Life
Imitating Art: Donald Trump and the English Cycle Plays
The
world has greeted the election of Donald Trump to the presidency of
the United States of America with some consternation due to the
divisive, haranguing diatribes that characterised his campaign. The
speeches, which could reasonably be called performances,
that
he
gave were full of threats of violence and dismissal of his opponents
and are echoed by far-right groups active across the world at the
moment. However, if other scholars of early drama are anything like
me, then they will have recognised speeches such as these from
another source; the English Cycle pageants.
The
English Cycle plays, particularly those originating in the city of
York, depict two of the most significant Biblical tyrants. The first
is, of course, the Pharaoh of Exodus who appears in the York play of
Moses. The parallels between the Pharaoh and Trump in terms of
identity and racial politics are undeniable and obvious (for example,
the Pharaoh says of the Jews 'Fy on tham! To the devell of helle […/]
bondage shall we to tham bede')
but I would argue that Donald Trump is more comparable to the second
despot of the Cycle; Herod Antipater and it is upon this persona that
I will focus.1
In particular I will examine the depiction, and the speeches, of
Herod in the York play Christ
Before Herod and
draw out comparisons between the persona of Herod and Trump.2
I
will end by suggesting possible appropriate reactions to such
rhetoric.
Herod,
as is common in the plays featuring either of these despots, opens
the play with a rant in which many tropes of Trump's rhetoric are
present. Like Trump, he threatens
physical violence
upon those who do not listen to him when he says 'þis
brande þat is bright schalle brese in youre brain',3
like Trump he boasts
of his own prowess when
he states that 'agaynste jeauntis [giants] ongentill have we joined
with ingendis' (l.14), like Trump he threatens
to imprison his enemies
when he warns that 'whoso repreve our esrare we schal choppe þam
in cheynes' (l. 17). That this opening speech alone is so reminiscent
of Trump tells us a great deal about his political strategies. Herod
as depicted in this play displays the very definition of bad
kingship; ranting, dictatorial, barely coherent. It should worry us
all that so many parallels to Trump's campaign can be drawn from this
speech.
Traces
of Trump are not confined to the Herod's opening speech. Herod's
concern about Jesus also has parallels with Trump and his supporters.
The first time in the play that Herod seems concerned with anything
other than his own rants is when he feels threatened by the potential
power of Jesus, asking his advisor, 'menys þou
þat [his..] myghtyng schulde my myghtes marre[?]' (l. 108) and later
again rather anxiously asking 'knowes he þat oure myghtis are þe
more[?]' (l. 132). This angst about Jesus' power is coupled with
pettish complaints about his lack of reverence when Herod complains
that 'he meks hym no more unto me/ þanne it were to a man of þer
awn towne' (ll. 180-1). The insecurity about his own power that Herod
reveals here is key to understanding Trump's presidential campaign.
The campaign was built on the insecurity and fear of white males that
they, hitherto unquestionably the kings of the USA, may no longer be
given the preferential status to which they are accustomed. Like
Herod, Trump and his supporters do not react well to the possibility
that their power may be threatened by interlopers.
So,
this said, how should we respond to these real life Herods, ranting
and threatening, terrified of their power slipping from their
fingers? It is here that life must cease imitating art. In the
pageant, Jesus reacts with a stoic silence, saying not one word for
the whole performance. This first amuses ('Lo sirs, he deffis us with
dynne' (l. 190)), then enrages ('Wele Lorde, saie! What devyll never
a dele[?]' (l.239)) Herod and his court.
This
silent strategy of Christ in the play, however dramatically striking,
is not appropriate for those of us who would count ourselves among
the opponents of Trump and his supporters. We, unlike Christ, must
speak up against every Herod-esque rant that we hear and counter them
with reasoned, calm and firm moral arguments. Of course Trump, like
Herod, will not listen but make no mistake – everyone that speaks
up will be heard by someone. We need not demand 'Pes' (l. 1) and
silence as Herod does, nor need we threaten our audience. Kindness is
always heard eventually. So while Trump continues the performance of
a despot that have been played before the people for centuries, we
must not tailor ours on the same sources. Be less like Christ. Be
heard.
NOTE:
Greg Walker's anthology cited in this piece comes highly recommended
and can be purchased
here.
1
'The Play of Moses' in English Mystery Plays, ed.
By Peter Happe (London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1985) ll.67-74.
2
For those unfamiliar with medieval English drama, it is established practice to refer to the dramatic figures as personae
rather than characters as, arguably, the idea of characterisation
upon the stage had not yet fully developed. Natalie Crohn Schmitt's
essay 'The
Idea of a Person in Medieval Morality Plays' (Comparative
Drama,
Volume 12, No. 1 (1978), pp. 23-34) attempts in part to tackle this
rather thorny issue and is worth reading.
3
'Christ Before Herod' in Medieval Drama: An Anthology, ed.
By Greg Walker, (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2000), pp. 112-123,
l. 4. Further references follow quotations in the text..
