Richard III is not useful because it is historically incorre
Richard is difficult to understand psychologically because, while he is clearly pwer-hungry and sadistic, the deep-rooted motivations for his malevolent hatred are hard to pinpoint. Some critics feel that Richard is not really a fully developed character in the way that Shakespeare's later characters, such as Macbeth or Hamlet, are. Such critics argue that Richard does not possess a complex human psychology but instead recalls a stock character from early medieval drama. Like the "Vice" character of medieval morality pageants, who simply represented the evil in man, Richard does not justify his villainy—he is simply bad. Indeed, Richard, with self-conscious theatricality, compares himself to this standard character when he says, "Thus like the formal Vice, Iniquity, / I moralize two meanings in one word" (III.i.82–83). We should note that the mere fact that he reflects upon his similarity to the Vice figure suggests that there is more to him than this mere resemblance. Watching Richard's character, Shakespeare's audiences also would have thought of the "Machiavel," the archetype of the scandalously amoral, power-hungry ruler that had been made famous by the Renaissance Italian writer Niccolò Machiavelli in The Prince (first publis
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Richard III, Lord Buckingham, Lady Anne, Henry VII, Queen Elizabeth, Symbols Symbols, Elizabeth Woodeville, King Edward, Henry VI, Anne Clarence, richard iii, king edward, common people, queen elizabeth, henry vi, henry vii, edward iv, lady anne, king edward iv, king richard, royal family, king henry vii, succeeded son henry, richard iii begins, late fifteenth century,
Approximate Word count = 2803
Approximate Pages = 11 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
