Richard II seems to be a case of protagonist centered moarality. If he were not the title character would Richard not be seen as anything but a villian? A sympathetic villiean to be sure, but a villian none the less. He orginizes the death of the Duke of Gloucester, banishes anyone who knows to much or gets to close to the truth. He seizes the land and money of John of Gaunt to finance a war with ireland, makes the nobles pay for the crimes of their ancestors, and taxes the common folk.
But Richard is still sympathetic due to his many flaws. He makes mistakes, is easily led, and genuinely cares for his allies. Richard is crushed when Bolingbroke exand executes his friends and it is this despair that leads him to abdicate the throne. He is smart, but wise as he is often led by his uncles. He is a typical young man who bit off more then he could chew.
No comments:
Post a Comment