Villain Or Victim?: Shakespeare's Richard III
Richard III is the play that helped Shakespeare become well-known in those days.
The Elizabethan period was the golden era for England not only in the field of politics but also in literary arts. That’s to say, it was the golden age for drama, even though they were seen as figures of revolt, there were many public theatres. Also, in those days most poets worked for aristocratic patronage. The pay was quite good, and more certain than the vagaries of patrons. The companies were not entirely self-regulating; indeed, it was possible to carry on this business only under the protection of a nobleman, a court official. The need for protection was real, if only because the City of London was an inveterate enemy of the players. Consequently, the theatres had a unique social situation. They had to please the multitude yet avoid upsetting potentates at court who scrutinized their texts. With the hostile City, they had to deal cautiously, for the City authorities disliked them, not only out of a puritanical mistrust of plays but also because these authorities had to deal with occasionally troublesome audiences and traffic congestion outside the theatres (Kermode, 13). Besides, in those days originality was not important, people only looked at how poets write the story. That’s why poets wrote about legends, myths, and historical figures and one of them is Shakespeare's Richard III.
Richard III is the play that helped Shakespeare become well-known in those days. Also, Richard III is arguably the first fully realized and psychologically conceived character in his plays (Garber, 405). Besides that, Shakespeare mixed genres, he uses comedic things in tragedy and tragic things in comedy. Even though Richard III is categorized as a tragedy, it is a history play. Moreover, it has comedic elements on it too. Even though our knowledge is limited about Shakespeare’s personal life, it can be said that Shakespeare was very fond of reading, particularly in the history of England also in the second half of the sixteenth century, writing historical plays had almost become a fashion. At first, they were like epic poems; loosely textured, undramatic ventures starring the king and the hero. But the important thing was the desire of historians to take the subjects they wrote and bring them to the stage (Nutku). When Shakespeare was writing Richard III, he used Thomas Moore’s The Tragical Historie of the Life and Reigne of Richard the Thirde as a source. But, he made some changes to the historical portrait of Richard, he corrupted Richard to please the Tudor Monarchy and also took advantage of Richard’s bad physique.
Because people believed having a hunchback is a bad sign in the Elizabethan era also in the play Shakespeare questioned it as well. Besides that Thomas Moore’s Richard depiction helped Shakespeare to make the character and the play more dramatic. In The Tragical Historie of the Life and Reigne of Richard the Thirde, Moore described Richard with these sentences; Richard, the third son, of whom we now treat, was in wit and courage equal with either of them, in body and prowess far under them both: little of stature, ill featured of limbs, crooked-backed, his left shoulder much higher than his right, hard-favored in appearance, and such as is in the case of lords called warlike, in other men called otherwise. He was malicious, wrathful, envious, and from before his birth, ever perverse. It is for truth reported that the Duchess his mother had so much ado in her travail to birth him that she could not be delivered of him uncut, and he came into the world with the feet forward, as men be borne outward,1 and (as the story runs) also not untoothed (More, 5). Richard’s monstrous appearance was an inspiration for Shakespeare to create the character. Even if its historical accuracy is questioned, he portrays Richard as a cursed, and villain. The ugliness of his appearance is also ingrained in it.
Unlike other Shakespeare plays, the play begins with Richard's soliloquy, a situation that is rarely seen in Shakespearean plays. "Cheated of feature by dissembling Nature, / Deformed, unfinished, sent before my time/ Into this breathing world, scarce half made up,/ And that so lamely and unfashionable/ That dogs bark at me as I halt by them-/ Why, I, in this weak pipping time of peace,/ Have no delight/ Unless to see my shadow and in the sun/ And descant on mine own deformity/ And therefore, since I cannot prove a lover/To entertain these fair-well spoken days,/ I am determined to prove a villain/ And hate the idle pleasures of these days/Plots have I laid, induction dangerous,/ By drunken prophecies, libels and dreams,’’ (1.1. 15-25-30). Readers understand Richard’s mindset in the first chapter of the play. According to Richard, it is impossible for such a monstrous creature to find the happiness that a woman can give like other men. Therefore, his only hope is to sit on the throne and subdue people created more beautiful than himself.
However, between him and the throne, there are his brother King Edward, and his sons, also Duke of Clarence. Despite this, Richard is completely self-confident, bragging about his treacherous plans. "I do wrong, and first begin to brawl. / The secret mischiefs that I set abroach / I lay unto the grievous charge of others.’’ (1.3.325). At this point, many thoughts and criticisms have emerged about Richard's character. Is Richard really bad? Or is it his monstrous appearance that drives him to evil? The most correct criticism on this subject belongs to Agnes Heller. According to Heller, Richard is radically evil because he chooses himself as evil…The existential choice is even more succinctly presented in the frequently quoted words “I am determined to prove a villain”. This is a precise formulation: Richard does not become radically evil because he chooses evil, but because he chooses himself. He repeats here as well what we already seem to know: it is because of the ugly outer appearance that he has chosen his ugly internal essence (Heller, 254).
The ugliness of Richard's inner world can be considered a natural consequence of the ugliness of his body. (Urgan, 165) The hump that drives him to evil also gives him a sense of superiority. According to John Palmer, Richard is almost in love with his hunchback. (Palmer, 84-85) Because, despite his disability, he has done things that healthy men cannot do, he convinces Lady Anne, whose husband he killed, to marry him. "Was ever woman in this humour wooed? / Was ever woman in this humour won? / I'll have her, but I will not keep her long.’’ (1.2.215–217) Readers are fascinated by Richard's sarcasm and overpowering wit, so much so that his malice begins to sound sympathetic. Although the play is a tragedy, readers can't help but laugh at Richard's plans to take the throne, the scene where he plays the role of a religious person and rejects the throne is one of them. Richard deceives and manipulates the people around him and prides himself on his superior intelligence. He believes that the most important power in life is the mind and wit, there is no place for emotions in his life. However, he cannot suppress his instincts in his sleep. The ghosts of the people he kills haunt him. The ghosts in the plays symbolize wanting justice and if the ghost appears, it means that there is something unfinished. The ghosts of the people he kills cursed and hoped to him die. Richard, who is disregarding feelings, feels the pain of not being loved. He realizes that when he dies, no one will pity him. "I shall despair/ There’s no creature loves me; / And if I die, no soul will pity me.’’ (5.3. 200-201) Richard does not regret the people he has killed but is upset because he realizes that no one will mourn after his death. At this point, the reader once again understands his selfishness. Nothing has any value except himself. Thus, Richard took selfishness to its fullest extent, finally becoming a monster in the hell he had created. (Urgan, 164)
At the end of the play, Richard dies in the field Battle of Bosworth with no remorse in his petrified heart.
WORKS CITED:
Garber, Marjorie. Shakespeare After All. Kindle ed., Anchor, 2005.
Kermode, Frank, et al. The Age of Shakespeare [Modern Library Chronicles]. Kindle ed., Recorded Books, 2005.
More, Thomas, and George Logan. The History of King Richard the Third: A Reading Edition. Illustrated, Kindle ed., Indiana University Press, 2005.
Shakespeare, William. “III. Richard.” III. Richard, translated by Özdemir Nutku, İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 2007, p. Preface.
Shakespeare, William, and James Siemon. King Richard III: Third Series (Arden Shakespeare). Third Edition, Arden Shakespeare, 2009.
Smith, Emma. This Is Shakespeare. Kindle ed., Vintage, 2021.
Urgan, Mina. Shakespeare ve Hamlet. Kindle ed., Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2021.