Anyone who knows anything about Shakespeare's tragedies, or who even thinks about them for him/herself, knows that Othello is not about jealousy. Nor, in spite of what Olivier is supposed to have said, is it about Iago. The definition of a tragedy is of a man, or woman these days, successful, talented and gifted beyond others, who is brought down by a fatal inner flaw. This cannot apply to Iago, who is simply a machiavellian villain from start to finish, viciously revengeful for having been passed over. He can hardly be said to have been brought down by some unsuspected inner flaw.
This play is the Tragedy of Othello, and his fatal flaw is his own self-aggrandisement and self-glorification. He sees himself as the noblest of military commanders in the "big wars", a great leader and inspirer of other men, above and beyond the common herd. Betrayal and treachery to someone with this self-image is unthinkable: the disloyalty of his subordinate will drive him to insanity just as much as suspicion of his wife's fidelity. That he takes his distress out upon the most vulnerable makes his humiliation unbearable.
In one sense, his "race", so-called, is not a fundamental issue, although his colour racks his mind with an added intensity. As one or two of the more intelligent reviewers have noted, an actor is allowed to "act" any theatrical role he/she wishes, black, white or purple. I've actually seen a perfectly ridiculous Richard III with an all-female cast. Such tinkering is wholly pointless, of course, but I suppose they felt they were saying something. It added nothing at all to the play itself.
Shakespeare's plays are exactly that: they are plays. The words are everything. The delivery of these words is all that ultimately matters. The scenery, and the rest of the business, is not really a priority, and should never excessively obtrude, or become "cinematic".
If someone truly wants to know what Shakespeare's Othello is about, they should watch and listen closely to Olivier's delivery. They will then come away with enriched understanding. His performance, and that of all the other players, is matchless. It is incomprehensible to me how anyone could be less than transfixed throughout.
This play is the Tragedy of Othello, and his fatal flaw is his own self-aggrandisement and self-glorification. He sees himself as the noblest of military commanders in the "big wars", a great leader and inspirer of other men, above and beyond the common herd. Betrayal and treachery to someone with this self-image is unthinkable: the disloyalty of his subordinate will drive him to insanity just as much as suspicion of his wife's fidelity. That he takes his distress out upon the most vulnerable makes his humiliation unbearable.
In one sense, his "race", so-called, is not a fundamental issue, although his colour racks his mind with an added intensity. As one or two of the more intelligent reviewers have noted, an actor is allowed to "act" any theatrical role he/she wishes, black, white or purple. I've actually seen a perfectly ridiculous Richard III with an all-female cast. Such tinkering is wholly pointless, of course, but I suppose they felt they were saying something. It added nothing at all to the play itself.
Shakespeare's plays are exactly that: they are plays. The words are everything. The delivery of these words is all that ultimately matters. The scenery, and the rest of the business, is not really a priority, and should never excessively obtrude, or become "cinematic".
If someone truly wants to know what Shakespeare's Othello is about, they should watch and listen closely to Olivier's delivery. They will then come away with enriched understanding. His performance, and that of all the other players, is matchless. It is incomprehensible to me how anyone could be less than transfixed throughout.