King Richard Transformation Essay

Upon Richard's return to England, he learns of the events that had transpired in his absence. At first his own arrogance allows him to believe that since it is his God given right to rule as King, he will be protected. But then just as quickly, Richard's arrogance turns into despair upon the realization that Henry has gained support of the nobles and the people of England. Henry and Richard finally meet at Ramparts Castle leading to the climax of the play. Henry demands retribution for the allocation of his families' possessions and

he finally wins the mayor and the alderman over and receives the offer to "the

Richard, the main character of the Shakespeare’s play, Richard III is portrayed as socially destructive and politically over-ambitious. His destructive potential is depicted by the way he relates with the other protagonists in the play and also by what he confesses as his intentions.

It is only during his deposition and his imprisonment that Richard shows his greatest strength as a dramatic figure. Although occasionally he seems to demonstrate self-pity, he also reveals himself to have an acute awareness of the ironies and absurdities in the structure of power of his kingdom. He still compels the court to reconsider his initial claim that the crown is divinely appointed: “Not all the water… can wash the balm of an anointed king (3.2.55)”. Although he keeps reminding those present of his God-given mandate to rule, he seems also to take pleasure in passing on the trails of kingship to his successor. As a King, He does have a God-given position of being the king. But as a king one should know the difference between moral values and ethics values. Just because Richard is King and is appointed by God doesn’t give him any rights to be an awful ruler. He can’t always fight a problem by saying that he is

    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.

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

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’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’s reign as a king is certainly authentic; he has the power, appearance, and air of a true king. Richard has no problem going through the ceremonial motions and exercising his Divine Rite over his subjects. Though used haphazardly, Richard’s power is undeniable—he can cease a heated battle by the mere drop of his gage, banish with the “breath” of a word, he can “rent” out England’s lands and still be praised by “flatters;” all because he was supposedly chosen by God. However, once his power is challenged, its evident he is only authentic by virtue of being king; there are

A defining feature between these two men’s fate is Richard’s dependence on good fortune through divine intervention, whereas Henry and Machiavelli rely on free will, what they themselves can do to manipulate the situation. Richard calls upon God to defend him, thinking that he can manipulate God’s will to fit his desires, “angels fight, weak men must fall, for heaven still guards the right” (III.ii pg 409) This idea of unearthly abilities that allow him to manipulate nature itself, even England is stupid and shows how incompetent he is. Compared to Henry in this play, he is someone who wants to serve England, not how England can serve them; in other words what you can do for your country. Machiavelli states that “so long as fortune varies, and men stand still, they will prosper while they suit the times, and fail when they do not”, Richard in all ways fills this statement, his reliance on fortune seals his fate in the end (Machiavelli 148). Shakespeare shows this antiquated idea to show how much England needed a change of leadership and rule, the end of medievalism and the rise of Machiavellianism.

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.

Richard is taking on the challenge of becoming king as a game of outsmarting others. He makes sure that he eliminates everyone that stands in his way. Family ties are not a matter that Richard worries about in his pursuit. He has both of his brothers killed in order to become closer to his goal. He does not have a sense of what is morally right or morally wrong.

In Shakespeare’s history play Richard II, King Richard II’s relationship with God can be explored throughout the play as he gives up his crown. Richard II is easily seen as weak, making some think that he is not fit for the role of king. He does not listen to his advisors and takes money from the nobles. These actions lead Henry Bolingbroke to take the crown. Richard II does not put up much of a fight as he willingly hands the crown over to Bolingbroke, but he does prolong the process as he dramatically hands his crown and scepter over. Richard II even speaks out about his power that was given to him:

Richard definitely had a lot of enemies and didn't care for for anyone but himself.All he care about was the power he gained and keeping that power. He shows this when he kills certain people that relate to the throne(edwardyv). It also shows that he has enemies by the way he died. It wasn't so much as how he dies but what happened to his body afterwards. His body showed that after he died people did horrible revenge to his deceased body(worldviews).

Richard III displays a England in the wake of constant revolutions and tumult which has left her in an unclear state. Without religion, ceremony, or even law left to govern the people only self-interested, and therefore apolitical, people thrive. As such Richard III comes to the throne with a thunderous speed and a wake of bodies in his trail. However, this was not always the character of England. Prior to the constant revolution and tumult was the rule of King John which, while not free of evil, was dedicated toward something outside of the self. Through an examination of each play one can see the requirements for a truly ‘political’ rule.