Paper Summary:

This paper argues that the demise of William Shakespeare's "Richard II" was not due to Bolingbroke's invasion of England but due to Richard's own failings to act as an appropriate king. It develops the idea that Richard's character failures, his passivity and inability to act decisively, result in his loss of kingship. It examines how his numerous failures as king, such as his disconnection from his people and land, contribute to his removal form the throne. It shows that despite Bolingbroke's presence in the play, Richard's downfall is ultimately his own doing.

From the Paper:

"William Shakespeare's Richard II, is the dramatic portrayal of a king's downfall. The action of the play surrounds the deposition of an anointed but unworthy king, Richard II. Although he is stately and poetic, he fails miserably in his public role as a king because he is disconnected from his land and its people. Consequently, he is overthrown by his cousin Bolingbroke and eventually assassinated. However, despite Bolingbroke's connection to Richard's removal from the throne, Richard's fall ultimately is a result of his own inability to perform the duties of kingship. His continuous passivity and readiness to succumb to despair prove to be his definitive weaknesses and result in his final defeat. Richard is not fit to be king."

Visitors who viewed this Analytical Essay also liked these:

• Analytical Essay # 56754 : "The Tragedy of King Richard II"
• Analytical Essay # 86710 : "Thomas of Woodstock in "Richard II"
• Essay # 50623 : "Richard II"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: