King Charles III

Macbeth wasn't historically accurate but is a cracking story!
Could see Lady Macbeth in the Catherine character but that doesn't mean I see the (real) Duchess as that type of Machiavellian character. Parallels too between Diana and Banquo's ghost. Good stuff!

Shakespeare wrote plays to glorify and flatter the monarch of the day. Was this written to flatter William or Charles? or to show them all in a negative light?

I didn't enjoy it, this used people still alive , I dislike that

But trisher this wasn't written by Shakespeare was it??
No-one suggested that the writer had the same/the opposite motives.
It's 21st drama - not a political manifesto or (anti) monarchist diatribe.
But it is Shakespearean in style.

If you imagine that writers do not have any political motives when they write plays mcem (apart from Shakespeare of course) you are sadly deluded. There is usually a message there sometimes well hidden, sometimes less well hidden. 21st drama is just as political as 15 and 16th century drama was.

Not sadly deluded but giving credit to the viewing audience that it won't be taken literally. Neither is it a blatant declaration of what should happen nor a warning against the possbility that it might.

Intelligent viewers will take out of it what they choose - unless we're getting into the realms of subliminal messages.

It's a tv drama - no more real than Line of Duty and no more real because it uses real people.

It isn't a tv drama. It was stage play adapted for TV. The stage has always been and continues to be a vehicle for political ideas . Arguably play goers are much more discerning than a TV audience, expect different things and are more likely to pick up on a political message. I didn't say it was 'real'. Plays dealing with political themes do not need to be 'real' although the people they portray may have lived or be living. Why do you consider it is somehow wrong for it to have a political message? As I have already said there is a long and illustrious history of such writing. Just because you didn't see it doesn't mean it's not there.

trish the arts of all genre is political and can be seen so down the centuries, including painting, poetry, and literature of all types. Look at the penny leaflets which were often rude in the extreme about royalty and political figures. Indeed some have provoked riots in previous centuries, and that includes various paintings.

If this was hyperthecical or fiction why on earth did they make ALL the actors look like and sound like real life people I thought it was incredible disrespectful to make ficticious situations about live people and put words in their mouths that they had never uttered
What right would anyone have to make a play about me with a look alike actor ( so there was no doubt it was me ) and my children were stabbing me in the back when in real life I have a loving relationship with them would I not be upset hurt angry Yes I would for sure
I have no problem with the story line I have no problem with politics on stage or tv shows I have no problem with the acting or writing if the characters were entirely unrecognisable

As for well it's always happened doesn't make it any better we used to shove kids up chimneys hopefully we are a little more civilised now, well vaguely

Seeing as half the people watching Eastenders and Corrie think it's real and seeing as half the Daily Mail readers believe everything they read I think you have high expectations that everyone would know it's fiction and if it was fiction why look alike actors

whitewave I am well aware of that I am questioning why mcem regards it as not having a political message and imagines that I think t is 'real' something I never said. I think that the writer used blank verse and Shakespearean style because he had a political message and wanted to link to the Royal plays Shakespeare wrote. I'm not 100% certain of what was intended in this script. I would need see it again or read the script to be clearer.

I am in the 'I thought it was brilliant' camp.Even DH was riveted ( rare event with tv)

trish yes I was agreeing with you and adding to your general idea.

trish, Why are play goers more likely than TV viewers to pick up on political messages? Is this not a rather patronising statement?

Patronising or not - and I take your point - I did say earlier in the thread that I wish I'd managed to see the stage version. However what I saw was the version adapted for tv.
I did not say that there was no political message. What I said was that an intelligent viewer will take from it what they choose.
It was obvious that the Shakespearean style was a clear link to his history plays with all their political implications.
Apart from saying that we might all have different interpretations of it, I really can't see what you're arguing about.

mcem you seem to be disagreeing with yourself. Read your 12.28.22 post.

In the context of this thread, this has just come to mind. Has anyone read this novel by the late Sue Townsend?
"The queen and I." published 1992.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Queen_and_I_(novel)

There are a lot of parallels in Sue Townsend's story and the play. It is making up stories about the monarchy.

Queen and I. No disrespect Ma'am, I would like to keep my head on my shoulders .