My accent does slip. When I arrived in England in 1978 at 18, I
My accent does slip. When I arrived in England in 1978 at 18, I was shocked to find myself 'the American' at RADA. The English and the Americans have an intense relationship. They helped us out in the Second World War.
Mark Rylance, a man of the stage whose voice and presence have stirred the hearts of many, once reflected with gentle honesty: “My accent does slip. When I arrived in England in 1978 at 18, I was shocked to find myself ‘the American’ at RADA. The English and the Americans have an intense relationship. They helped us out in the Second World War.” These words are more than a passing recollection of his youth. They speak to the power of identity, of belonging, and of the ties that bind nations together across oceans and centuries.
The origin of this memory lies in Rylance’s own journey. Born in England but raised in America, he returned to Britain as a young man to train at the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art. There, amid Shakespeare’s tongue and the discipline of classical performance, his voice—shaped by another land—marked him as foreign. To be called “the American” was to be reminded that accent is not only a sound but also a banner, carrying with it the weight of history, culture, and expectation.
The meaning of his words is layered. On the surface, they tell of the awkwardness of identity: how one may belong to two worlds, yet be marked as outsider in both. But deeper still, they speak of the enduring relationship between England and America, two nations bound by language, divided by culture, and forever entwined by history. To Rylance, this connection was not abstract—it was present in the way others saw him, the way he was both familiar and foreign. His slipping accent became a symbol of the fragile yet unbreakable ties between peoples.
And in his reflection on the Second World War, Rylance reveals a deeper truth. For when he says, “They helped us out,” he recalls the hour when Britain, battered by bombs and standing alone against tyranny, received lifelines of aid and eventual partnership from across the Atlantic. American ships, supplies, and soldiers turned the tide, not only saving a nation but preserving a shared civilization. That bond of sacrifice forged in the fires of war remains part of the collective memory of both peoples, a reminder that their destinies are intertwined.
History gives us vivid examples. Think of the Battle of Britain, when Churchill’s defiance rang through the air as bombs fell nightly upon London. Britain endured, yet supplies ran thin, and the promise of American support gave strength to a weary island. Later, on D-Day, American, British, and Canadian soldiers together stormed the beaches of Normandy, bleeding side by side for freedom. These were not just battles of nations, but of kin: cousins separated by history, reunited in a common cause. Rylance’s words echo with that shared memory.
The lesson in his reflection is clear: identity is more than where we are born, and friendship between nations is more than treaties and trade. It is the recognition that in times of trial, we are bound by shared values, shared sacrifices, and even shared tongues. To be called “the American” in England, or “the Englishman” in America, is to be reminded that though nations may differ, their hearts may still beat in unison when justice and survival demand it.
Practical wisdom calls for this: honor your heritage, yet embrace the ties that connect you to others. Do not let accent, appearance, or nationality be barriers, but bridges. And when you reflect upon history, remember not only the battles fought, but the alliances forged, for they teach us that unity in struggle is the seed of lasting peace.
Thus, let Mark Rylance’s words linger: the English and the Americans have an intense relationship. It is a relationship born of separation, tested by conflict, and sanctified by shared sacrifice. Carry this truth forward, children of tomorrow: that though nations differ, the bonds of history and humanity unite us, and in that unity lies the strength to endure the storms of any age.
TTThai Thi Thu Thuy
Rylance’s reflection about being the 'American' at RADA speaks to the power of accents and nationality in defining one’s experience in a new culture. His mention of the historical bond between the U.S. and the U.K. raises the question: does this relationship still carry weight today? Are there underlying tensions or is it more of a shared history that continues to shape the identities of both countries?
H115 Nguyen Trung Hieu 12A2
Mark Rylance touches on an important issue: how national identity, especially accent, plays a significant role in how we are perceived abroad. His experience at RADA, being singled out as 'the American,' makes me wonder if this kind of identification still shapes the way people from different countries interact in international settings. Do accents, in particular, continue to serve as markers of cultural difference in our increasingly globalized world?
NPNha Phuong
Rylance's reflection on his arrival in England as 'the American' at RADA is a powerful reminder of how deeply rooted national identities can influence personal interactions. This dynamic, particularly the 'intense relationship' between Americans and the British, often surfaces in cultural and historical contexts. Does this deep-rooted connection still carry the same weight, or has the world changed so much that it no longer holds the same significance?
TTVi thi thuong
Rylance's experience at RADA illustrates how accents and nationalities create a sense of belonging—or isolation—when you're in a foreign culture. It raises an interesting point about how cultural identities shape social dynamics. How do we navigate the tension between embracing our own national identity and adapting to a new environment? Do we unintentionally carry historical narratives, like the wartime alliance, into modern relationships?
VNPham Hoang Vuong Nguyen
Rylance’s comment about his American identity at RADA is an insightful reminder of the enduring ties between the U.S. and the U.K. The history of collaboration, particularly during the Second World War, still lingers in how both countries relate to each other. I wonder, how much of this historical connection still impacts current relationships between the two nations? Are there modern issues that define the relationship as much as the wartime bond?