Irony in Richard's Speech and Ability as a King

It is very interesting to me why Richard II acts as such a weak, inconsistent king, yet he speaks poetically and beautifully, delivering (arguably) some of the plays most eloquent speeches. He frequently cites anecdotal analogies and using other metaphors and symbols that are made because of his extensive knowledge of history and mythology. I'm aware that articulate speech and being a good king are different, but I think there's a definite reason as to why Shakespeare would implant such an odd irony in the play's central character.

His most recent, captivating speech occurs at the end of Act III scene ii, where he is expressing his feelings of death to Aumerle. It states, "For God's sake, let us sit upon the ground,/ And tell sad stories of the death of kings -/ How some have been deposed, some slain in war,/ Some haunted by the ghosts they have disposed,/ Some poisoned by their wives, some sleeping killed,/ All murdered" (ln. 151-156). His sorrow is articulated very poetically, and it makes me wonder why he makes some horrible decisions yet can recollect on his mistakes in a profound way.

Perhaps is it simply to show what truly makes a good person and a good king. Simple articulation doesn't equate to good kingship. It could also be a critique on kings by Shakespeare, the opinion that politicians and kings speak poetically to create a facade; under all these flowery language lies dimwitted decision making and ill-favored fortunes. I'm assuming that this trend continues through the end of the play, and the two concluding acts may serve as more evidence for this particular aspect of the play.

Identity and Divine Right

After reading Act 3, I am still unsure of how I feel about the character of Richard. Most of the time I feel bad for him, but once and a while he'll do something that bothers me. I'm curious to see what happens in the next act, and particularly, if he will be killed, or at least removed from the throne by Bolingbroke. I think he will be removed from the throne in the next act, as act 3 seemed to be moving towards that fate for Richard, but like all Shakespeare plays I'm sure there could be some crazy plot twist I wasn't expecting that changes everything.

Something I thought to be interesting while reading this play was the idea of divine right. I know we talked about this a little bit in class Friday, but reading Act 3 really got me thinking about it a bit more. I knew from history class that monarchs often got their power from the belief that they were chosen by God to be rulers, but I had never really thought about how important that may be. Richard says that "Not all the water in the rough rude sea/Can wash the balm from an anointed king./The Breath of worldly men cannot depose/ The deputy elected by the Lord" (3.2.50-53), and this really reveals how much faith is put into the belief of divine right, and that a ruler is a ruler not only because they are a part of the royal family, but also because they have been chosen by God to rule.

Another thing I found to be interesting was the continued discussion of honor and familial bonds, which we talked about for a while in class. Bolingbroke talks about his banishment in Act 3.1, and says "From my own windows torn my household coat,/ Razed out my imprese, leaving me no sign,/ Save men's opinions and my living blood,/ To show the world I am a gentlemen" (3.1.24-27). These lines show us just how important Bolingbroke's lineage is to him, as well as his honor. This also reveals how these things contribute hugely to constructing his identity. The loss of these things devastated him, and I think that he wants revenge for the theft of his honor.