Richard II Leadership

William Shakespeare’s play King Richard III and Al Pacino’s docu-drama Looking for Richard have enriched my understanding of how context shapes the values inscribed within each text. In light of this, the connection that exists between the two texts is: how the central character of the texts embodies the values of theatricality and language in order to attain their own perception of power as shaped by their respective contexts. Whereas Richard III relentlessly pursues political power in the context of a late 16th century

Richard the Lionhearted was not do much of anything for the people of England or for England in general. When he became king of England he devoted his life to the Third Crusade which was started because Saladin, the leader of the Muslim armies, captured and took over Jerusalem. He did not care about the future of England, and used all the money he could to buy things for the Crusade. He was also competing with French, German, and English powers for the title of getting Jerusalem back. People think that Richard the Lionhearted plotted Conrad’s, the German who was trying to get Jerusalem,

Shakespeare adapts these tenants to construct a power thirsty character. Consequently, while the London elite was introduced to these ideals, Shakespeare shaped the overall plot of the play to exemplify the discussed the power quest introduced by Machiavelli. This results in Richard’s actions that lead him to kill his brother and manipulate his family into getting the throne.

As I Lay Dying by William Faulkner was a story set in Yoknapatawpha County, Mississippi, and quite frankly, it was awful. It took me quite a long time to get through, because the plot was frustrating, I didn’t care about the characters, and the constant shifting between multiple people as narrator was really confusing. The story itself was well written, but I constantly had to check to see who was narrating, and it broke up the action. Furthermore, it took the family forever to get where they needed to be. So, while the may have been written, the overall plot was frustrating, long, and confusing. This work had many weaknesses, and I’m not even sure how the author could fix them.

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 II is an authoritative and greedy king of England, and he is living in a period of transition that medieval knights who are swearing total loyalty to a king has been disappearing and an aristocracy starts to gain a power for their own good. However, Richard II keeps believing the power of kingship, and he also is too confident himself. He overestimates his authority and power; furthermore, he ignores the periodical change. Therefore, he speaks confidently how firm his position as king is to the people in Wales, but his attitude changes when he suffers a defeat by Henry Bolingbroke that he

‘vices’ (ll. 2 & 34), and that he ‘fell / to make the living wise’

The Medieval Times, also known as “The Middle Ages” (5th-15th century), was a period in history that started when Rome fell in 476 CE. Important political characters found the Medieval Time important because it allowed these people to push and conquer different lands. Richard the Lionheart was one of the important political characters because he was the one to rule the third crusades. Richard the Lionheart was born on September 8, 1157, in Oxford, England. Even though he couldn’t speak English, he was a great leader and people understood what he wanted. Richard went on crusade so he can conquer other lands, like the Siege of Acre with King Philip of France from August 28, 1189 to July 12, 1191. Richard the Lionheart died on April 6, 1199 in Châlus, France. Richard died because he had gangrene, a condition that occurs when body tissue dies. Similarly, to Richard the Lionheart during the Medieval Times, Erik the Red was a traveler. Born on May 4, 950 in Jæren, Erik the Red was a Norwegian Viking and a traveler. He sailed from Iceland on 982 and he led a group of colonists to Greenland on 986. Erik the Red is famous for discovering and naming a land that we know as Greenland today. Erik the Red died on 1030 because he had terminal illness. Richard the Lionheart and Erik the Red were very similar because Richard led a crusade group and Erik led a colonist group. Another similarity was that both traveled outside their homeland to find new parts of the world. Although Richard the Lion were very similar, both were extremely different because Richard the Lionheart was attacking to conquer new land while Erik the Red sent out colonists to start a new life in a new area, causing no harm to other people.

    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.

A general conclusion of most critics is that Richard II is a play about the deposition of a "weak and effeminate" king. That he was a weak king, will be conceded. That he was an inferior person, will not. The insight to Richard's character and motivation is to view him as a person consistently acting his way through life. Richard was a man who held great love for show and ceremony. This idiosyncrasy certainly led him to make decisions as king that were poor, and in effect an inept ruler. If not for this defect in character, Richard could be viewed as a witty, intelligent person, albeit ill-suited for his inherited occupation.

On his deathbed, John of Gaunt invites the young King Richard and lectures him about his poor leadership skills and how due to his ineptness he has destroyed the splendor of England. In reference to the state of the Kingdom, Gaunt uses the imagery of the garden and expresses concern about how if mismanaged, it comes to ruin. Throughout the Shakespearean texts, the concept of the garden has been used as imagery for the kingdom of England, with deep insights on how mismanagement ultimately leads to destruction.

In Shakespeare's famous tragedy King Lear, the parallel between natural and unnatural occurrences unifies the plot while further developing and foreshadowing the conflicts in the play. Lear's resignation from the throne and his method of distributing the land, as well as the unnaturalness of Gloucester's and Edmund's situation, brings turmoil and tragedy to a society based on natural order. From the physical works of nature such as the storm in the third act to the variety of unnatural politics, it all comes together to cause ultimate chaos in the kingdom.

According to the article History and Tragedy in Richard II, written by Elliot, he writes “Richard is a failure as a king not because he is immoral, nor because he is too sensitive and refined for the job, but because he misunderstands the nature of kingship (260)”. Richard’s downfall is not all his fault but as a king he should have understood the idea of what a great king needs to do to succeed in the life of royalty.

Once upon a time there was a boy named William. He was a curious child and loved sticking his nose where it didn't belong. This caused his parents a lot of grief having to watch over him while also completing their feudal duties. They lived in the castle of lord Richard and his family had been pledged to them for many years. Lord Richard had taken an interest in William and noticed the trouble he was causing his parents. He was never angry with William however because showed a stark resemblance to himself at that age. William did slow down all of the work that was happening throughout castle always asking question. One day lord Richard saw William's parents walking through the ------ and spoke with them. They were terrified that they were

Eisenhower once quoted “The supreme quality of leadership is integrity.” This quote correlates to William Shakespeare’s play Hamlet because the protagonist of Hamlet—Hamlet— exhibits the quality of a king through sincerity. The evidence provided in the text first serves Hamlet’s sincerity in act one, all the way through the end of the last act. Due to the loss of his father Hamlet faces the consequence of