In Richard III by William Shakespeare, Richard is a complex character whose use of rhetoric is used to what others consider to be nefarious ends. Throughout the play, Richard calls himself a villain, and all of his actions, as well as the consequences of his actions, seemingly corroborate this fact. However, when analyzing the interactions between Richard and the secondary characters as well as Richard’s interpretation of said interactions, Richard's character is exposed to be a victim of its circumstance. Examining the influence of secondary characters on Richard’s use of eloquence, rather than the actual use of it, as the true cause of the play’s problems then shows that Cicero's description of the cause of distress within a society is not …show more content…
accurate because it focuses only on Richard and his ability to persuade others, then ignores the role the environment and supporting characters play in allowing Richard to use such skills. This lack of depth within Cicero's claims as exposed by Richard then highlights that society's problems are not raised by eloquent men but rather by the fact that society is creating such individuals. Through analysis of his monologues, in particular his first one, it can be interpreted that in this particular play, Richard is not the villain, but rather a victim of his circumstances.
This insight about his character then allows for a better understanding of how Richard and his rhetorical abilities impact the course of events In his initial monologue, he indicates that he is "not shaped for sportive tricks, nor made to court an amorous looking glass I, that am rudely stamped and want love’s majesty to strut before a wanton ambling nymph”, indicates rejection, especially that of sexual and romantic nature, which in turn feeds his insecurities regarding his deformity. After this, he mentions he is "And that so lamely and unfashionable that dogs bark at me as I halt by them". This further demonstrates the concept of how insecure Richard is regarding his condition, and while also indicates that he perceives others’ treatment of him as deeply negative. This portion of the monologue implies that those around him treat him so poorly, he expects no creature at all to show him respect. This insecurity regarding his physical appearance and others' reactions to him then combines with the fact that he is returning from a war where he fought on behalf of his family, and the opposition he has encountered most likely treated him in a similar, disrespectful and cruel, manner. Evidently, this monologue grants insight as to Richard’s relationships with others, and how he sees said …show more content…
relationships. Richard’s bad relationships with others then plays an integral role in the motivation behind his actions. The cruelty he receives breeds a feeling of being cheated, as he indicates when he says "I that am curtailed of this fair proportion cheated of feature by dissembling nature"(Shakespeare, 135). Richard believes he deserves a better physical appearance, an aspect that is deeply related to how he understands his position in society and his interactions with others, and thus his sense of deserving better applies to his role in the court as well. When he goes on to say "And therefore, since I cannot prove a lover to entertain these fair well-spoken days, I am determined to prove a villain and hate the idle pleasures of these days"(136), he indicates that this rejection on behalf of those around him drives Richard to embrace the way others vilify him as he changes his tactics to obtain the things he thinks deserves by his own hand rather than continuing to wait for others to acknowledge him. This influence of others on Richard and his actions paints Richard as a product, or even a victim, of his circumstances, rather than a villain that acts independent of outside influence. Feeling that he has been wronged, Richard pursues higher status within the political sphere throughout the play, and in doing so, utilizes the form of eloquence that Cicero is concerned about.
In his opening monologue, he mentions "[he has laid] plots, inductions dangerous, by drunken prophecies, libels and dreams, to set Clarence and the king in deadly hate"(136). Here, Richard not only explains the beginning of his plot but rather he also indicates that lying and deception are the foundation of his plots to gain power. Furthermore, he shows this ability while speaking with Clarence in Act 1 Scene 1, when he says “'Tis not the king that sends you to the Tower. My Lady Grey his wife, Clarence, ’tis she that tempers him to this extremity”(138). In this instance, Richard is blatantly lying to convince others of his ignorance regarding the situation and ensure that his plots remain secret. Eloquence is one of the largest concerns that Cicero presents in his own argument, and in Richard III, Richard very obviously uses his own rhetorical skill in the very ways that Cicero
mentions. When analyzing Richard III through Cicero’s arguments regarding the origin of conflict, Richard fills Cicero’s description of eloquent men and thus, is responsible for the tension that occurs within the play. Cicero says "when I consider the disasters of our own republic, and when I call to mind also the ancient calamities of the most important states, I see that it is by no means the most insignificant portion of their distresses which has originated from the conduct of the most eloquent men"(Cicero, De Inventione). As mentioned above, Richard directly admits he will be using eloquence to further his plots and get what he thinks he deserves, then follows this admission with a series of lies in an effort to convince other characters he is innocent. He even goes as far as to say he is "As subtle, false, and treacherous [as the King Edward be is true and just]"(136). In turn, Richard displays the behavior of one of these eloquent men that Cicero is concerned about. Thus, according to Cicero’s logic, Richard must be the cause of the conflict that occurs throughout the play as he fits Cicero's description of an eloquent man who abuses rhetoric to deceive and fulfill his own ends. However, as mentioned above, Richard’s actions stem from the treatment he receives from others and thus the consequences of his actions can be attributed to such treatment. Therefore, Cicero’s argument regarding the cause of conflict is inaccurate, because it fails to account for the influence of outside factors on an individual’s use of eloquence. In Richard III, the true origin of conflict lies in the fact that the other members of Richard’s social circle reject him, ultimately causing him to execute a series of plans to regain the things he thinks these secondary characters owe him. This exposes a problem that Cicero fails to address, which is the role of outside factors, such as society, in the creation of said individuals. Without this, conflict is attributed to a symptom, the rise of eloquent men such as Richard, rather than addressing the root problem, such as rejection on behalf of Richard’s peers. Furthermore, by dismissing Cicero, Richard’s existence as a character motivated by his interactions with others works to reveal an important flaw in Cicero’s argument. Cicero attributes conflict to eloquent men, yet fails to acknowledge the outside influences that allow such people to be created. Dismissing Cicero’s claims not only allows for a better understanding of the roles of secondary characters in the events of the play, but also brings attention to the role of a society in the creation of conflicts. This heightened awareness then translates to a different approaches to the solution of problems, as focus can be turned towards the true cause of the problem instead of the symptom that is the creation of mischievous and eloquent men.
I feel that Richard gains our sympathy when he resigns the crown, refuses to read the paper that highlights his crimes, and smashes the mirror, which represents his vanity. In terms of kingship, I interpret the play as an exploration between the contrast with aristocratic pride in the law and the king's omnipotent powers. It also shows the chain reaction on kingship as past events in history determine present
Anne is quite like a modern woman in the way that if a man tells her
“I am determined to prove a villain / and hate the idle pleasures of these days. / Plots have I laid, inductions dangerous, / by drunken prophecies, libels and dreams.” Richard III, the evil Duke of Gloucester, is fighting a bloody road to the crown in Shakespeare's dramatic play. Stopped by nothing and with brilliant intelligence, Richard fights his way to the king’s position, clothing his villany with “old odd ends stolen out of holy writ.” With no one to fully trust, Richard breaks many hearts by killing all people in his way, and becomes the unstoppable villain. He hides behind a shield of kindness and care, but when he is alone, his real soul comes alive. Sending murderers, or killing people himself, he has no mercy. Manipulating Lady Anne to marry him and promising Buckingham rewards for his deeds, he knows what he is doing, and won’t stop until the crown lies at his feet.
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].
...e was also writing in Tudor England and seemed to have openly dislike Richard III. In other portions of his writing he describes Richard as an unattractive deformed man who was born with a full set of teeth. He writes that he had a “sour countenance , which seemed to savour of mischief, and utter evidently craft and deceit.”
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 Hamlet’s speech, Shakespeare’s efforts to target his Elizabethan audience develop the theme of the frailty of man. Shakespeare conveys this underlying theme of the play by subt...
Shakespeare's presentation of the way in which King Claudius acts correlates with the view that each `Elisinorian' character assumes a pretence. Shakespeare presen...
Gifted with the darkest attributes intertwined in his imperfect characteristics, Shakespeare’s Richard III displays his anti-hero traits afflicted with thorns of villains: “Plots have I laid, inductions dangerous / By drunken prophecies, libels, and dreams” (I.i.32-33). Richard possesses the idealism and ambition of a heroic figure that is destined to great achievements and power; however, as one who believes that “the end justifies the means”, Richard rejects moral value and tradition as he is willing to do anything to accomplish his goal to the crown. The society, even his family and closest friends, repudiate him as a deformed outcast. Nevertheless, he cheers for himself as the champion and irredeemable villain by turning entirely to revenge of taking self-served power. By distinguishing virtue ethics to take revenge on the human society that alienates him and centering his life on self-advancement towards kingship, Richard is the literary archetype of an anti-hero.
At the very outset of the play, readers are presented with the power-hungry, self-loathing Duke of Gloucester, defined by his thirst for vengeance and power and by his uncanny ability to manipulate the minds of the people around him. Richard appeals to the audience’s sympathies in his self-deprecating description, when he declares that he is deformed, unfinished, and so hideous and unfashionable that dogs bark at him as he passes by. The imagery he utilizes throughout the opening soliloquy also evokes a feeling of opposition and juxtaposition which speaks to the duality of his nature.The juxtapositions he employs are more than rhetorical devices, as ...
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.
Shakespeare Richard III was a traitor, a murderer, a tyrant, and a hypocrite. The leading characteristics of his mind are scorn, sarcasm, and an overwhelming contempt. It appears that the contempt for his victims rather than active hatred or cruelty was the motive for murdering them. Upon meeting him he sounds the keynote to his whole character. " I, that am curtailed of this proportion, cheated of feature by dissembling nature, Deform'd, unfinish'd sent before my time Into this word scarce half made up"( 1.1.20-23)
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 William Shakespeare's play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, two speeches are given to the people of Rome about Caesar's death. In Act 3, Scene 2 of this play Brutus and Antony both try to sway the minds of the Romans toward their views. Brutus tried to make the people believe he killed Caesar for a noble cause. Antony tried to persuade the people that the conspirators committed an act of brutality toward Caesar and were traitors. The effectiveness and ineffectiveness of both Antony's and Brutus's speech to the people are conveyed through tone and rhetorical devices.
Shakespeare thus leaves his audience to fabricate their own perception with serving only minor stage directions. They are then left with Hamlet’s lingering words, actions, and the reactions to predisposed whether Hamlet’s madness is actually feigned or legitimate. Nevertheless, The evidence does not actually define Shakespeare’s character, Hamlet. To relate, modern audiences must do their research to become accustomed to the way of thinking done by people of the Renaissance. All in all, Hamlet’s true soundness is left up to the people of today’s