Filed by Lance at 4:06 pm under General, Social Issues

My roommate Rob and I ditched the Grammys to go see The Kings Speech. I loved it.

For hundreds of years, people have been debating stories about those in power versus stories about the working classes. Oedipus, Hamlet, and King George VI versus Everyman, Willie Loman, and Lionel Logue. The Kings Speech was really interesting because it displayed both types of story, and the interaction between the two distinct worlds of have’s and have-not’s.

There are reasons kings and queens still exist. As an American, it’s definitely an outsider’s perspective*, but royalty is comforting: they are a collective personification (“L’État, c’est moi”). We love the story of the common man, like Lionel Logue (a filthy, base actor, no less!) who subverts the established order of medical credentials (”I have no letters after my name”) and aristocratic titles (”My game, my rules”) who rises through sheer skill and gumption. George VI, though, became a symbol of defiance and national pride: a nation looked to him to find what they couldn’t find in themselves alone.

The Kings Speech was a neat interaction between establishment and subject. The King needed an actor to help him perform his duty, given him by Divine Right, and the actor needed the King’s help to make ends meet. The interaction between the two worlds was mutually beneficial: the King became an icon, an the actor became a knight.

Through it all, we got to see a great story. One man, damaged by his past and his family, goes through a process to find what he needs in the face of tremendous pressures and great evil. The other, having found a calling in life in the midst of great suffering and pain, is recognized for his skill and service, and becomes a hero.

*Did you know there’s an amendment to the Constitution (which could theoretically still be ratified!) which would revoke the citizenship of anyone who took a title or station from a foreign government?