Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
social classes in shakespeares plays
king richard III looking for richard character essay
social hierarchy in Shakespeare's time
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: social classes in shakespeares plays
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 character of Richard is the ideal tool for this purpose. He is apparently a heartless, unscrupulous, bloody "cockatrice." He kills without remorse (until his dream-like visitation from the ghosts of his victims), while using other peoples' crimes, and supposed crimes as weapons against them. Ornstein describes him as a character "who plays the moral teacher for quite a long time before he becomes the moral lesson of the play." This description is quite accurate, as Richard, in great and unblushing hypocritical fashion, does not hesitate to call others to account for their parts in the pasts atrocities while conveniently overlooking his own; he condemns Margaret's slaughter of Rutland, and commits the double murder of the princes in the tower. This two-faced morality enables us to see and condemn the wicked actions of the others in the play, but also highlights Richard's own villainy. We are not convinced by Richard's pious displays; we know his heart as well as we are able.
In a contrast to Richard's hypocrisy, we see some characters repent before their de...
... middle of paper ...
..., she continues to desire revenge, which can only be completed by Richard's death.
In conclusion, it is apparent that Richard III is quite a moral play. The characters in it are able to repent their own transgressions, and condemn those of others, and finally, retribution and judgement are always carried through. This text fully demonstrates a social morality that is, early on, ignored, but culminates in the fulfilment of a natural justice, and thereby endorses the moral codes it shows us.
Bibliography
Primary text: Shakespeare's Richard III
Secondary texts: A Kingdom for a Stage - Ornstein
Shakespeare's History Plays - Tillyard
Engendering a Nation - Jean E. Howard and Phyllis Rackin
Stages of History - Phyllis Rackin
A Commentary on Shakespeare's "Richard III" - W.H. Clemen
Of Deformity - Francis Bacon
Wordcount - 1,089
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...
Anne is quite like a modern woman in the way that if a man tells her
In his article, "Shakespeare 's King Richard III and the Problematics of Tudor Bastardy", Maurice Hunt gives a convincing (dare I say legitimate!) argument for why he believes Shakespeare took a large risk writing and performing his play King Richard III during the life of Queen Elizabeth I. Knowing the challenges Elizabeth faced during her childhood and into her reign because of her father, King Henry VIII 's ever-changing mind whether or not she was a legitimate heir or a bastard, I agree with Hunt in the fact Shakespeare took a huge risk with his performances of Richard III, if in fact she did see the performance which is something I will be touching on later on, but for the sake of the review of his article I will be focusing on his argument based on Elizabeth being present. Hunt also spends a great deal explaining the history of bastardry in the Tudor family so that we can understand why that
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.
and sent before his time" and "since he cannot prove to be a lover; he is
Compare the behavior and reactions of Richard, Anne and Elizabeth in Act One Scene Two and Act Four Scene Four.
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.
... bloody pathway to kingship. Filled with scorn against a society that rejects him and nature that curses him with a weakened body, Richard decides to take revenge and ultimately declares a war between himself and the world. By achieving goals for the mere sake of self-advancement, a self-made hero, an ambitious king, and an atrocious villain were created. Richard assumes that love forms a bond which men can break, but fear is supported by the dread of ever-present pain (Machiavelli ch. XXIV); thus, for true success the hero must be a villain too. Richard III becomes one of literature’s most recognized anti-heroes under the hands of Shakespeare as he has no objective or thought to take up any other profession than the art of hatred; however, ironically being a representative of a heroic ruler sent by God, he is made to commit murder to redeem society of their sins.
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.
From the outset of the play, it is obvious that Richard subscribes to the majority of the Machiavellian principles. Certainly, he is not ashamed or afraid to plot heinous murder, and he does so with an ever-present false front. "I do mistake my person all this while,"1 he muses, plotting Anne's death minutes after having won her hand. He will not even entertain the ideas in public, demanding they "Dive...down to [his] soul."2 He knows that he must be cunning and soulless to succeed in his tasks. Richard also knows it is essential to guard against the hatred of the populace, as Machiavelli warned.
In the Shakespeare play Richard III was depicted as a malformed mean, ill looking, tyrant. But this was not the case. Richard
...n moral and royal principles. By the end of this play, it’s clear that Richard has completely questioned the concept of divine right and when he has to shed his crown and turn over England to his enemy, he dramatically states “Throw away respect, Tradition, form, and ceremonious duty; For you have but mistook me all this while. I live with bread like you, feel want, Taste grief, need friends. (3.3.172-76). Just because Richard as a divine right to be the King doesn’t mean that he is the right choice to accomplished the requirement of what it takes to be a great king. Richard was lacking on the will power of a leader. His downfall was his fault in the sense that he couldn’t concentrate to see what he was doing to his region as a ruler. He failed as a leader but at the same time he gain sometime much better than a crown, Richard gain the understanding of who he is.
In Hamlet Shakespeare is able to use revenge in an extremely skillful way that gives us such deep insight into the characters. It is an excellent play that truly shows the complexity of humans. You can see in Hamlet how the characters are willing to sacrifice t...
In actuality, his mind overpowers his self. Because he firmly holds on to the belief that he “cannot prove a lover” without offering any proof that he really is incapable of wooing “a wanton ambling nymph,” Richard chooses “to prove a villain” (Shakespeare 6). His mind constantly rejects optimism and instead thrusts him back into the darkness where he can protect himself from disappointment. By doing so, Richard’s body becomes a canvas upon which his mind can paint any identity. Richard plays the concerned, supportive brother to an imprisoned Clarence, a good-hearted, loyal citizen in front of Brackenbury, and a drooling lover in front of Lady Anne. In reality, however, neither of these personas come even remotely close to the truth of his identity. By hiding behind these facades as well as expressing evil intentions and a strong connection to the dark side, Richard finds himself capable of being someone amazing. But that someone is not him. He revels in being able to “seem a saint…when mostly…play[ing] the devil,” and thus gains an identity through his villainous and monstrous ideas (36) Every physical action he takes can be traced back to its origin in the mind as a carefully crafted piece of his overall plan to ascend the
From the beginning of the play, Richard II is apathetic at best in his royal role. By exiling Bolingbroke and...