A general finish of most pundits is that Richard II is a play about the affidavit of a "frail and feminine" ruler. That he was a feeble ruler, will be yielded. That he was a mediocre individual, won't. The understanding to Richard's character and inspiration is to see him as a man reliably acting his way through life. Richard was a man who held extraordinary love for show and function. This peculiarity positively drove him to settle on choices as lord that were poor, and in actuality a maladroit ruler. Notwithstanding this imperfection in character, Richard could be seen as a clever, wise individual, yet illsuited for his acquired occupation.
Promptly the peruser is demonstrated the love of function and show that Richard holds. He hears the allegations conveyed to him by his cousin Bolingbroke and Mowbray. Mowbray dreading unprejudiced nature on the lords part is consoled by Richard: "fair-minded are our eyes and ears./Were he my sibling, nay my kingdom's heir...Now by my staff's wonderment I make a promise. (I.i.120-123). Notice the affection Richard has of his influence and of the service itself that the sovereignty carries with three words, "my staffs stunningness". Strangely until this point Richard has utilized the imperial "we" in his discourse; here it turns into his own status. Also, he requests that they "be controlled by me" (i.i157) and takes after this line with smart verse. "Lets cleanse this choler without letting blood./This we endorse, however no doctor;/Deep noxiousness makes too profound entry point." (I.i.158-160). Richard is flaunting his lovely abilities, not really his royal gifts. There is by all accounts a solid feeling that he appreciates this show of his ability. Now the peruser might be interested and engaged by his order of dialect.
The main scene demonstrates a keen lord. Any shortcoming is just alluded to, particularly if Mowbray is coming clean when he says: "Ignored my sworn obligation all things considered" (I.i.139). On the off chance that that is reality than Richard is feeling the loss of a chance to have Mowbray for all time hushed, so as not to have an observer to involve himself. In spite of the fact that his choice to wish for no brutality could be praiseworthy.
The language of Shakespeare connects both King Richard III & Looking for Richard, enriching the significance of each & enabling both to provide continuous meaning for a range of contexts. The apparently outdated language of Shakespeare is given new life for the modern context, enabling audiences to better understand the original text & thus elevating the play. The film Looking for Richard, through rehearsals of actors, cuts between scholars and ‘random’ people on the street,
Here it sounds like he is talking about how cruel Richard is because he has destroyed good people, Namely; Anthony, Richard Grey, and Thomas Vaughan. Each were considered loyal to the children and would never have come to their untimely demise if Richard had never gained the Crown. So, how could anyone consider themselves safe under his
Ambition is an earnest desire for achievement. Both texts are self reflexive and emphasise Richard’s obsessive ambition, desire and longing for the throne. Each Richard strives towards capturing the throne regardless of consequences and bloodshed. Richard is depicted in both texts as an ambitious character who strives to gain power and independence through deception and self confessed villainy. ‘Since I cannot prove a lover. . . I am determined to prove a villain’ This obsession which drives Richard to commit horrific evils to gain and then protect his claim to the throne. His ambition, power and evil blinds him and inevitably is responsible for his downfall in both of the texts. A connection is formed between Looking for Richard and King Richard III in the final scenes Al Pacino’s interpretation and ‘Hollywood’ background influences an ending which can be interpreted as portraying Richmond as a coward. Elizabethan audiences
Richard II was one of Shakespeare's political works depicting the rise and fall of King Richard II. Richard became king of England as a boy at 10 years of age, although his advisors made most of the political decisions of the kingdom until he matured. During this maturation period, Richard was more interested in learning about aesthetic things in life rather than things more responsible to the monarch. He had very little experience and talent in the areas of military tactics and his decisions relating to the monarch seemed arbitrary.
Richard III is seen as a monster and a horrible person, but why? What if people saw him differently or if his family treated him equally like others? Also nobody wants to love an ugly hunchback. This is how Richard is treated in the play. He despises everybody including God and all of is creations so he decides to conquer the land and become King of England.
He is arrogant no less, on the strength of his superiority to any natural stirrings of love or pity, of terror or remorse. Richard’s true fall and punishment is his humiliation on his point of reliance and pride; he comes to require friends when friends fail in heart or in heartiness, he regrets affection, would fain be pitied, admits terror, and believes in the power of conscience if he endeavors to defy it. The involuntary forces of his being rise in insurrection against the oppression of the voluntary. His human nature vindicates the tendencies of humanity, when the organism, which was strained to sustain itself on the principle of renunciation of sympathy, falters and breaks down. The power of the strongest will have its limitations; mere defiance will not free the mind from superstition, and mere brutality cannot absolutely close up the welling springs of
Richard, a brilliant war general, was a steely-eyed, tall, and meticulous person who did everything very seriously. Richard had spent many years in hiding after Edward took the throne, for he knew that Edward would hang him immediately if Richard was found. But he saw the desperation of the people, and he decided that he would do everything he could to help them.
In Shakespeare's Richard III, Richard’s body has always been at the center of attention. As the main protagonist of the play, Richard is constantly being deplored for his deformed body, which at the end, ultimately serves as a weapon to all instead. Throughout the play, we observe a malformed Richard, ruthlessly slaughtering his own kins, consumed solely by the notion of taking the crown. We often question ourselves as whether Richard’s intent of succeeding the throne was only based upon his own greed and ambition or whether there was another reason for his heinous crimes, possibly the idea of exacting revenge on those who have scorned den upon him. The justification of his crimes are often expressed through his body, enforcing his deformed
Richard’s aspiration for power caused him to sacrifice his morals and loyalties in order to gain the throne of England. Shakespeare refers to the political instability of England, which is evident through the War of the Roses between the Yorks and Lancastrians fighting for the right to rule. In order to educate and entertain the audience of the instability of politics, Shakespeare poses Richard as a caricature of the Vice who is willing to do anything to get what he wants. As a result, the plans Richard executed were unethical, but done with pride and cunningness. Additionally, his physically crippled figure that was, “so lamely and unfashionable, that dogs bark at me as I halt by them,” reflects the deformity and corruption of his soul. The constant fauna imagery of Richard as the boar reflected his greedy nature and emphasises that he has lost his sense of humanity.
Richard is a victim of bullying throughout the play, and this causes him to do harmful things to others. His deformity is something that he is very insecure about, and when characters in the play insult him, it leads to him getting revenge on them. Anne, when Richard is talking to her as a potential love interest, insults him, “Blush, blush, thou lump of deformity” (1.2.58). As Richard is trying to be charming, Anne strikes his insecurity, which upsets him, and causes him to hurt her later. Queen Margaret calls Richard names as well, “Thou elvish-marked, abortive, rooting hog” (1.3.228). This is especially hurtful to Richard, because he is trying to be especially desirable to win over her daughter, yet he is still called rude names. Later in the play, Richard implies that he is going to kill Anne, “Come hither; Catesby. Rumor it abroad / That Anne my wife is very grievous sick; / I will take order for keeping close”(4.2.50-52). This is awfully suspicious and implying that he is going to kill her, which is his revenge for her calling him a lump of deformity, as well as allowing him to proceed in his plans to take the throne. He is insecure about the insults, but he still tries his best to be kind to the women in the play.
Shakespeare’s Richard III, is filled with desires and determination to achieve and fulfill ambition. Shakespeare uses the power of language to explicate Richard’s manipulative ways to fulfill his desires of becoming king, thus doing so by bringing darkness to the content world of others. According to Anderson’s article The Death of a Mind: Study of Shakespeare’s Richard III Richard’s state of mind is oriented around imposing “dark shadows over the positive dispositions of the others’ lives” (Anderson 701); he works at spreading destruction and grievance to those around him. Throughout the play Richard is in his own state of mind, with his main focus on the crown. Act I scene ii, illustrates Richard’s power and manipulative ways through language in order to gain advantage and gain a step forward in achieving the crown. The dialogue between Richard and Lady Anne at King Henry’s funeral exemplifies his manipulation when he uses charming and charismatic words to obtain her attention. Throughout this essay I will agree with Anderson’s point that Richard’s manipulative ploy is a means of fulfilling his ambition. This essay will explicate how Richard manipulates and uses the power of language to exemplify what his deranged state of mind can do to unsuspecting and naive minds. Lady Anne, her character at the beginning of the scene is distressed and angered, however as the scene progresses, Richard’s dialogue with Lady Anne begins to illustrate her naive mind and weak character
According to many, Shakespeare intentionally portrays Richard III in ways that would have the world hail him as the ultimate Machiavel. This build up only serves to further the dramatic irony when Richard falls from his throne. The nature of Richard's character is key to discovering the commentary Shakespeare is delivering on the nature of tyrants. By setting up Richard to be seen as the ultimate Machiavel, only to have him utterly destroyed, Shakespeare makes a dramatic commentary on the frailty of tyranny and such men as would aspire to tyrannical rule.
Richard then gloats over his success in a soliloquy stating how he has won her heart even though he is regarded by her as the devil with dissembling looks and he stabbed Edward her love just 3 months earlier. This highlights how he thinks of himself as the best as he brags about his misdeeds as though he is immortal.
A general conclusion of most critics is that Richard II is a play about the deposition of a "weak and effeminate" king. That he was a weak king, will be conceded. That he was an inferior person, will not. The insight to Richard's character and motivation is to view him as a person consistently acting his way through life. Richard was a man who held great love for show and ceremony. This idiosyncrasy certainly led him to make decisions as king that were poor, and in effect an inept ruler. If not for this defect in character, Richard could be viewed as a witty, intelligent person, albeit ill-suited for his inherited occupation.
According to the article History and Tragedy in Richard II, written by Elliot, he writes “Richard is a failure as a king not because he is immoral, nor because he is too sensitive and refined for the job, but because he misunderstands the nature of kingship (260)”. Richard’s downfall is not all his fault but as a king he should have understood the idea of what a great king needs to do to succeed in the life of royalty.