The content and construction of texts are inexorably influenced by the plethora of social, cultural, and historical factors relative to a composer’s context. Context thus becomes the principle medium for deciphering the complex and often didactic meanings within texts. Through the comparative study of Shakespeare’s historical tragedy King Richard III and Al Pacino’s postmodern docudrama Looking For Richard, both texts explore the various connections explored through the protagonist Richard with respective societal influence affecting their portrayal. Shakespeare’s text strongly conveys a sense of providentialism which was influential by the Tudor monarchy whilst Al Pacino thorough the implement of modern day media portrays these influences to a secular, postmodern audience. The undeniable pursuit for power is Richard’s flaw as a Vice character. This aspect is demonstrated in Shakespeare’s play King Richard III through the actions Richard portrays in an attempt to take the throne, allowing the audience to perceive this as an abhorrent transgression against the divine order. The deformity of Richards arm and back also symbolically imply a sense of villainy through Shakespeare’s context. In one of Richard’s soliloquies, he states how ‘thus like the formal Vice Iniquity/ I moralize two meanings in one word’. Through the use of immoral jargons, Shakespeare emphasises Richard’s tenacity to attain a sense of power. However, Richard’s personal struggle with power causes him to become paranoid and demanding, as demonstrated through the use of modality ‘I wish’ in ‘I wish the bastards dead’. This act thus becomes heavily discordant to the accepted great chain of being and conveys Richard’s consumption by power. Pacino similarly portrays Ri... ... middle of paper ... ...n day context. Pacino ideally portrays Margret as a ‘sort of ghost of the past’, which is established through the use of quick cut edits in the docudrama , turbulent facial expressions and frantic camera movements to enhance the insanity that she is portrayed to have in Richard III. This therefore demonstrates the lack of importance of determinism, due to the differing contexts between texts, which affect their portrayal. Therefore, through the comparative study of Shakespeare’s historical tragedy King Richard III and Al Pacino’s postmodern docudrama Looking For Richard, it can be clearly demonstrated how the distinctive contexts between both composers inevitably affect their portrayal of ideas. In Pacino’s docudrama ‘Looking For Richard’, not only has he ‘found Richard’ but has also redefined his character portrayal of Richard for his post-modern secular audience.
To explore connections between texts is to heighten understanding of humanity’s progressing values and the underlying relevant themes that continue to engage societies regardless of context. William Shakespeare’s King Richard III (1592) (RIII) and Al Pacino’s docudrama Looking for Richard (1996) (LFR) demonstrate how opinion is created through comparative study, both explore the struggle for power within differing contexts to determine the duplicity of humanity. Ultimately, despite the divergent eras of composition and textual form, these connections expose the relevant social commentaries of their composers, highlighting innately human values, which remain constant.
The works of William Shakespeare have been one of the diligent hotspots for adaptation and appropriation. We see dramatic adaptation of Shakespearean playtexts began as early as Restoration period. Different fields like poetry, novels, advertisements, and movies have connected themselves with Shakespeare as well. The adaptation of Shakespeare makes him fit for new social settings and distinctive political philosophies.
“I am determined to prove a villain / and hate the idle pleasures of these days. / Plots have I laid, inductions dangerous, / by drunken prophecies, libels and dreams.” Richard III, the evil Duke of Gloucester, is fighting a bloody road to the crown in Shakespeare's dramatic play. Stopped by nothing and with brilliant intelligence, Richard fights his way to the king’s position, clothing his villany with “old odd ends stolen out of holy writ.” With no one to fully trust, Richard breaks many hearts by killing all people in his way, and becomes the unstoppable villain. He hides behind a shield of kindness and care, but when he is alone, his real soul comes alive. Sending murderers, or killing people himself, he has no mercy. Manipulating Lady Anne to marry him and promising Buckingham rewards for his deeds, he knows what he is doing, and won’t stop until the crown lies at his feet.
During the course of this essay it is my intention to discuss the differences between Classical Hollywood and post-Classical Hollywood. Although these terms refer to theoretical movements of which they are not definitive it is my goal to show that they are applicable in a broad way to a cinema tradition that dominated Hollywood production between 1916 and 1960 and which also pervaded Western Mainstream Cinema (Classical Hollywood or Classic Narrative Cinema) and to the movement and changes that came about following this time period (Post-Classical or New Hollywood). I intend to do this by first analysing and defining aspects of Classical Hollywood and having done that, examining post classical at which time the relationship between them will become evident. It is my intention to reference films from both movements and also published texts relative to the subject matter. In order to illustrate the structures involved I will be writing about the subjects of genre and genre transformation, the representation of gender, postmodernism and the relationship between style, form and content.
Henderson, Diana E. “A Shrew for the Times, Revisted.” Shakespeare the Movie II, Popularizing the Plays on Film, TV, and DVD. Eds. Burt, Richard and Boose, Lynda E. New York: Routledge, 2003. 120-139. Print.
... movie stars like royalty or mythical gods and goddesses, viewing the drama between great archetypal characters in a personal psychic realm. By considering the statements made and their societal impact from a Marxist perspective, Benjamin’s method is highly effective, as it does not simply consider art in terms of pure aesthetics anymore, but considers art’s place in a society capable of mechanically reproducing and endlessly duplicating film, photography, and digital art. His qualm with losing the aura and mystique of an original work is negated by the cult of movie stars, the adoration of fame, the incorporation of soundtracks which embody a particular time period, cinematographic allusions, and time-capsule-like qualities of a film such as Basquiat, a 90s tribute to the 80s, produced both as a part of and resulting from the art movements and trends it addresses.
The task which Shakespeare undertook was to mold the hateful constitution of Richard's Moral; character. Richard had to contend with the prejudices arising from his bodily deformity which was considered an indication of the depravity and wickedness of his nature. Richard's ambitious nature, his elastic intellect, and his want of faith in goodness conspire to produce his tendency to despise and degrade every surrounding being and object, even as his own person. He is never sincere except when he is about to commit a murder.
Composers throughout various zeitgeists are linked by different representations of universal human concerns, and their texts simultaneously embody certain values and agendas individual to themselves. An exploration of Shakespeare’s King Richard III (1592) and Al Pacino’s Looking for Richard (1996) allows for a greater understanding of the composer’s respective contexts, along with their intended agendas, through the lens of their own societal values and concerns. The manipulation of Richard III’s persona, whether by authorial adaptation of historical sources related to his character, or through the differing views of Richards motives, are universal concepts, that when studied in relation to the differing time periods, accentuates the context and our understanding of recurrent aspects of the human experience.
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.
middle of paper ... ... adulterated voice on the soundtrack. Texts and their appropriations reflect the context and values of their times. Within Shakespeare’s Othello and Geoffrey Sax’s appropriation of Othello, the evolution of the attitudes held by Elizabethan audiences and those held by contemporary audiences has been shown through the context of the female coupled with the context of racism.
Altering the ?facts? of Richard III?s history, supernatural elements inconspicuously blend into the play and create a strong backbone for the plot. Clarence and Stanley?s dreams bridge the abyss between dream and reality, while the ghosts? appearance lends horror to the play and reminds all that the higher powers will triumph over mortal evils. The curses of the female royalties add psychological and supernatural forces to drive the character?s actions, thus furthering the plot. Dreams, ghosts, and curses ? these supernatural elements all have a natural place in Richard III, for they weave together the fascinating horror in the storyline and ensure that the tyranny of a mortal man will not reign in the end.
Transformations inherently contain traces of the author’s social and cultural context. Much of the same can be applied to “Much ado about nothing”. It incorporates comical features, yet retains the sense of tragedy which is attached to almost all of Shakespeare’s plays. Brain Percival’s role as a director, was determining, understanding and distinguishing the social norms and the social structure of the society, and how the themes represented in the play can be transformed into a modern text. The Elizabethan society was typically a patriarchal society. Percival has used as well as transformed certain themes and textual features to ensure, that the film is more appealing and assessable to the critical modern audience.
Throughout history there have been various values that remain relevant in all societies. It is these values that shape the critical fame of social structure and constitutes the very foundation on which individuals stand. In William Shakespeare’s Othello and Tim Nelson’s O (2001); there is a clear evolution of the depiction of certain themes and values which is influenced by context, which is ultimately, directed by social customs, values and meanings. The choice of what values should be represented and in what particular way they should be represented was conducted by the composer of each text, Shakespeare and Nelson, respectively.
Across the Universe of Time: Shakespeare’s influence on 21st century society. It is harder to imagine a more universal writer than William Shakespeare. Rarely, if ever, is one of his many plays not being performed anywhere in the world and similarly rare is the tertiary English student who has not examined his work at length. His plays, sonnets and poems are common fodder for high school English departments across the globe.
Texts provide insight into the lifestyles of individuals from past and allow the modern audience to understand shifts in contexts and values through time. William Shakespeare’s play The Tragedy of King Richard III presents its audience with the values of the sixteenth century, whilst Al Pacino’s film Looking for Richard highlights the shift in context and creatively reshapes these values in order to make them more accessible to a twentieth century audience. Both Pacino and Shakespeare employ different mediums in order to attract the audience of their time. Both texts explore the idea of ambition overriding the values of integrity and honesty. They both utilised the ideology of an abolished hierarchy in order to gain the adoration of the common