Morris Carnovsky successfully did this with Lear, using his resonant voice and commanding presence to create a self-involved persona who struck fear into everyone, including his daughters. In this excellent production, Buck Shirner doesn't do that, but he does create a touching, sympathetic king, and John Peakes mirrors him with a heartfelt Duke of Gloucester. This is a fitting parallel, because Shakespeare's Gloucester shows that more than one man can make a rash misjudgment about his children.
Sara Valentine is an appealing Cordelia, and E. Ashley Izard is fine as the sexy bitch Regan, but J.J. Van Name isn't strong enough as the oldest and nastiest daughter, Goneril. Greg Giovanni is a particularly charming Fool, Michael Whistler is great as the multifaceted good son of Gloucester and Bev Appleton creates a wonderful characterization as the loyal Kent.
Carmen Khan directs with sweep and spectacle, fully using a small space. The duel scenes are vivid, and Khan's staging of the blinding of Gloucester is bloody and graphic, a great moment of theater. After we get past that problematic first scene, the play unfolds beautifully as we see a family disintegrate and an old man endure fate and grow to understanding.
