Who Is King Richard III Good Or Evil

These traits that Richard displayed were not befitting to a king and a man who was suppose to lead. Rather than look out for the

Richard is not eye-catching due to physical deformity which he vividly describes as the cause of his misfit, and therefore acquires himself the status of a victim. No one pays attention to him because others neither find him handsome nor sexually appealing. But he magnetizes the audience, makes them complicit of his own deeds and dares it to look away.

In prior years, Richard had gained much public support and accolades for his part in fighting Scotland. He uses this support in his next step of a move for the throne. In the past there had been rumors of Edward the IV being illegitimate, now there was evidence that Edward's son was illegitimate as well, as Edward IV had not been legally wed to Elizabeth when they had Edward V. Upon hearing this news, Richard chose to proceed with caution, only telling chief political players and asking their advice. Richard was wise for these actions. He had been known for his prudence in the past in the war with Scotland. When Edward IV wanted a crushing blow to the Scots, Richard realized that it would be too costly and at the same time England had already accomplished a great feat. Richard pushed

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

* Shakespeare shows the journey in Richard III of Richard himself on his dark quest to becoming king by both using his literary skills and performance to attain what he wants, ultimately being power.

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.

The house of Lancaster treats Richard very poorly, he grew up with a hateful mother and his family always put him after all of his brothers. His deformity has made him a monster to all around him. Even Queen Elizabeth believes that Richard is a “Foul spider” and a “Bunch-backed toad” (Richard III IV.iv. 84). Richard’s mother, the Duchess, also talks about Richard poorly.

According to the article, titled "After digging up old bones, Britain argues: was King Richard III a villain?" written by the Washing Post, the central idea of this article is about King Richard III's life and whether or not he is a villain. For example, the author states "Before he was king, Richard III was a loyal supporter of his brother, Edward IV. Upon Edward's death, however, Richard usurped the crown from his brother's 12-year-old son, Edward V" (Washington Post, "After digging up old bones, Britain argues: was King Richard III a villain?", paragraph 5). This statement shows us a snippet of King Richard III's life and it also shows us how he was as a person before he became king. However it does not show the villainous acts he is accused

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.

Source 2 which is a 19th- century portrait that shows Richard as King, indicating that he was to become one of the most powerful people in Medieval Europe in the feudal system, below the Pope. Richard, becoming the King of England was one of the most major events in the life of Richard the Lionheart, as it affected the whole feudal system in Medieval

however it was not and he had to face him in battle. "My lord he doth

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

Shakespeare wrote many plays during his lifetime, but possibly none as complex and busy as Richard III. It is an intricate play where many different characters are portrayed in many different roles. One of those characters is the Duke of Buckingham, a villain and for the majority of the play the trusted accomplice for Richard. In almost every scene in which Buckingham was portrayed, he proved himself to be a rebellious villain over and over. As a rebel, he fought as a revolutionist, craving a change of events for self-seeking power. Buckingham exemplifies the definition of a revolutionist rebel because of his willingness to be part of a revolution in order to change his surroundings and increase his own eminence. He followed through with almost every plan given to him by Richard to accomplish his purposes until the final order to kill the young princes.

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.

William Shakespeare wrote his histories focusing on an individual historical character and how they interact with their community as well as how it affect them or how they affected it. In Richard III, the titular character ambition is to become a true king, but being the youngest of three brothers (who have male sons as well) his chances are very slim so he ascends into the throne by deceit and murder. In Henry V, the titular character agrees to go to war to extend his influence onto France over a confusing reason by clergymen. Shakespeare, through both of the monarchs of these plays, explores Machiavellian politics and what it means to be live by these principles. Although both Richard the Third and Henry the Fifth are Machiavellians by having the ability to be a constant actor and doing whatever it takes to remain in power, but by having Henry succeed in the end shows how superior of a Machiavellian he was because he had a concrete goal in mind throughout Henry V.