Richard II is extremely complicated due to the large cast and complex family history. The story centers around the royal family, which is the object of huge scandal, disloyalty and deception. The first two acts reminded me of Measure for Measure in many respects. Both begin with the introduction of bad rulers who are leaving their thrones. In Measure for Measure, the Duke puts Angelo in charge because he has messed up so badly and experiments with what a new, stricter ruler could do for the nation. King Richard has no such desires. He leaves his country in the hands of his elderly uncle, the Duke of York, because he is available, not because he hopes his uncle will be a good leader.
The Duke in Measure for Measure may have been selfish and cowardly, but he was interested in bettering his country. He ruined his country because he wanted to be liked and he was intimidated by his position. Richard, on the other hand, has ruined his country due to keeping a large court and spending his money frivolously. Richard leaves in Act II to go to war in Ireland. I was confused as to why exactly he was going- was he participating in the war, or supervising it? Either way I know that he was going to protect his investments and connections in Ireland. He displayed no interest in bettering his country or himself as a leader.
In the first scene, I thought that perhaps Richard was a good king, because he seemed fair when he was trying to obtain the truth from Bolingbroke and Mowbray, but as the play went on, I found him to be increasingly shady. First, he does not seem to have any actual interest in who is telling the truth, and who is lying to him. He doesn’t even allow them to fight; he just bans both of them from England. Then, after banning his cousin, he goes to visit his heartbroken, dying uncle on his death bed. He should be mourning, but he is instead joyous, because that way he can have his uncle’s fortune. Then he leaves his country in the hands of his other uncle, who is old and not prepared to take over.
I feel the relationship between Richard and his uncle Gaunt is an important one to examine. On his death bed, Gaunt gives a beautiful speech in which he clearly sees through Richard and seems to curse his future. Between lines 40 and 69 (“This throne of kings, this sceptred isle,/ this earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,/ this other Eden, demi-paradise,/ this fortress built by nature for herself,…That England that was wont to conquer others/ hath made a shameful conquest of itself./ Ah, would the scandal vanish with my life,/ how happy then were my ensuing death!) Gaunt invokes a feeling of unease and leads me to think this man knows more than Richard would have us believe. I feel that Richard is a bad man and a bad leader. I am wondering if this “curse” will play a bigger part in the rest of the play. Having read Richard III I know that prophecies play a big part in these family tragedies and I want to see where that leads in this play.
2 comments:
The one thing in Richard II that got me to think Richard was a bad king was when Gaunt died and Richard seized all of this worth and belongings. The Duke of York is outraged at Richard also because he feels it is unfair to take away someone’s belongings when it was already promised. Gaunt’s children should inherit his money; it should not be taken by the leader. York believes in an heir and Richard takes this away. This is when I first realized Richard was not a good king.
This gives a good overview of our impressions of Richard early in this play, and all the reasons we might judge him to be a "bad king." We might think about why Shakespeare is setting him up this way...and whether or not we still feel, by the end of the play, if he was a bad king.
The issue of Gaunt here is so important, Alex, and you're right to point to it. The seizure of his property is really central to the play.
Post a Comment