Google Preview

• .

  • *** This comment contains spoilers! ***
  • 

  • For me, the tragedy of Shakespeare's historical dramatization of Richard III is that it has passed on to posterity the myth that Richard was a conniving, vicious, murderous machiavel who got what was coming to him. Many historians dissent from this view, but unfortunately, history is written by the ... Continue

    For me, the tragedy of Shakespeare's historical dramatization of Richard III is that it has passed on to posterity the myth that Richard was a conniving, vicious, murderous machiavel who got what was coming to him. Many historians dissent from this view, but unfortunately, history is written by the winners, as the saying goes, and the house of York lost the War of the Roses - and their name has been vilified through subsequent generations by Lancaster, and later Tudor, chroniclers. This play's perversion of the truth is nothing more than an example of Shakespeare pandering to the Tudor dynasty.

    However, there are some redeeming qualities. Several excellent speeches and an intense climax highlight this otherwise forgettable - and regrettable - "historical" play.

    Particularly interesting to modern readers is the mirroring of the haunting and taunting of Richard III on the night before his battle and the climax of "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire". It's a really nice "holler out" by Rowling to the immortal bard.

    

    Is this helpful?

• ― guaddess said on Oct 20, 2007 about the Paperback edition| Add your feedback

• Tragedyplaysebooksclassicle pirebritishdrama