“What Is Royalty Without a Voice?” The Performance of Power in The King’s Speech

The core subject of The King’s Speech (Tom Hooper, 2010) is the relation between voice and power. In the first place, we have the speech impediment of the Duke of York (the future George VI) and his subsequent inability to deliver effectual messages to the nation in a particularly dramatic phase in history. This failure highlights, by contrast, the identification of monarchy with voice. The film actually shows how the performative power of speech became crucial after the invention of the wireless. The BBC, as George V stated on his death bed, had turned kings into actors: elocution could either make or unmake them. Yet, these are only some facets of the complex dynamics by which language and power are interrelated in the film. Another important issue is the form of verbal exchange between doctor and patient, which enacts a wavering between two kinds of authority, the one possessed by right (legitimate power) and the one acquired by study and experience (expert power). Emphasis is also placed on standard English as the language traditionally associated with higher education, political supremacy and prestige. The importance given to Received Pronunciation and the contempt shown towards other language variants proves how deeply embedded in language power is. Though amiably, even the ironic remarks on conversational rules made by Elizabeth, the future Queen Mother, finally confirm the status quo, putting things and people back into place on the social scale. This is also, ultimately, the policy of the BBC, the institution that has been invested with the task of preserving, at the same time, British national identity and the purity of the English language.