American Kent
What can Shakespeare’s most loyal character teach us?
In King Lear’s opening, we are met with a storming tyrant. His mind and body failing with age and he seeks to cast off his worries. He summons his heirs and orders them to flatter him to earn their inheritance. Two flatter blithely, giving the old man what he wants to hear: that he is most loved and cherished in their lives. The third, Cordelia, is unable to heap lies upon her father. The king turns to rage and cuts her off. Before the act is finished, Kent speaks. Kent tells Lear he does wrong, and that it is his duty to speak honestly to him:
Think’st thou that duty shall have dread to speak
When power to flattery bows?
Kent knows the risk. The king is mad and acting irrationally. Still, he speaks the truth. Lear, as the mad king, banishes Kent. Yet Kent returns, at threat to his life, to accompany the king and protect him to the end.
Shakespeare—or Bacon, or North, or whomever wrote Lear1—uses Kent as a paradigm of what is expected of advisors. Loyalty is not fawning support; rather, it is the bravery to say what needs to be said and still commit yourself to a person, even if they are in error. This is missing today.
Has America lost its Kents? Jake Tapper’s Original Sin looks at Biden’s descent into senility and those who accompanied him along the journey. It is a semi-biographical American King Lear. Only, it’s not clear anyone cast a Kent to serve inside the administration. Instead, we get a glimpse of Hunter Biden serving as both Goneril and Regan. Unfortunately, the lack of a principled stance will, in the end, bleed over to other members of the administration.
The sympathy Kent engenders in the play comes from his righteous suffering. In front of the court he argues with and rebukes Lear. Mattis was the last member of a presidential administration to do that. Who of prominence is ready to do that now? In part, this is why the “warnings” from most former members of the Trump administration rang hollow. Why didn’t they speak out at any point before 2024? Where were the principled resignations akin to Mattis. The reason they are missing is simple: proximity to power.
Why do people go along with things they know are wrong? As long as they are proximate to power, they fear speaking out for what they will lose. Kent’s redemption in Lear’s eyes flows from the acknowledgment that disagreement and argument are not betrayals. But, silence and acquiescence are profitable. Regan and Goneril gain half England while honesty earns Cordelia scorn and loss. Though in the end, Lear sees she spoke from love and not desire for material wealth.
Increasingly, the Presidency is appearing more a dynastic affair. From the Bush clan through to President Trump’s family’s roles politics mirrors more of a Shakespearean court than a Team of Rivals.2 Let’s hope there are more Kents and Cordelias.
There are several great substacks on this subject- on in particular is
’s article on North. The search for the literary Shakespeare is interesting, even if it does not substantially alter the impact of these plays on our culture.I am somewhat reserving judgement on the current Trump administration as it is still early days but, I do not see a Mattis yet.
I caught Antigone for the first time this year, a play from circa 440 bc. King Creon is surrounded by similar flatterers. It is his son, Haemon, who stands up to him, and the king ultimately loses his son when he refuses to listen. It appears vain leaders and syncophants is a timeless trope.
I caught Open To Debate's recent interview with Original Sin's authors and it concludes with the depressing conclusion that despite what happened with the last presidency, and a plethora of recently serving congressional reps, we haven't changed a thing.