| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "KING 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, $ 49.95
»
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", "Coriolanus" and "King John", 1999.
Examines portrayals of children in Shakespeare's plays and their role in the development of ideas, action and characters.
3,150 words (approx. 12.6 pages), 7 sources, $ 111.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
"The purpose of this research is to examine the portrayals of children in Shakespeare's Richard III, Coriolanus, and King John. The plan of the research will be to set forth the pattern of ideas in each of the plays as they relate to role of children in the action and then to discuss internal evidence of the plays that suggests how Shakespeare feels about children and the narrative and thematic uses to which he puts them in order to make clear the motivations and behavior of the various adult characters.
From the Paper
"The purpose of this research is to examine the portrayals of children in Shakespeare's Richard III, Coriolanus, and King John. The plan of the research will be to set forth the pattern of ideas in each of the plays as they relate to role of children in the action and then to discuss internal evidence of the plays that suggests how Shakespeare feels about children and the narrative and thematic uses to which he puts them in order to make clear the motivations and behavior of the various adult characters.
It is not difficult to identify Shakespeare's portrayals of children as symbols of innocence and trust, as well as of truths that either cannot be or deliberately are not articulated by the adults who surround them. This does not necessarily mean that they are wiser than adults or even aware that they are agents of ..."
| |
|
"Richard III", 2003.
An analysis of Shakespeare's play, "Richard III".
1,448 words (approx. 5.8 pages), 0 sources, $ 48.95
»
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."
| |
|
'Richard III', 2006.
A review of 'Richard III' by William Shakespeare.
1,219 words (approx. 4.9 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 41.95
»
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, 2007.
This paper compares and contrasts five dramatic and historical interpretations of Richard III.
1,482 words (approx. 5.9 pages), 5 sources, APA, $ 48.95
»
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", 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, $ 67.95
»
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."
| |
|
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, $ 112.95
»
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", 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, $ 67.95
»
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 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, $ 69.95
»
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: 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, $ 23.95
»
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" 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, $ 45.95
»
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", 2002.
An analysis of the character of the Duke of Buckingham in Shakespeare's "Richard III".
650 words (approx. 2.6 pages), 1 source, $ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper analyzes the Duke of Buckingham in Shakespeare's "Richard III".The Duke was a clever, power-hungry and ambitious opportunist who supported the most dominant people in the country. When Richard was trying to be king of England, the Duke of Buckingham supported his evil schemes to punish the innocent in order to seize power. Later, the Duke of Bucking showed intelligence, wisdom and compassion when he refused to support the killing of more innocent soul during Richard's reign.
| |
|
Shakespeare's "Richard III", 2004.
Analysis of Shakespeare's play, "Richard III", and how the main character is able to win over the hearts and minds of the audience in spite of his evil nature.
1,710 words (approx. 6.8 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper describes the four techniques used by Richard, in William Shakespeare's play, "Richard III", to win the love of the audience. Eliciting the audience's sympathy and then their collaboration, Richard's ability to charm and manipulate the audience depends are various elements; each is cited as a technique used by Richard to gain the audience's devotion.
From the Paper
"One of Shakespeare?s most memorable characters is a villain who will always be remembered for his outstanding intelligence, political intensity, and incredible language skill. Richard, Duke of Gloucester, a devilish man, who murders anyone who stands in his way, even innocent people. We ask ourselves how could anybody with a hypocritical, and deceiving nature win the hearts of the audience of so many generations: for at-least most part of the play. It is agreed then that normally one such a person would horrify and disgust one and all. However, Richard (I stress not King Richard) which will be clarified by the end of this essay; mesmerizes his audience with sly skill. He captures sympathy in his audience by convincing them that his physical deformities should excuse him of committing evil crimes. His alluring use of language is like a spell that is cast over the audience and sustained from the beginning of the play until Act IV. Richard is then able to charm his audience into a partnership of evil and corrupt manipulation. Moreover, Richard, distinguishable than any other villain, and deserves his title because of the four most vital techniques that he uses: through these techniques he is able to win the love of the audience. There are four specific techniques that are used by Richard, which will be explained in-order of importance throughout the essay. The key idea is that each technique adds to, enhances, and strengthens the effect of the situations and outcomes- to whoever is participating in the play (audience, characters etc.)."
| |
|
"Richard III", 2004.
An analysis of Shakespeare's play, "Richard III".
745 words (approx. 3.0 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 26.95
»
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."
| |
|
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, $ 79.95
»
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."
|
|
|
