When the Applause Changes.

He paces, tweets, and gestures toward an invisible audience, expecting a response. “Blow, winds, and crack your cheeks! Rage! Blow!” Lear once shouted into a storm; here the winds are digital and the thunder arrives through cable news. Loyalty is tested, admiration expected, and hesitation quickly treated as injury.

King Lear remains useful not because Lear gives power away, but because he cannot understand why authority no longer produces the obedience it once did. He still expects love, agreement, and immediate affirmation, even after the terms have changed. Trump’s public life often works by a similar arithmetic: applause, loyalty, spectacle, affirmation carefully noticed and quickly missed when absent. When judges rule, senators hesitate, or former allies begin speaking independently, the reaction is familiar, anger presented as correction, grievance offered as proof that others have failed in what was expected of them

Lear eventually reaches a place Trump does not seem naturally drawn toward. Reunited with Cordelia, stripped of certainty, he says simply: “Pray you now, forget and forgive: I am old and foolish.” Shakespeare places the line late, when power has already slipped away and apology can no longer repair much. What stands out in Trump is not anger itself, politics produces plenty of that, but how rarely disagreement loosens into reconsideration. Injuries remain active, slights are stored, named again, and kept available for later use.

That is where Coriolanus becomes useful. Shakespeare’s Roman general cannot forgive because forgiveness would imply dependence on people he believes beneath him. He despises the approval he nonetheless requires. “You common cry of curs,” he tells the crowd, before learning that contempt is not an electoral strategy. Trump’s relationship with crowds is warmer, but structurally similar: admiration is welcome, contradiction becomes treachery, and any concession risks looking, to him, like defeat. Coriolanus cannot bend because bending feels like self-erasure; Trump often gives the impression that concession belongs to lesser men.

Shakespeare understood that betrayal becomes dramatic only when it arrives through familiarity. Caesar does not fall because strangers gather outside the chamber; he falls because Brutus is already standing among those inside. Trump’s political imagination often appears arranged in much the same way: recognisable names moving abruptly from trusted to suspect, not necessarily because their principles changed, but because their usefulness did. The cast alters while the plot remains strangely stable. Former allies leave under familiar accusations, weakness, disloyalty, failure, ingratitude, as though each departure confirms less about them than about the narrowness of the part they were expected to play.

This helps explain why the ritual never quite stops. Every statement, rally, accusation, legal complaint, and improvised reflection serves partly as rehearsal: a repeated assertion that centrality still exists because it is still being declared. The theatre matters because performance has always done practical work. Shakespeare repeatedly noticed that performance becomes most intense precisely when authority has begun to doubt itself.

The occasional reflections on heaven belong here too. Trump has, from time to time, wondered aloud whether he will arrive there, and the tone is more reflective than his critics usually allow. Shakespeare’s rulers also think about eternity, though usually under less favourable conditions. Macbeth hears judgment only after blood has made sleep difficult. Richard II discovers mortality once ceremony has abandoned him. Lear, late in the play, no longer speaks like a king at all but like a man beginning to suspect that heaven may not be arranged according to earthly grievance.

The thought does not sound entirely confident. If anything, it suggests that mortality has entered the room, along with the faint possibility that judgment may not be negotiated in familiar terms. Shakespeare often places that moment late, when certainty has already begun to thin and the world has stopped answering in the expected way.

Trump’s imagined golden interior ballroom, bunker, refuge, symbolic retreat, suggests a place to withdraw when the weather turns hostile. Shakespeare’s rulers often end this way: Macbeth enclosed at Dunsinane, Richard in confinement, Lear exposed yet mentally cornered by what he can no longer control. Retreat offers shelter, but it also narrows the exits.

There is absurdity in this, though quiet absurdity: the kind produced whenever a figure continues performing command while the room has already begun consulting other scripts. Shakespeare understood that rulers rarely notice the exact moment authority begins to thin. They continue speaking at full volume because silence would acknowledge that something has already shifted.

So the scene settles on something close to late Lear: a figure still speaking with full conviction while the weather has stopped answering in the old way. The audience remains in place, though the mood has altered; less applause now than anticipation, as if everyone understands that endings in Shakespeare arrive not as surprises but as recognitions. Shakespeare would have recognised the scene immediately, not because he predicted Trump, but because he understood how power behaves when it begins to feel the edge of its own limits. The storm is never only weather. It is the sound made when authority discovers that command and obedience are no longer quite the same thing.

If you know someone who’d appreciate this, they probably will. Please share. Sharing's nice.
...
If you enjoyed this article and would like to see more, 'Buy the Goose a Coffee →'.
...
The views expressed are those of the correspondent. Factual claims draw on publicly available sources.