King Richard Iii and Looking for Richard Essay

This derives from the play as a recount of historical events with a known outcome and a medium for propaganda in support of the monarchy, an avid determinist. Nevertheless, the aforementioned tension is prevalent throughout and epitomised by the paradoxical pun ‘I am determined to prove a villain’. Uttered with a tone of poise and self-assuredness, the term ‘determined’ implies a conscious statement of purpose and a preordained villainy. Thus Richard is aligned with the stock character of the Vice, an instrument of predestination, and the innovative Machiavel, an advocator of humanism. Despite this, the ultimate decline of Richard is consequential of the reign of determinism. The directly antithetic correctio ‘I am a villain. Yet I lie, I am not’ yields an implicit self-doubt and acknowledgment of an inability to fulfil his humanist purpose. Providentialism thus displays precedence over self-determination. This is in direct contrast to Pacino’s docudrama, composed for a secular modern American audience disengaged with traditional notions of determinism. A greatly diminished and altered portrayal of Margaret, the primary instrument of determinism in the play, is expressive of this. Pacino devalues her curses by reducing her to a ‘sort of ghost of the past’. A frenzied montage of informative discourse and the activity of the play complete with

A deeper understanding of ambition and identity emerges from pursuing the connections between King Richard III and Looking for Richard.

Texts are shaped by their compositional context and thus offer new insights about the composer’s era. However, as there are ongoing concerns of humanity, key ideologies resonate over time and are affirmed between texts as shown in William Shakespeare’s play ‘King Richard III’ (1591) and Al Pacino’s docudrama ‘Looking For Richard’ (1996). King Richard III examines the irrational behaviours and moral ramifications of a power lust Richard to explore ideas of the relentless pursuit of power, betrayal and deceit, reflective of the theocentric context of the Elizabethan society. Centuries later, Looking For Richard explores Pacino’s journey to reshape a Shakespearean text that is representative of the changing contextual norms and values of a contemporary American audience who are confused and sceptical about the relevance of Shakespeare’s plays. Both texts provide an image of Richard’s deceit reflective of their distinctive contexts. However, despite the disparity of time, both texts display how key ideas such as deceit, endure and resonate over time.

-Anne mostly in the dark enhancing her incomprehension, camera turns away from her or shows only as body parts to frame Richard’s body

Richard was the third son of Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine, and he was given the duchy of Aquitaine, his mother’s inheritance, at the age of 11 and was enthroned as duke at Poitiers in 1172. Richard possessed precocious political and military ability, he won fame for his knightly prowess, and quickly learned how to control the

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.

Have you ever read a book that made you contemplate how it would pertain to your life or someone else’s life? Certainly, after reading the play titled King Henry V originally written by William Shakespeare and edited by Andrew Gurr, I concluded that certain situations in this book correspond to several aspects in this world. For instance, it can connect to many events that occurred during the 1590s, the time period in which this play was written. On the other hand, it correlates with other compositions that were read in class such as The Prince, but more importantly this play undoubtedly relates to my life. Even though you may not think the production titled King Henry V applies to you, you may want to reconsider your decision and realize

‘King Richard III’ and ‘Looking for Richard’ Comparative Study Both William Shakespeare’s play ‘King Richard III’ (1592) and Al Pacino’s docudrama film ‘Looking for Richard’ (1996) are closely linked in terms of themes, however as the saying goes ‘No text is written in a vacuum’ and both composers had different agendas and contexts resulting in different methods of conveying the core values. Shakespeare’s goal was to dramaticise the historical events that led to the establishment of the Tudor dynasty as to appeal to the queen at the time as she was a Tudor. Pacino has a very different goal of trying to educate and entertain a modern audience, Pacino states at the start of the docudrama “Our main goal with this project is to reach an audience

There are few names as commonplace, ubiquitous, and recognizable as that of William Shakespeare. His enchanting story telling, complex plot twists, and brilliant usage of rhetoric make it easy to understand why connoisseurs of the English language are devotees to his style of writing. However, it is his extremely portable themes that endear him to today’s audience – plotlines that resonate with the modern everyday human just as much with someone from the 1600s.

I decided to convert Shakespeare’s Richard III into a children’s book due to how much Shakespeare’s Richard intrigues me and the moral lessons that I believe a child can learn from his story.

King Richard II had a skewed view of his roles. He was unable to successfully balance his role as king with his role of a man. One cannot rule a kingdom properly without knowing both of these roles (Moseley, 2009). He had a public persona that led him to believe, falsely, that he was immortal; privately, he was fallible and immortal. King Richard II did not pay attention to the things happening around him (Attend, 2017). He felt he was only responsible to God. This caused him to feel more resentment towards people such as Bolingbroke because he felt Bolingbroke should not have had a say. Between King Richard’s unpredictable temperament and his complicated psychological state, his confusion about his roles because too much to overcome (Forker,

The major step in any sort of ethical discussion is a precise definition of evil, and its role in life; this point is a heavy theme in Shakespeare’s Richard III. While many believe that Shakespeare’s plays were in fact just “byproduct of the sociopolitical events of the period” (Smith

            Throughout Richard II, Bolingbroke is up against King Richard.  Richard is, to a considerable degree, the morally void opportunist: he does after

The greatest playwright of English literature was William Shakespeare. His final play that he wrote alone was The Tempest, the story of how the former Duke of Milan, Prospero, returned to power after being exiled on an island for twelve years. While reading The Tempest, it is hard not to notice the ambivalence of the character of Prospero. Consequently, the character’s motivation and subsequent characteristics are solely defined by the reader. Typically, Prospero is seen as driven by either revenge or redemption. This divide predominately shapes the view of his character as a whole, and in turn the view of the whole play. This paper will demonstrate that, though there are many ways to interpret a work of literature, the best way to view The Tempest is in a meta-theatrical framework where Prospero is a vengeful and controlling character.

Paul Raffled and Gary Watt, described the Elizabethan time as an era where the ‘government was conducted and represented as theatre’ . The aforementioned quote questions the importance of being performative or acting in relation to leading a kingdom or to rule accordingly. Throughout Shakespeare’s plays, he illustrates that magistracy is more than the ability to dictate, but more to do with effectively appearing the part of a magistrate. Encompassing the themes of ‘Divine Right of Kings’, in King Richard the Second, and the ‘Divine Quality of Mercy’, in Merchant of Venice , Shakespeare demonstrates the significance of performance through the unified concept that kingship and law is fragile, easily broken and used for deceptive purposes. This essay will specifically look at the Duel Scene (Act I, Scene III) and the Mirror Scene (Act IV, Scene I) in King Richard the second (Richard II). Also, look into Shylock’s Trial (Act IV, Scene I) and the Casket Game (Act II, Scene IX) in Merchant of Venice (MOV). To which this easy will prove that being performative is to the utmost importance for magistrates during the Shakespearean era.