| Papers [1-16] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "RICHARD III": |
|
|
William Shakespeare?s ?Othello? and ?King Richard III?, 2003.
This paper compares William Shakespeare?s villains, Iago from ?Othello? and Richard III from ?King Richard III?.
1,490 words (approx. 6.0 pages), 6 sources, APA, AU$ 83.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper relates that Shakespeare?s primary intent in ?Othello? was to develop the villainous character of Iago, whose motives are represented as being highly complex and ambiguous, but villainous in the extreme. The author points out that Richard is shown to be a villain of the highest caliber, whose power-mad lust for the crown compels him to confirm his claim that, ?I am determined to prove a villain?. The paper concludes that Shakespeare portrays Iago and Richard in much the same light, as sociopaths who view others as merely objects representing obstacles in their path to fame and glory, which makes them villains by any definition.
From the Paper
"However, much like Richard, Iago?s ambition is the source of his villainy rather than his resentment at being overlooked for promotion, sexual jealousy or the racial prejudice he had consistently faced; rather: ?A man motivated by simple jealously and hatred would have no such need. He is not inspired by pure evil and desire to torment Othello either. In reality, Iago?s main motivation, born out of an inferiority complex, is a desire to heighten his sense of superiority and power.? According to Agrawal, Samuel Coleridge?s phrase, ?. . . motive hunting of motiveless malignity,? may best describe Iago?s strange actions and behavior. ?Motive hunting? exactly describes Iago?s soliloquies. He continuously ponders over and tries to understand his emotions. It is clear that he wants to torment and destroy Othello. However, he is not sure of the motivations underlying that desire.? "
| |
|
Richard III, 2007.
This paper compares and contrasts five dramatic and historical interpretations of Richard III.
1,482 words (approx. 5.9 pages), 5 sources, APA, AU$ 81.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines four productions and one biography of Richard III.
The paper explains that a controversial historical figure like Richard III, whose flawed character and life was filled with intrigue, betrayals, confrontations and battle has provided ample opportunities for playwrights, biographers, novelists, and filmmakers to interpret him and the events of his life in a variety of ways. The paper shows how some interpretations rely upon an understanding of the historical Richard III, others rely upon the characterization of him in William Shakespeare's famous play, while others have chosen to rely less upon traditions and more upon innovative approaches.
From the Paper
"Carefully examining the 1954 and 1995 films, both entitled Richard III; as well as Shakespeare's Richard III, Al Pacino's Looking for Richard, and historical and biographical accounts of Richard III provides many opportunities to compare and contrast these various interpretations. William Shakespeare's play is the best known of these productions, and justifiably so, for it created a memorable and lasting image of Richard III that renders the historical figure virtually irrelevant to most people. Shakespeare's interpretation of Richard is so powerful, vivid, and overwhelming that no biography or historical account can even begin to compare."
| |
|
'Richard III', 2006.
A review of 'Richard III' by William Shakespeare.
1,219 words (approx. 4.9 pages), 6 sources, MLA, AU$ 69.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper takes a look at William Shakespeare's play 'Richard III' and two movie versions based on this play. According to the paper, 'Richard III' is both a tragedy and a historical account of the short career of the last medieval English king. The paper discusses how Shakespeare's 'Richard III' depicts Richard and his "reign of terror" both unflatteringly and beyond historical accuracy.
From the Paper
" In the movie version, "Looking for Richard," Al Pacino creates, directs and stars as Richard III's obsession for power, lust and betrayal through the streets of New York to the birthplace of Shakespeare to an emotionally charged production of Richard III (Richard III Society 1996) It is a presentation of Shakespeare with an untraditional format more accessible to the modern audience and with which this modern audience can relate better. The cast includes Estelle Parsons as Queen Margaret, Alec Baldwin as Clarence, Kevin Spacey as Buckingham, Winona Ryder as Lady Anne and Aidan Quinn as Richmond. Al Pacino also puts in the enthusiasm and help of Sir John Gielgud, Sir Derek Jacobi, Kenneth Branagh, Vanessa Redgrave, James Earl Jones and Kevin Kline in an attempt at making everyone enjoy Shakespeare and his tales truly timeless in exploring human nature. This version is different from the first two interpretations in that Al Pacino and his actors needed to break down the barriers, which render Shakespeare's history complicated and intimidating. Al Pacino allows his viewer to go behind the scenes and witness the actual process of acting. The heavier aspects of the play are made mild by informal shots of actors dealing with their roles in either a comic or heated forum. Al Pacino's methods of analysis are insightful, amusing and engrossing. He transcends the barrier between actors and their audience as he stands in London's legendary Globe Theater and the halls of New York City's Cloisters Museum (Richard III Society)."
| |
|
"Richard III", 2002.
A paper which looks at the role of women in Shakespeare's play, "Richard III".
2,180 words (approx. 8.7 pages), 13 sources, MLA, AU$ 113.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
A paper which presents a detailed discussion about the role of women in "Richard III" by William Shakespeare. The writer of this paper brings forth the roles played by females as well as a discussion about the impact they bring to the work both in emotional as well as movement areas of their life. The paper shows how the women in the real life of Richard III were strong and intelligent but Shakespeare chose to portray them with personality traits he needed for the play.
From the Paper
"In the real life of Queen Margaret she played a marginal role in the life of Richard III but in the play she was a key and central figure to the Kings rise to power and fame. She was a presenter of truths through her visions. Instead of being the strong and capable woman that she was in real life Shakespeare had her a constantly crying woman because she felt her cause was lost. One of the reasons he may have placed her in the position that he did was because it allowed him to write some things he wanted the audience to understand without having to create entire scenes for them and hire more actors to carry out the scenes(Rackin pg 47). "
| |
|
Richard III: Fact vs. Fiction, 2005.
This paper discusses several examples of the history behind Richard III, about whom William Shakespeare wrote his play.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 4 sources, MLA, AU$ 39.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper explains several examples of the history behind Richard III, about whom William Shakespeare wrote his famous, if historically inaccurate, play. The paper deals with the issue of political maneuvering and examines the villainy of Richard III and his rise to power.
From the Paper
"Richard III. Fact vs Fiction. The scandalous portrayal of Richard III was the result of political maneuvering by Henry IV and his Tudor successors who came to the throne by force. This was deemed necessary by the Tudors to make the people believe they had rescued the country from the York Dynasty."
| |
|
Richard III in Shakespeare and History, 2005.
A compare and contrast paper of Richard III from William Shakespeare's drama and the historical figure in English history.
2,252 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 6 sources, MLA, AU$ 116.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper compares and contrasts the historical from the literary Richard III, as portrayed by Shakespeare. There is a brief description of each portrayal as well as a short analysis of the two together. The representation by Shakespeare shows the villain-hero to be one that we both adore and abhor at the same moment, but the real Richard III was just as fascinating in his ability to twist the royal line to make himself king.
From the Paper
"Being so repulsive, Richard learned to use beautiful words and delicate language to disguise his face and to gain the trust and love of others by speaking sweetly to them. Lady Anne, mourning over the corpse of her father-in-law, was won over by his honeyed tongue. Richard not only slew her father-in-law, King Henry VI, but he murdered Anne's husband, Prince Edward, on the battlefields as well. Richard convinces Anne that it was her beauty that forced him into killing her beloved family. Anne, so swept up by his voice and, perhaps with the sight of an empty future, ends her resistance, stays her curses of him, and agrees to become his wife."
| |
|
"Richard III" and "Henry IV", 2007.
An analysis of the lying and cheating of the main characters in William Shakespeare's historical plays, "Richard III" and "Henry IV."
1,356 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 2 sources, MLA, AU$ 76.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses and analyzes William Shakespeare's historical plays, "Richard III" and "Henry IV." It discusses the characters of Richard III, formerly the Duke of Gloucester, and Falstaff, prince Hal's friend. The paper specifically focuses on their negative characteristics, such as lying and how they used lying to achieve their goals. The paper presents examples from both plays to illustrate the extent of each character's lying.
From the Paper
"During this conflict, Henry shows his bitterness at not having his eldest son, prince Hal to help him in the military matters. Hal is, at this time, with a group of rogues and villains who accompany him in his unlawful actions. Falstaff is the most famous of these, and seems to be Shakespeare's best known personification of falseness (a word from which his name is undoubtedly derived) lying and deceit. Falstaff uses dissembling as a means to achieve both fortune and fame, pretending even to have killed Hotspur in the battle. But even more so, he achieves through permanent lying to create almost a myth about himself, arguing through such skilled rhetoric that he even overtake Richard III, that honor and morality are of no use whatsoever and that they lose their value as soon as they are opposed to the only true thing there is: life."
| |
|
"Richard III", 2003.
An analysis of Shakespeare's play, "Richard III".
1,448 words (approx. 5.8 pages), 0 sources, AU$ 81.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the play, "Richard III", focusing on the main character, King Richard III of England. It discusses whether he should be considered a villain and asks, "Did he repent in time?" It explains that, in the play, Edward IV is on the throne, but his brother Richard plans to usurp Edward and be crowned king. To accomplish this goal, he must manipulate and murder, but in the midst of all the chaos he creates, there are glimmers of a better man.
From the Paper
"He has decided that since he is no good at being happy, he will become an outstanding villain. He will soon show just how power-hungry he is. His reasons for acting as he does seem thin, and at this point it is hard to imagine how any good traits could be spotted in such a man. Richard is intelligent and manipulative, and has the ability to lie through his teeth and bee believed. He convinces a just-widowed noble woman, Lady Anne, that she should marry him, even though she knows he murdered her husband. He has his trusting and na ve older brother executed. King Edward is already in poor health, and Richard uses Clarence s death to hasten Edward s death."
| |
|
Machiavellian Philosophy in Shakespeare's 'Richard III', 1997.
A look at the character of Richard III, as well as the era of Shakespeare and the man himself.
4,245 words (approx. 17.0 pages), 6 sources, AU$ 189.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at at Shakespeare's "Richard III", but also discusses the theatre and the times in which Shakespeare lived. It starts with an overview of Elizabethan theatre and society, then moves specifically to theatres in London and the provinces. William Shakespeare, the man, his life and career in the theatre are discussed. "Richard III" is looked at in terms of historical facts, and then the character of Richard is examined.
From the Paper
"A history partly based on The Union of the Two Noble and Illustrious Families of Lancaster and York by the English historian Edward Hall and on the Chronicles by the English historian Raphael Holin?shed. Probably first performed in 1593. First published in 1597. In this play, the first history to have a self-contained narrative unity, Shakespeare accentuated the moment of death as a crisis of conscience in which man judges himself and is capable of true prophecy. He centred the drama on a single figure who commits himself to murder, treason, and dissimulation with an inventive imagination that an audience can relish even as it must condemn it; and in defeat Richard discovers a valiant fury that carries him beyond nightmare fear and guilt to unrepentant, crazed defiance."
| |
|
"Richard III", 2005.
An analysis of Shakespeare's play, "Richard III", focusing on the relationship between the Duke of Buckingham and Richard.
2,143 words (approx. 8.6 pages), 2 sources, MLA, AU$ 113.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper concentrates on exploring why the Duke of Buckingham helped Richard III as extensively as he did to lie, cheat, steal, and murder his way to being king. It also explores why Buckingham left Richard III at a certain point after he was asked to arrange for the murder of Edward. The author argues that Buckingham left Richard not because of his conscience regarding the murder of the boy, but out of a fear that by helping the tyrant to gain his power, he would not get anything in return but his own death.
From the Paper
"Shakespeare?s ?Richard III? was a play in the series of historical texts that also includes ?Henry IV.? With these texts, the author left the convention of setting his plays is exotic places like Athens and Italy, and concentrated on the theme of English history. Richard III was a monarch who is shown in Shakespeare?s ?Richard III? to have lost touch with reality more than a little bit in his quest for power, which has corrupted him deeply. At the end of the play there is little that can be done to redeem Richard III, such is his rejection of morality and his overriding ambition. These qualities caused Richard III to murder many of his own family members, and throughout the play he treats everyone as either someone to use or a potential threat. One of the people whom Richard III used was the Duke of Buckingham, who became his right-hand man during his quest for the throne."
| |
|
The Role of Women in "Richard III", 2004.
A discussion of the role women play in Shakespeare's "Richard III".
2,628 words (approx. 10.5 pages), 0 sources, AU$ 133.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
To consider the role of women in Shakespeare?s plays and Shakespeare?s attitude toward women, the play, "Richard III", is discussed. This includes an analysis of the three major female characters in the play, showing the roles of women in the society of the time and suggesting Shakespeare?s own view of women.
From the Paper
"Queen Margaret shows herself to be one of the strongest women of the play in some ways. This is mainly by being the only woman that Richard is not able to fool. Her continuing anger over her dead husband and son is also a sign of her loyalty to them. This can be compared to Lady Anne who is initially angry about the death of her husband, but then quickly agrees to marry Richard. This action by Lady Anne suggests that women are fickle. In contrast, Queen Margaret never gives up being loyal to her husband and son, despite circumstances. This shows a strength that many women of the play do not have. At the same time though, this loyalty by Queen Margaret does not do her any good and only results in her constant unhappiness. The point that seems to be made is that a strong woman actually suffers, and that it is better to be fickle. While Lady Anne is fickle, she actually does achieve happiness. At the same time, she does not gain the respect of the audience."
| |
|
"Richard the III" and "Daughter of Time" ., 2002.
A comparative analysis of the characterization of "Richard the III" by William Shakespeare and "Daughter of Time" by Josephine Tey.
650 words (approx. 2.6 pages), 2 sources, AU$ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper will seek to understand the play "Richard the III" by Shakespeare in comparison with Josephine Tey's novel, "Daughter of Time". A making a comparison and contrast between the main characters of each of these stories, we can see how the authors characterize their stories.
| |
|
"Richard III", 2004.
An analysis of Shakespeare's play, "Richard III".
745 words (approx. 3.0 pages), 3 sources, MLA, AU$ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper introduces, discusses, and analyzes the play, "Richard III", by William Shakespeare. It discusses just what enables this "foul devil" to succeed: his own talents, the corruption of the world around him, or a combination of the two. It also look at what this suggests about Shakespeare?s tragic vision.
From the Paper
"Richard III is the opposite of many of Shakespeare's other heroes, who are tragic figures. Richard is a villainous hero, which makes him unique, and in addition makes him extremely unlikable, but intensely human. Richard III was a real historical figure who lived only a century before Shakespeare's time, so Richard was a timely character to theater audiences of Shakespeare's era, and they understood the many twists and turns the play takes in winding its way to its conclusion. Richard of Gloucester is a hunchback who ascends to the throne of England due to his own treachery, and then holds court as a murderous villain and fiend."
| |
|
Richard III vs. Much Ado About Nothing, 2008.
This paper compares and contrasts two of William Shakespeare's plays, "Richard III" and "Much Ado About Nothing".
2,300 words (approx. 9.2 pages), 2 sources, APA, AU$ 118.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper basis it's premise on the fact that at the center of Shakespeare's plays there exists a current of darkness, a cynicism about government, people and love, and a willingness to poke the eye, if only gently, of the establishment. Using this premise, the author discusses "Much Ado About Nothing", which highlights the foibles of the human heart, and "Richard III", which showcases the nature of corruption and power in the hands of the evil. The author asserts that while on the surface, these two plays could not be compared or even contrasted, at the thematic level, there exists a level of anxiety about female sexuality, of the supremacy of man over God in terms of destiny, of moral examples of how power wielded badly can result in truly horrific consequences, and a fear that if we simply accept the rule of others, then we too would be corrupted with power. Furthermore the author states that in both of these works, Shakespeare sends the message that women are of equal significance and power to men; that people control their own destinies, can either be a power for good or for evil and that loyalty to friends and family supercedes all other fealties.
From the Paper
"Elizabeth is absolutely power-hungry. She is as corrupt and fickle as Richard's assessment of women. She is his equal in this manner. She is just as capable of manipulating her as he is of taking the dominant position - though he has usurped his brother's title, he proves his weakness is ultimately his desire to be truly loved for himself and not the power he wields. Where Shakespeare took this theme up to a positive resolution in Much Ado About Nothing, in giving both Benedick and Beatrice a satisfactory joining upon their mutual realization of respect and love, he showed the opposite side in Richard III. The power of the feminine sexuality proved to be Richard's undoing, his eventual collapse came because he could not absolutely dominate Elizabeth and Anne, to use young Elizabeth, and to manage the nation that is now his. The failure, of Richard, is in his absolutely corrupt nature. He is incapable of love and because of this, he approaches women in an awkward and rather juvenile way. He cannot actually succeed in love because he can never come to the kind of realization of mutual respect that Benedick and Beatrice did. So, in his brand of fear of feminine power, Richard is unable to escape from his own foibles. But, both Benedick and Richard express their fear of the power of women in the relatively same way - they attempt to dominate women with whatever their natural or coarsely gained power may be."
| |
|
The Renaissance, "Dr Faustus" and "Richard III", 2005.
This paper examines Shakespeare's "Richard III" and Christopher Marlowe's "Dr Faustus" in light of a definition of the term "Renaissance".
2,343 words (approx. 9.4 pages), 7 sources, MLA, AU$ 122.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper presents an understanding of the term "Renaissance" that shows both Marlowe's "Dr Faustus" and Shakespeare's "Richard III" as indicative of an era concerned with the questioning of fundamental ideas and immense exploration. The paper also explains the term "Renaissance" as indicative of moral turmoil as we see morality playing a major role in both works. The paper interprets the literature as making us consider what are essentially universal human problems, this being a major preoccupation of that era known as the "Renaissance".
From the Paper
"The term 'Renaissance' literally means rebirth. There are many views as to the exact dates of the Renaissance period in history, and indeed the essential characteristics of this 'rebirth'. For this essay, I will take the term to indicate the period in history between the early fourteenth century and the late sixteenth century, a time of exploration and 'a time of intellectual ferment that laid the foundations for the thinkers and scientists of the 17th Century.' This human endeavour inevitably lead to a renewed questioning of old ideas and was aided by the invention of the printing press, which made ancient works including Greek and Latin classics and the Bible available to the public for critical reading. This in turn lead to a new approach to religion in general, which can be seen in the later reform of the church from Catholic to Protestant. This change in the church is today known as the Reformation, and can be defined as a secularisation of the church which ended the ecclesiastical supremacy of the Pope and placed a new emphasis on the relationship of the individual to God."
| |
|
Richard III, 2005.
A debate on Richard III and his actions.
1,150 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 6 sources, MLA, AU$ 66.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper provides both sides to the debate about whether or not Richard III killed his nephews. The paper determines that he did not and contends that the accusation was a propagandized lie.
From the Paper
"Today Richard III has become almost more of an idea rather than an actual historical figure. To this end it is often hard to separate fact from fiction when dealing with the plethora of information and different faces of the king. Literary a ..."
|
|
|
