While reading the first section of Richard the Second, i discovered that Richard is not the nicest individual. You find out very quickly that Richard has many character flaws. He is envious, self involved, lavish, and pretty disrespectful. It becomes clear within the first few scenes that Richard was involved in the murder of his own uncle Thomas of Woodstock, Duke of Gloucester. This is hinted at by Mowbray in the first scene when he is accused of the murder by Bolingbroke, then stated outright by the Dutchess of Gloucester when she is speaking to John of Gaunt. Richard is clever enough to keep the plot a secret by having Mowbray exiled for life later when he stops Mowbray and Bolingbroke from dueling.
The stopping of the duel is important because it shows Richard demonstrating his power because all he needs to do is drop his staff. He does not need to speak out, but only preform this slight motion. This also goes against tradition which is a major aspect of the text. The first scene was the traditional way of settling a dispute by having a duel, but Richard interrupts tradition so he can profit in different ways. He exiles Mowbray so that he can never admit that Richard was involved in the plot to kill Gloucester, then exiles Bolingbroke for 6 months for a number of reasons. In the next scene Richard describes Bolingbroke's departure with apparent jealousy. The common people all seem to love Bolingbroke, wishing him goodbye. Richard says, "As were our England in reversion his, And he our subjects' next degree in hope" (Act 1 Scene 4 Line 34). This line reveals Richard's fear of what the common people think, and his envy over his cousin's popularity. It is possible that he banished him in hopes that the people would forget about him while he was gone, and so it would be easier for Richard to steal his inheritance.
In the next act John of Gaunt dies, but not before giving Richard a piece of his mind. "Now He that made me knows I see thee ill: Ill in myself to see, and in thee seeing ill" (Act. 2 Scene 1 line 93). Ealier he discussed with York his displeasure over Richard renting out properties for money, which he should never need to do. Now he directly accuses Richard of murdering Gloucester, and Richard does not deny these facts. When Gaunt dies, Richard is not at all sad about the loss of his uncle. In fact he is happy because now he can steal his cousin's inheritance to spend on a costly war with Ireland. This scene shows the cruel and plotting side of Richard who will go to great lengths to get what he wants.
Richard has numerous characteristics that make him a bad king and just a bad person in general. I am curious to see what lengths he will go to later on in the play.
New Paltz Students Blogging about Shakespeare
4 comments:
I agree with the idea that King Richard is "envious, self involved, lavish, and pretty disrespectful," as was stated above. I also believe that the action he took in stopping the spontaneous fight and postponing it into a proper duel is almost a cowardly action on his part. It's almost as though he's trying to compensate for the fact that he killed his uncle by lessening the violence between Mowbray and Bolingbroke, and later cutting down the ten year ban to six. All in all, King Richard does not seem like a good guy in this play.
While all of Richard’s actions easily points to him as a villain, Shakespeare also works to unveil a human side of the King. In 3.2, Richards speech begins charged with rightful divinity (“anointed king” (3.2.51) and dwindles into a meditation on mortality. After learning the reversal of power between him and Bolingbroke when his troops switch to his cousins side, Richard despairs on an existential level. As discussed in class today, Shakespeare performs a psychological experiment on his characters, stripping them away of all that defines them—wealth, power, allegiances-- and uncovers what’s left of the man. “I live with bread, like you; feel want, taste grief, need friends. Subjected thus, How can you say to me I am a king?” (3.2.171-174), this quotation exemplifies Richard as a humbled tyrant, struggling with the same problems any fellow human has. All throughout the play, I can’t help but feel empathy for his unpopularity and insecurity.
While I agree completly that Richard does not have the tendencies of a king that would win the hearts of any in his kingdom. There are several reasons to hate him and yet there are also several reasons to pity him. For example, the scene where he has his eloquent speech where he talks about how he fears like men, needs like men etc., that is a very humbling speech and I am curious as to whether or not that moment in time would change your opinion about the man. He is having everything stripped of him and that, in my opinion, is the first time where we see him as more of a man compared to a king. Did this scene sway your opinion of Richard II at all?
As Tori suggests, the early discrediting of the king (which Ray begins to document here) gives way to a more complicated figure by the middle and end of the play. We'll see how this develops when we finish the play in the coming week!
Post a Comment