Richard III Ambition Essay

Moreover, Richard’s multifaceted nature in his determination to attain power is further accentuated through the striking metaphor “And thus I clothe my naked villainy …And seem a saint, when most I play the devil.”, which Shakespeare employs to represent Richard as an embodiment of absolute evil and amorality. Hence, the Shakespearean audience becomes aware of the destruction of Richard’s moral compass as he sacrifices the value of honesty in his ambitious plan to gain power and engage in sacrilegious acts to create his own fate. Comparatively, Pacino reshapes the downfall of Richard as a result of his ambition for power to reflect the secular perspective of free will and aspiration. As such, Pacino’s reimagining of the opening soliloquy with a mid shot of Pacino leaning over the sick King Edward effectively encapsulates the control Richard possesses, which allows him to deceive the king and maneuver his way

Human beings behave with a conscience, an innate feeling of right and wrong. The conscience prevents most people from committing horrific acts, and those who commit such acts bear a guilty conscience. Richard starts out as the perfect Machiavellian, but as Shakespeare’s historical drama Richard III unfolds, he becomes fallible due to his conscience. Richard’s Machiavellian techniques allow him to rise to the throne; the same tactics cause Richard’s demise. Shakespeare explicitly uses Richard’s failure to demonstrate that Machiavelli’s philosophy does not work. According to Shakespeare the most important reason for the downfall of Richard is his conscience, and Machiavelli’s philosophy does not account for this quality of human nature.

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

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

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.

To establish the sinister intentions of Richard the actor, Shakespeare makes reference to his moral and physical impediments that leave him cursing “I that am not shaped for sportive tricks…I that am curtailed…”. Through the subtle use of anaphora and repetition of ‘I that am’, which is fleshed out by a definitive tone, the audience is made aware of how Richard is led ostensibly “to prove a villain” and thus, adopt a disguise. Moreover, Richard’s theatricality is stressed as he embarks as a ‘master’ of his own fate, for he perceives himself as “subtle, false, and treacherous”. His sinister intentions are exemplified by the use of tricolon, evocative word choice and short sentence patterning that create a sharp staccato effect. These intentions allow Shakespeare to subtly resonate Richard with the Vice from the medieval morality plays as well as the Renaissance Machiavelli who actively sought power, caused mischief, practised deceit and cynically gloats over his success. Moreover, Richard’s acting allows him to confide in his audience as he is paradoxically honest about his dishonesty, whilst also encouraging his audience not to detest him, but rather, take delight in his cleverness as the ‘director’ of the play. Thus, the opening soliloquy of Richard III offers an insight into how Richard manipulates the

The pursuit of individual recognition in the form of power and authority remains intrinsic in texts despite the change in contexts. This is evident in William Shakespeare’s 16th century play, King Richard III and Al Pacino’s 19th century docu-drama, Looking for Richard. Both texts explore that the pursuit of individual recognition can be initiated by an individual’s flaw in character caused by the corruption of their sense of morality in order to gain power. This is depicted through the malicious and treacherous nature of the central character, Richard in both texts. There are central ideas conveyed in these texts, including the nature of authority, the acquisition of power and the significant impact determinism plays in one’s decisions and actions. However, due to the difference in cultural context, Pacino reshapes these values to make Shakespeare accessible to a modern day audience. As a result, Pacino sequentially follows the plot of King Richard III in order to emphasise the relevance of Shakespeare’s plays in a modern society. Pacino addresses this through an emphasis on film techniques instead of dramatic techniques. Therefore, it is evident that the comparative study of these texts allows the responder to appreciate the connection between contexts and values, allowing the responder to reflect upon their own society’s concerns.

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.

In William Shakespeare’s play, Richard III, Richard is portrayed as physically deformed and psychologically affected. It is believed that his inner soul is a reflection of his physical deformities. Richard is considered as the protagonist of this play, however this is highly contradictive. A protagonist is the hero of the story who exhibits characteristics of courage and perseverance, and is admired for their brave deeds as well as their noble qualities. Richard however, contradicts the character portrayal of a hero and demonstrates himself as the exact opposite: an anti-hero. The play opens up with Richard’s, (Duke of Gloucester) soliloquy: “I am determined to

But although Richard believed he was just in what he was doing, the heinous acts that he committed throughout the play voids any justification he had to begin with. In Richard III, by William Shakespeare , Richard believes that because of his deformities and because he was not properly rewarded for all the work he did to put his brother Edward on the throne, that he is justified in taking the paths he does to make himself king; however, although he believes he is morally sound in whatever steps he takes to obtain the crown, the inhuman acts that Richard commits in his lust for power negates any justifications he may have had at the start. The lesson that Shakespeare was trying to convey in this play is that sometimes, the ends do not always justify the means, and that if you let your lust for power consume you, all that will come of it is

Richard III as a Successful Politician Shakespeare's Richard III is set in England after the War of the Roses. Richard, the megalomanic eponymous character, is desperate for the throne of England. He tells us that he seeks the crown to compensate for his deformity (he was a hunchback from birth). Richard has his own brother killed and later has former allies and those who still stood in his way killed also. When Richard eventually gains the throne he finds his conscience and begins to feel insecure, he has the two Princes he has locked away killed.

Richard III, born in England, to Richard, Duke of York; and Cecily Neville, Duchess of York, is often pinned as the culprit in the murder of his nephews. Edward V and Richard, Duke of York, were the sons of King Edward IV, Richard III’s older brother. When King Edward IV died on April 9th, 1483, Edward V, roughly twelve years old at the time, remained the heir to the throne. King Edward IV had appointed Richard to govern England until Edward V came of age. Around June 1483, following a declaration by Bishop Stillington that Edward had been married to Eleanor, Lady Butler before Elizabeth Woodville and that therefore Edward V was an illegitimate heir, Richard III declared himself as king. Soon after, his nephews both disappeared, last seen

Shakespeare’s King Richard III examines the nature of villainy. Richard announces himself as a villain in the opening soliloquy, when he declares his intention to be evil “I am determined to prove a villain” due to his “unfished…deformed…rudely stamped nature”. This hyperbolic description of Richards’ deformities exposes the audience to his inner thoughts, while also representing his ‘unnaturalness’ – an outward sign of his inner corruption. This reflects the Elizabethan context in which the play was written. Queen Elizabeth I is the granddaughter of the play’s Richmond, whose supporters lent the Tudor dynasty legitimacy by claiming that not only was Richard a “monster of evil” (Stephen Greenblatt), but that Richmond’s reign as King Henry

Linda Charnes takes a different approach as to why Richard in Richard III, wants to be king. She believes that Richard wants to hide behind the English crown in an attempt to hide his deformity. Essentially, she is saying that rather than other people having a predetermined view of him because of his deformity, he “’makes’ the opinion which makes him” (356). She means that Richard is able to alter the view of the people once he is King because he has ultimate authority, and what he says, goes. Through his cunning and charismatic ways, he’s able manipulate the people’s vision of him and in Charnes’ eyes, he “desire[s] to replace stigma, and its shameful sense of social exclusion, with charisma” (355). once he’s King, and Richard’s deformed image

Richard II was a king of England, but his failures attracted more interests from different parties. Most of the other rulers renowned in the world have fame for being successful in their rule. However, Richard II was known for his failures and inadequacies during his rule. Richard was king when he was nine years but since there was no regency, his uncle, John of Gaunt, dominated his control when he was young. However, during Richard II's rule, there was erupt of the French war. The war was spreading at a high rate, and the effects were seen all over the nation. There were poor royal finances, and they could not satisfy the needs of the armies during the war (Lebow, 2017). In 1381, Peasant's Revolt also happened as the king imposed a third poll