In Richard II, the divine right to rule is a contentious issue. In each play by Shakespeare, the kings are susceptible to certain errors that stem from divine rule or from flouting it, and seizing power on their own. For instance, Richard II has believed his entire life that his kingship is a gift from God and that his actions are an extension of God’s will. By believing that everything he does is an act of the lord, he alienates himself from his subjects and ends up losing his throne to Henry, who does not have the authorization of the lord, but is more politically minded that Richard. This creates a question that spreads through many of the history plays that Shakespeare wrote; is it divine right or power that allows one to rule? This struggle leads to a myriad of issues throughout Richard II and contributes extensively to these representative works of some of England’s famous rulers. Shakespeare starts with King Richard in the play Richard II who, having been born into the royal line and following the laws of succession, has been raised to believe that he has the right to rule, g...
Shakespeare’s Hamlet indicates “There’s divinity that shapes our ends, Rough-hew them how we will” [5,2,10] given that “the devil hath power”. [2,2,188] These comments demonstrate that power is often in the hands of those who will abuse it and yet, the abuse of that power will not necessarily bring desired rewards. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that fate will treat the abuser kindly, and ‘divinity’ is in control of how the characters ends are shaped. This power abuse is demonstrated both through Claudius’ manipulation of Hamlet, Gertrude and Laertes in order to maintain his authority now that he is King; and, through Hamlet and Claudius’ use of their implicit power over women, which is an entitlement granted to them simply because they
Shakespeare constructs King Richard III to perform his contextual agenda, or to perpetrate political propaganda in the light of a historical power struggle, mirroring the political concerns of his era through his adaptation and selection of source material. Shakespeare’s influences include Thomas More’s The History of King Richard the Third, both constructing a certain historical perspective of the play. The negative perspective of Richard III’s character is a perpetuation of established Tudor history, where Vergil constructed a history intermixed with Tudor history, and More’s connection to John Morton affected the villainous image of the tyrannous king. This negative image is accentuated through the antithesis of Richards treachery in juxtaposition of Richmond’s devotion, exemplified in the parallelism of ‘God and Saint George! Richmond and victory.’ The need to legitimize Elizabeth’s reign influenced Shakespeare’s portra...
From different contextual standpoints, both William Shakespeare’s King henry IV part 1(1597) and Barry Levinson Man of the year (2006) both represent a unique similarity in discussing power rather than truth. Shakespeare invokes an appreciation of strategic manipulation for both King Henry IV and prince Hal. King Henry struggles of breaking divine lineage whilst Prince Hal appearance vs reality allows Shakespeare to explore the political strategies upheld by politicians within the Elizabethan era. Similarly, in Man of the year, Tom Dobbs use of short and verbose colloquial language exhibit his demagoguery approach to candidacy epitomizing political succession within the 21st century.
Despite Richard's deformity, Shakespeare presents Richard as an all-powerful master of the stage. Initially, Richard's power appears to know no limits. From the first act, the audience is persuaded that he can merely appear on stage and his will is carried ...
Shakespeare's Richard III is from the outset a very moral play. It opens with an introduction to the character of Richard in his "Now is the winter..." speech. In this we are first introduced to the idea of a man becoming evil from his own free will, excused (by him) on the grounds of his inability to fit in with the physical ideals of society, saying, "And therefore, since I cannot prove a lover... I am determined to prove a villain." Although we are not, at this point, given a definite indication of Shakespeare's opinion on this moral position, it is the opening for a discussion on what is morally acceptable, which is continued quite decisively throughout the play.
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.
Shakespeare's Richard III is a play pervasive in figurative language, one of the most notable being the symbolic image of the sun and the shadow it casts. In an examination of a short passage from the text, it will be argued that Richard is compared to a shadow in relation to the sun, which has traditionally been held as a symbol of the king. The passage is significant not only because it speaks volumes about the plots of Richard, but also because it is relevant in understanding the overall plot of the play, which in the first few acts is almost indistinguishable from the plot of the scheming Duke of Gloucester.
King Richard II is Shakespeare's example of a king who removes himself from the reality of the common people. Richard views his position as a source of amusement. His "cares" as King, other than an opportunity for an agreeable audience, are merely a burden. Instead of investigating the accusations of treachery from Henry and Mawbrick, he exiles both men as an easy way out. Richard was born a King, and knows no life other than that of royalty. Unfortunately the lesson that must know men to rule them costs him the thrown. Richard's lesson influences his usurper and his usurper's heir to the thrown, demonstrating to them both the value of humility.
Gifted with the darkest attributes intertwined in his imperfect characteristics, Shakespeare’s Richard III displays his anti-hero traits afflicted with thorns of villains: “Plots have I laid, inductions dangerous / By drunken prophecies, libels, and dreams” (I.i.32-33). Richard possesses the idealism and ambition of a heroic figure that is destined to great achievements and power; however, as one who believes that “the end justifies the means”, Richard rejects moral value and tradition as he is willing to do anything to accomplish his goal to the crown. The society, even his family and closest friends, repudiate him as a deformed outcast. Nevertheless, he cheers for himself as the champion and irredeemable villain by turning entirely to revenge of taking self-served power. By distinguishing virtue ethics to take revenge on the human society that alienates him and centering his life on self-advancement towards kingship, Richard is the literary archetype of an anti-hero.
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.
Richard II is not your average king. He is useless with his power and does not know how to use it. He is the king of England when the play begins but shortly after his kingship is taken away from him. Richard II is a young man who has not matured much since his adolescence. He is disconnected from his land and its people, which becomes one of the downfalls of his crown. He has an extraordinary flair for poetic language. He is witty and poetic personality doesn’t work with his higher calling in life. A king should be strong and fearless. King Richard II is not a man of action and as the play advances, he gets into more and more trouble. As his end approaches, he becomes very poetic. Like most Shakespearean heroes, Richard II has a strong theatrical personality. He likes putting on a show and enjoys a bit of wordplay, even at his own expense. What sets him apart from other Shakespearean characters is the perverse joy he takes in his downfall.
The concept of absolute monarchy comes into existence during the early seventeenth century. For England at this time, the Tudor dynasty ends, while the Stuarts begin theirs. However, it is the latter dynasty that brings the concept into mainstream politics, because “early Stuart political discourse can indeed be read as containing defences of absolutism” (Burgess 19). James I is the first king of the Stuart line and the first to practice absolute monarchy. It is said of him at the time that “James [I] described [sic] his ideal form of government . . . from which he sought [sic] to justify his own absolute authority and power . . . hence he was [sic] to be free and absolute, to be the law in and of his kingdom” (Jordan 15). In coincidence, the beginning of James’ reign coincides within the same time Shakespeare wrote King Lear. In his play, several scenes link together, showing that even though the king supposedly gave up his job, he cannot escape the fact that he is king and will be until his death. These scenes exemplify certain aspects of absolute monarchy. Indeed, the seventeenth century theory of absolute monarchy provides evidence that, although King Lear bestows his role as king to others, he ultimately retains the absolute power and behavior of a monarch in Shakespeare’s famous tragedy.
Power is a person’s capacity to influence and control. In Shakespeare’s time and in the modern world, power is something that is sought by many people. When used for good, power can inspire change, help society and unify a nation. However, in William Shakespeare’s play King Lear, it is a force strong enough to turn family against each other, and drive people mad. Goneril and Regan are corrupted by the power their father gives them. Edmund is corrupted by the power of his new position, Earl, and King Lear is blinded by his belief that he is the all-powerful King. The greed for power, plays an extensive role in the play because it corrupts most of the villainous characters and ultimately leads them to their demise.
The Elizabethan World Picture begins focus on the Order of the Universe. Tillyard explains that God has created an order for everything. Cosmic order is a key characteristic in poetry and plays written in the Elizabethan time period. Tillyard claims that our order is affected by personal connections with each rank. Tillyard uses several examples of order in our lives one of those being, “the sun, and the king, primogeniture hang together”. Primogeniture is the right for the firstborn to inherit the family estates. This order is shown to be in conflict in Shakespeare’s play, Richard the Second. In Richard II the sun was the king, and he was to be respected as he divinely anointed by God for his role. We see an ignoring of this divine order when Henry Bolingbroke and the other nobles take it upon themselves to rebel and pressure the king into giving up his crown. Ironically, primogeniture is used to excuse treason in one case and then ignored to take Richard’s crown. When Bolingbroke arrived he claimed that he was only interested in taking back his God given right and at the end of the play we see Bolingbroke and the nobles ignoring Richard’s divine right to rule because he does not have the ability to rule. A lot of respect was given to cosmic order during Elizabethan times. It was believed that to be out of order, especially the cosmic order caused strife and chaos in the universe.
Power is a universal concept. With regards to humanity, the desire for power ― the need for control and authority for personal gain ― is present throughout history. This theme is especially prevalent in Shakespeare’s The Tempest, through the character of Prospero, who takes advantage of his magical abilities in an immoral manner, for the purpose of fulfilling his self-serving goals. Correspondingly, Shakespeare demonstrates the effects and ethical consequences of absolute power through Prospero’s abuse of his magic for personal benefit.