William Shakespeare 's King Richard IIi

Both William Shakespeare’s play “Richard III” and Al Pacino’s docudrama “Looking for Richard” explore the timeless themes of Richards’s pursuit of power and the impacts of his villainous and evil nature. Shakespeare’s Elizabethan context is far different from the humanist and secular context of Pacino. Shakespeare highlights the importance of the church and the divine right to rule of monarchs within Richards’s pursuit of power and downfall; this is not relevant within Pacino’s contemporary times. Hence Pacino employs this key theme to reframe the play's focus from divine rule to political power whilst still exploring Richards’s achievement of this power. Through his portrayal of King Richard, Shakespeare creates a character meant to be hated by his audience who were familiar with the Tudor myth.

Shakespeare’s and Pacino’s texts both depict Richard’s downfall due to his lack of conscience and virtues in his ambitious quest for power to reflect the beliefs of a Providential and secular society respectively. As such, Shakespeare's use of stichomythia and rhetorical question “Was ever woman in this humour wooed? Was ever woman in this humour won?” accentuates the lack of compassion and morality in Richard’s persuasive abilities to emotionally manipulate Anne to accept him as a suitor in his path to attain greatness. With Richard’s gratification of his achievement, Shakespeare illustrates the tyrant within Richard as his moral conscience diminishes due to over-ambition, hence reflecting the harsh Machiavellian politics in the Elizabethan era. Shakespeare’s underlying message on over-ambition is further exemplified through the dissolution of Richard’s unjust reign and mental stability through the death imagery in “It is now dead midnight. Cold fearful drops stand on my trembling flesh. What do I fear? Myself?”. Richard’s unstable mind in the ghosts’ precession, encapsulates Shakespeare’s message of the ramifications of sacrilegious acts whilst asserting God’s divine retribution on any form of theomachy ambition. In accordance to Shakespeare’s illustration of the fall of man due to ambition,

There is no doubt that Shakespeare was the author of great pieces of literature during an interesting time period. Given the circumstances, he was indeed mastering his craft during a very tumultuous juncture in British history. When one reads Richard III, they don’t necessarily have to know a great deal about the War of Roses to understand that there is some serious strife going on. However, if the reader takes some time to understand this fascinating string of events, the story of Richard and his fall becomes much more interesting. In all of his brilliance, Shakespeare manages to toy with the idea of humor in this very morose play. As a matter of fact, he does this in many, if not all of his tragedies.

To play one of Shakespeare’s most complex roles successfully on stage or on screen has been the aspiration of many actors. William Shakespeare’s Hamlet has been the focus on various accounts throughout the 20th Century, each actor attempting to bring something unique and unmarked to the focal character. Franco Zeffirelli and Kenneth Branagh, both film directors, introduce varying levels of success on the screen through downright differences in ways of translation and original ideas. Zeffirelli’s much shorter interpretation of the film is able to convey the importance of Hamlet as a masterwork by using modern approaches to film but still capturing the traditional work behind Shakespeare’s well-known play.

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

Shakespeare’s King Richard III and Al Pacino’s 1996 documentary ‘Looking for Richard’ enhance a deeper understanding of ambition and identity through depicting explicit connections between each text and their audience. Enhancement of each text is gained through differing contexts and text types which are presented through literary and cinematic techniques. Both composers use anachronisms to parallel beliefs and values such as ambition and identity which transcend both contexts.

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 understand the complexity of the lineage of the English monarchy, it is imperative to make a connection between present values and those of the past. While contemporary society demonstrate an appreciation of William Shakespeare’s play King Richard III (1851) it is not one of his plays they can readily connect with. Al Pacino’s docu-drama, Looking for Richard, (henceforth Looking for...) (1996) attempts to bridge that gap through intertextual connections. Both composers elucidate their respective contexts through their exploration of the English monarch, King Richard III, through their representation of the Elizabethan struggle for power and Pacino’s attempts to connect the post-modern world to the 16th century. Pacino attempts to transform the Elizabethan play in light of

Throughout my comparative study of texts and context, I have explored various connections shared between William Shakespeare’s ‘Richard the 3rd’ and Al Pacino’s ‘Looking for Richard’. As both of these items are based on the same character, King Richard the 3rd, they share a lot in common. The connection that I have chosen to concentrate on though is the idea of power, and how both texts explore this theme.

Richard III is the story of a villain who will commit unspeakable crimes in order to attain power. However, it is important to remember that it is just that, a story. Shakespeare wrote to entertain, and sometimes in order to captivate an audience, history must be embellished. For example, the events on which the play is based span 14 years, although the runtime of the play seems to suggest that it all took place within a few months. Even though this play is classified as historical, it fits more in the historical fiction genre as Shakespeare bases it on actual events but takes artistic liberties with his characters. In Richard III, due to the political climate of his time, Shakespeare characterizes Richard as ruthless and power hungry in order to paint the Tudor dynasty in a superior light.

(Shakespeare I.i.26-31). William Shakespeare’s Richard III depicts Richard, Duke of Gloucester’s, rise to power through means of manipulation, dishonesty, and violence. His actions lead to the eventual deaths of himself and those he seized power from. Based on historian Thomas More’s account of Richard III, it is apparent that Shakespeare was greatly influenced by More’s writings. Thomas More places a great deal of emphasis on King Richard III being “[...] hard-favored in appearance” (More 5) as just one example of how his deformed appearance might have played a role in his actions. Richard claims that his deformities prove that he cannot be loved or feel a sense of love, so he is predestined to be a “villain” since he cannot enjoy life. In this essay, I posit that Richard III’s appearance resulted in a great deal of psychological trauma, which may serve as an explanation for his actions. Thus, Richard III’s appearance essentially predetermined his fate as a villain, but also determined him to act as a villain based on the negative treatment he was accustomed to.

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.

Now is the winter of our discourse. Made glorious summer by Al Pacino 's documentary, Looking for Richard. The documentary presents a facet of cultural and academic critiques of performing Shakespeare while striving to turn those preconceived presumptions on their head. Pacino 's documentary shakes up the script and provides an interesting dialogue on the importance, influence, and approachability of Shakespeare on a grand scale.

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.

William Shakespeare’s Hamlet is a celebrated revenge tragedy, which challenges conventions of the Elizabethan era. An unquenchable thirst for revenge is the underlining factor which propels the action of the play, engaging our undeniable fantasy for vengeance as we too are torn between bestial urges to act and Christian morality “vengeance is mine says the Lord”. Additionally, the theme of verisimilitude explores the complexities of appearance vs reality depicting the difficulty in comprehending the truth in a world changing from feudal ideals to modern humanist values. Thus, Shakespeare’s skillful use of structure, language and context creates a multi-dimensional text, which resonates through the ages to explore the extremities of the human condition. Thrilling the responder to reflect upon their own psychological and physical state of being as we empathise with Hamlet’s ambiguous predicament and question our own place in a world full of choice, chaos, corruption and terror.