William Shakespeare’s ‘Richard III’ presents a kingdom in turmoil, largely due to the Fascist ideals of the King’s brother, Richard. In this essay I will explore how Richard, the titular character represents the ideals of Fascism, mainly in the Italian style. These include; encouraged Nationalism and Patriotism, Disregard of human rights, Militant supremacy, Manipulation, Heavy punishment and fear mongering. I will go on to discuss how a monarchy and the role of kingship can affect these theories.
The Oxford dictionary defines Fascism as “An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.” An online dictionary proposes this definition ‘a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.” Both of these definitions outline the controlling nature of Fascism, which is personified in Richard. Use of the term grew in popularity from the 1920s – 1940s when many Fascist governments reigned, beginning with Mussolini’s regime in Italy. Similarly the Nazi government of Germany also exhibited many of the ideals of Fascism.
Richard displays qualities of a Fascist leader from the beginning of the play. Richard is jealous of his brother’s power and the happiness of his family and friends. He has grown malicious and plots to take the throne. He has no qualms at the thought of killing anyone who gets in his way declaring “I am determined to prove a villain” Embarrassment over his physical deformities also plays a role in fueling this malicious intent. In the opening dialogue Richard declares himself cruel and evil “I am subtle, false, and treache...
... middle of paper ...
...lso obey him simply because he is the King. He shouldn’t need large armies to control his subjects and he shouldn’t need to create the sense of fear and uncertainty that a true Fascist state has. As the King, especially in 15th Century England most of the nation would have obeyed simply because that is the power a King holds.
In conclusion, Richard embodies many of the characteristics of a Fascist leader like Benito Mussolini. He is manipulative and controlling. He does not regard his subjects as thinking, feeling human beings, but he is afraid of rebellion and uprising. He is a sexist, using Women as pawns in his game. His role as an anointed monarch does shroud the fascist ideals in reality but in removing the divinity of kingship, we see how clearly Richard exhibits Fascist ideals. However, conquered by his vile selfish deeds Richard’s regime ends.
This one-sided portrayal is achieved through animal imagery of a “usurping boar”, as Shakespeare’s pro-monarch propaganda highlights how duplicitous representations of reality may influence a society, regardless of context. Comparative study of RIII and LFR reveal the contextual influences on the portrayal of power and the duplicity of humanity, as these values transcend regardless of era. Shakespeare and Pacino highlight that to learn connections of texts is to dissect each text and create appreciation of the other, which reshapes the perception of an individual, facilitating a deeper and more enriched understanding of the play and the docudrama.
Anne is quite like a modern woman in the way that if a man tells her
to behave in the same way as King Richard, and since he is acting this way, the
Through manipulation but not by his heart he gains Ann’s hand. So, he does gain a woman for political strength but he still does not fulfill the trait of a King as a loving individual. Why does Richard believe he should be King? He seems to possess only one quality which his brothers have: to be born of Royalty.
The undeniable pursuit for power is Richard’s flaw as a Vice character. This aspect is demonstrated in Shakespeare’s play King Richard III through the actions Richard portrays in an attempt to take the throne, allowing the audience to perceive this as an abhorrent transgression against the divine order. The deformity of Richards arm and back also symbolically imply a sense of villainy through Shakespeare’s context. In one of Richard’s soliloquies, he states how ‘thus like the formal Vice Iniquity/ I moralize two meanings in one word’. Through the use of immoral jargons, Shakespeare emphasises Richard’s tenacity to attain a sense of power. However, Richard’s personal struggle with power causes him to become paranoid and demanding, as demonstrated through the use of modality ‘I wish’ in ‘I wish the bastards dead’. This act thus becomes heavily discordant to the accepted great chain of being and conveys Richard’s consumption by power.
Furthermore, Richard’s threat to kill his son is perhaps the only threat that Richard does not actually carry out during the entire play. As a result of his courage, Stanley is rewarded by his son being spared and being able to live in a post-Richard England. The uniqueness of Stanley’s situation shows that justice does not only level the wicked in the world but it also rewards those who are brave enough to stand against
Richard is seen as a monster through history. Many people overlook the good he did in his legislation and charitable acts. A few open-minded scholars feel he could have been one of the most influential kings of England if the circumstances were different. How is anyone to judge such a person in such turbulent times? Richard was a product of his times, and he did what was necessary to survive in the political anarchy of the Middle Ages. If one was to look at Richard for a lesson to learn, there is much to take away from his experiences. Political decision making surrounds every aspect of Richard's life. His good and bad decisions are what made him immortal. You can see such prominent politicians today in the same light. They may not be killing each other, but politicians political lives sway in the wind just as gingerly if their decision making and policy are not supported, and backed strongly by their party.
This contributes to a very villainous role. Richard begins his journey to the throne. He manipulates Lady Anne. into marrying him, even though she knows that he murdered her first. husband.
The task which Shakespeare undertook was to mold the hateful constitution of Richard's Moral; character. Richard had to contend with the prejudices arising from his bodily deformity which was considered an indication of the depravity and wickedness of his nature. Richard's ambitious nature, his elastic intellect, and his want of faith in goodness conspire to produce his tendency to despise and degrade every surrounding being and object, even as his own person. He is never sincere except when he is about to commit a murder.
Instead of a powerful physical image, like Queen Elizabeth I, Richard implements elegant soliloquies, engages in witty banter, and attunes the audience to his motives with frequent asides. This flexibility demonstrates Richard's thespian superiority and power over the rest of the play's cast, making him a unique character in the play, but why does he do it? This constant battle between characters to claim mastery over a scene leaves the audience with a seemingly overlooked source of power for an actor [clarify/expand].
From the outset of the play, it is obvious that Richard subscribes to the majority of the Machiavellian principles. Certainly, he is not ashamed or afraid to plot heinous murder, and he does so with an ever-present false front. "I do mistake my person all this while,"1 he muses, plotting Anne's death minutes after having won her hand. He will not even entertain the ideas in public, demanding they "Dive...down to [his] soul."2 He knows that he must be cunning and soulless to succeed in his tasks. Richard also knows it is essential to guard against the hatred of the populace, as Machiavelli warned.
In the Shakespeare play Richard III was depicted as a malformed mean, ill looking, tyrant. But this was not the case. Richard
But while the histories’ plots are largely concerned with the acquisition of political power, their themes can be said to focus more on the exercise of such power. At its heart, the Great Tetralogy is a discourse on the qualities of the ideal ruler. A comparison of Richard II and Henry V, and the way each wields political power, will serve to illuminate this point. Ultimately, Henry V is an effective king bec...
Richard had weakened since he had become king and was no longer ruthless as he had no reason to be ruthless. He had got what he wanted and was pleased with himself. He thought he was invincible, and he was too confident, which cost him his life. If he had been more careful, he would have been aware of the danger that lied before him. But, he did use some similar techniques in both the scenes.
In the first scene of the play, Richard announces in a narration, his plan to