Richard King: A Character Analysis Of King Richard III

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

Richard’s political ambition is revealed through his strategic calculations based on the order of birth in his York family which puts him third away from the throne. Ahead of him is his elder brother, George Clarence, a barrier which will have to eradicate. His brother, King Edward, is another political barrier, by simply being alive, in power and equally by being the father of the two young princes . Richard’s creates a political mistrust between his two

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.

William Shakespeare’s Richard III is a historical play that focuses on one of his most famous and complex villainous characters. Richard III or The Duke of Gloucester, who eventually becomes king, is ambitious, bitter, ugly and deformed. He manipulates and murders his way to the throne and sets the tone for the whole play with his very first speech, which is the opening of the play.

Richard I reigned over England during the Middle Ages from 1189 to 1199 with great bravery and immense courage. Richard was born as the third legitimate son of King Henry II of England and never assumed that he would ever ascend to become the king. After leading his country in the Third Crusade, he gained the nicknames “the lionhearted” and “the absent king.” Through many heroic deeds while away at war, he deserved the nickname of “The Lionhearted” the most.

A main aspect of Richard’s, Duke of Gloucester, personality is his hatred of women, possibly due to most woman within Richard III holding more knowledge than the men, in regards to Richard’s deceiving nature. The only woman who is outsmarted by Richard is Lady Anne.

    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

For the Elizabethan audience of Shakespeare’s plays, power was given by God. Power and associated wealth was a birthright and you got what was given to you. It was understood that a hierarchy was established by God. Richard, in his quest for the throne, challenged God as the throne was not rightfully his, as his two nephews and his brothers were still alive. From the theo-centric worldview that the Elizabethan society would have held, Richard never had a chance because he was a mere man challenging God. Richard is closely aligned to the fallen angel and the devil, being called ‘hellish’, a ‘cacodemon’, a ‘foul devil’ by himself, Margaret and Anne respectively. The use of such words emphasise his direct attack on God by choosing to be evil.

Shakespeare used the physical deformities and the gray areas of history to create one of the most well known villains of all time. Shakespeare’s play, Richard III, is the leading voice in the Richard III story. He is portrayed as an ugly villain, an image that is fueling the way people think, talk and reference Richard III. In reality he differed as a person, but many mysteries remain unsolved. The murder of the princes in the tower at the hand of Richard III is still undecided. In more recent terms we are able to see what he actually looked like and if his physical appearance played the role it did in real life. Richard III is an unloved king by many people even though we base most of our assumptions on a play.

Richard speaks about how people see him as a curse to the land and how he is unfit to be there. He does not like that and to prove everybody wrong, he will rise up to be king, no matter what he has to do. He even stated in his opening soliloquy that he will, “set my brother Clarence and the King, / In deadly hate the one against the other.” (I.i. 35-36). He can’t live his whole life being told he is a villian just because of his deformity.

Late 14th century English king Richard II lost all of his power towards the end of his reign as a result of his exploded sense of self-importance and godly association, which led to fatal opposition from multiple prominent aristocrats and eventually England as a whole. This gradual growth of opposition can be seen in the persecution of Richard’s most favored advisors; the aftermath of fear and apprehension that followed Richard’s execution of the Lord’s appellant in 1397; and his swift and universally encouraged abdication by Henry Bolingbroke, future Henry IV.

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.

Early on in the play, we learn of the character Buckingham and his allegiance sworn to Richard, the Duke of Gloucester. One can view Buckingham as Richard’s partner in arms. Throughout most of the play, we see the two conspirators design and carry out evil and malicious acts to place Richard as the king. They were willing to remove any obstacle in order for a new king to be crowned. Clarence, Hastings, and Lady Anne are a few of the characters who befell a gruesome fate due to the conspiracy of Richard and Buckingham. Buckingham is completely devoted to Richard’s cause and will stop at

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.