| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "KING RICHARD": |
|
|
King Richard and Prospero, 2004.
An analysis of discourse between the characters, King Richard II and Prospero, in plays by William Shakespeare.
1,453 words (approx. 5.8 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
When considering matters of discourse in William Shakespeare's plays, "The Tragedy of King Richard II" and "The Tempest", King Richard displays stronger leadership skills because he always speaks with eloquence. King Richard speaks with a grace and style that cannot be matched by Prospero. This paper examines how speech is an important part of how a leader is perceived through King Richard and Prospero.
From the Paper
"This soliloquy also illustrates how Richard has come to terms with the fact that he is not destined to be king, as he once believed. He has resigned himself to the fact of how he must live out the rest of his life. This soliloquy is beautiful and heart wrenching. It is through Richard's speeches that Shakespeare is able to make Richard stand out. King Richard would be an ideal candidate for any political position in the world today. He was always able to deliver moving speeches and this is a valuable asset to any king. In fact, it is proof that a man's words can carry him far even if they cannot save his life."
| |
|
King Richard I, 2004.
An overview of the life and reign of King Richard I of England.
2,813 words (approx. 11.3 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 83.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how King Richard I made significant progress during his reign in England and how, while he was king, he succeeded in gaining land for the Christians. It shows how he led the Third Crusade with great compassion and wisdom and how he was able to think in different ways in regards to strategy, which allowed him to conquer land and earn the respect of many. It also shows how his efforts allowed the Christians a safe pilgrimage to Jerusalem and how the land he conquered gave England strategic territory.
From the Paper
"The Third Crusade is known as King Richard's "great chivalrous episode." 11 as well as the most "bloody and brutal" 12 of the eight crusades. Philip Augustus also took part in this Crusade. The two behaved like friends in public but were actually rivals. Despite the fact that Richard's expedition did not free the Holy Sepulcher, it did allow him the opportunity to demonstrate his courage. 13 This situation forced Richard and Saladin to come together and agree to put an end to the fighting. While they were negotiating, Saladin began to respect Richard. He even said that Richard was a "man of honour and very brave . . . he plunges into the midst of danger and in his reckless indifference to his own safety." 14 Indeed, Richard always displayed courage in the face of fear."
| |
|
The Tragedy of King Richard II, 2004.
A look at the reasons behind Williams Shakespeare's King Richard II's downfall and how he develops as a stage character.
978 words (approx. 3.9 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 34.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper questions the reasons for King Richard II's demise, whether he was to blame, whether he was irresponsible and whether it was a sin to kill him. It reflects upon these issues and also discusses if whether despite his downfall brought about by his own actions, Richard grows as a character in the end.
From the Paper
"King Richard is not a man of action and as the play advances and he gets into more and more trouble, his end approaches and he becomes most poetic of all. He shows himself to be a poet and a dreamer. At Flint castle he asks Aumerle '....Shall we call back Northumberland, and send Defiance to the traitor, and so die?' And Aumerle replies' No, good my lord; let's fight with gentle words...' This is also an example of another cause of King Richard's downfall. He surrounded himself with flatterers and poor advisors. Richard ignores the only sound advice he gets from Gaunt's death bed and even wishes that the doctor would quicken his death so that he can seize Gaunt's land."
| |
|
William Shakespeare's "Othello" and "King Richard III", 2003.
This paper compares William Shakespeare's villains, Iago from "Othello" and Richard III from "King Richard III".
1,490 words (approx. 6.0 pages), 6 sources, APA, $ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper relates that Shakespeare's primary intent in "Othello" was to develop the villainous character of Iago, whose motives are represented as being highly complex and ambiguous, but villainous in the extreme. The author points out that Richard is shown to be a villain of the highest caliber, whose power-mad lust for the crown compels him to confirm his claim that, "I am determined to prove a villain". The paper concludes that Shakespeare portrays Iago and Richard in much the same light, as sociopaths who view others as merely objects representing obstacles in their path to fame and glory, which makes them villains by any definition.
From the Paper
"However, much like Richard, Iago's ambition is the source of his villainy rather than his resentment at being overlooked for promotion, sexual jealousy or the racial prejudice he had consistently faced; rather: "A man motivated by simple jealously and hatred would have no such need. He is not inspired by pure evil and desire to torment Othello either. In reality, Iago's main motivation, born out of an inferiority complex, is a desire to heighten his sense of superiority and power." According to Agrawal, Samuel Coleridge's phrase, ". . . motive hunting of motiveless malignity," may best describe Iago's strange actions and behavior. "Motive hunting' exactly describes Iago's soliloquies. He continuously ponders over and tries to understand his emotions. It is clear that he wants to torment and destroy Othello. However, he is not sure of the motivations underlying that desire." "
| |
|
Richard II: A King's Demise, 2002.
A review of the demise of the king in William Shakespeare's "Richard II".
1,906 words (approx. 7.6 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 60.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
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."
| |
|
"Richard III", "Coriolanus" and "King John", 1999.
Examines portrayals of children in Shakespeare's plays and their role in the development of ideas, action and characters.
3,150 words (approx. 12.6 pages), 7 sources, $ 111.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
"The purpose of this research is to examine the portrayals of children in Shakespeare's Richard III, Coriolanus, and King John. The plan of the research will be to set forth the pattern of ideas in each of the plays as they relate to role of children in the action and then to discuss internal evidence of the plays that suggests how Shakespeare feels about children and the narrative and thematic uses to which he puts them in order to make clear the motivations and behavior of the various adult characters.
From the Paper
"The purpose of this research is to examine the portrayals of children in Shakespeare's Richard III, Coriolanus, and King John. The plan of the research will be to set forth the pattern of ideas in each of the plays as they relate to role of children in the action and then to discuss internal evidence of the plays that suggests how Shakespeare feels about children and the narrative and thematic uses to which he puts them in order to make clear the motivations and behavior of the various adult characters.
It is not difficult to identify Shakespeare's portrayals of children as symbols of innocence and trust, as well as of truths that either cannot be or deliberately are not articulated by the adults who surround them. This does not necessarily mean that they are wiser than adults or even aware that they are agents of ..."
| |
|
Richard the Lionheart, 2004.
An analysis of the life of King Richard the Lionheart.
2,739 words (approx. 11.0 pages), 24 sources, MLA, $ 81.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that the figure Robin Hood is based on a real person, a king of England to be precise. The paper claims that an examination of the life of King Richard, better known as Richard the Lionheart,will reveal the real tale of Robin Hood. The paper presents a biographical tale of the life of King Richard. The paper contends that it is Richard's positive traits and goals that people remember about him; it is his virtue and heroism that lives in storybooks. Though the fairytale has changed and gained an element of fiction, the paper explains that the truth of Richard's conquest is evident.
From the Paper
"Most people remember the character of Robin Hood from children's stories. When they think of him they recall a hero who "robbed from the rich and gave to the poor." What most people do not know is that the figure Robin Hood is based on a real person, a king of England to be precise. That character is King Richard I, better known as King Richard the Lionheart. Although Richard I did not, by the standards of the day, steal from "the Rich," historians have found a distinct connection between the lives of the two characters. Robin Hood lived during the 13th century, exactly one year after the time of King Richard's reign. Also, it is evident in the stories of Robin Hood that his main political goal is to "restore Richard to the throne after Prince John usurped it." Although most people are probably unaware of the connection between the two heroes, King Richard I had a very fascinating and interesting life. "
| |
|
Fit To Be King, 2002.
This paper explores themes of absolute power in "The Tragedy of King Richard III" and "A Winter's Tale" by William Shakespeare.
1,195 words (approx. 4.8 pages), 0 sources, MLA, $ 40.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The author compares and contrasts the rule of the two kings in Shakespeare plays, "Winter's Tale" and "The Tragedy of King Richard III." The theme running through both plays is that power corrupts, and this is the theme that runs through both of these plays. King Richard is portrayed as an absolute ruler destroyed by his thirst for absolute power. King Leontes, is a king more paranoid than perhaps even Lear who refuses to believe even the gods who say that his wife and friend are not involved in an adulterous relationship. He is also an absolute ruler who believes that he knows even better, than the gods themselves.
From the Paper
"Shakespeare's Richard is a thoroughly rotten villain. This is made clear to us in Act One, scene 1. Angry over the limits of his physical deformity, and, perhaps, the low social status accorded him as the very sparest of spare heirs, Richard vows to overcome his limitations. In line 30 of this speech, Richard says, "I am determined to prove a villain." Most would agree that these are not the words of a person who has the best interests of his fellow human beings at heart. If one needs further proof, Richard goes on to describe a plot that pits his two brothers, Clarence and Edward, against each other - hopefully resulting in both brothers' deaths."
| |
|
Richard the Lion-Hearted, 2005.
A brief paper examining the feats and accomplishments of King Richard the Lion-Hearted.
912 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Richard I of England (1157-1199), whose inspiring courage in battle earned him the titled "Coeur de Lion" or "the Lion-hearted," took control of the Third Crusade and became one of the greatest military leaders of medieval Europe. This paper talks about his early life, his military feats, key facts, and his death.
From the Paper
"With Acre under his control, Richard marched towards the Holy City to free it from the Muslim sultan who had captured it in 1187, Saladin. During the course of this march, Richard demonstrated his abilities as a logistician and strategist for military. He marched his troops along the coast, allowing his fleet of ships to parallel them and provide supplies whenever they were necessary. He did not allow his troops to chase the small Muslim groups who bothered them. The king knew that their plan was for his troops to fall into a Muslim ambush. Having ignored the Muslim till September 7, Richard decided to turn his entire army of around fifty thousand against Arsuf. He had an astounding victory here, as he killed seven thousand while only losing seven hundred."
| |
|
Shakespeare's Kings, 2006.
A comparison between William Shakespeare's characters of Richard II and King Henry IV.
1,600 words (approx. 6.4 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 52.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines two of Shakespeare's historical kings: Richard II and King Henry IV. The paper argues that Richard II was a king by divine right, whereas Henry IV was a Machiavellian king. The paper first assesses Richard's rule: he was not loved by his people or by those who served him; he did not earn his kingship, did not respect it and did not do anything in order to keep it. The paper contrasts this to King Henry IV, who was completely aware of his kingship and what he had to do to keep it; he acted aggressive, decisive and proactive. The paper then demonstrates how the characterization of these two kings demonstrates Shakespeare's unique ability to capture the diversity of humanity and create believable characters. The paper concludes that Shakespeare proves that kings are just like the rest of us--some of them capable and some of them negligent beyond belief. The paper quotes from both plays in order to supports its theses.
From the Paper
"Richard II was a king by the divine right of kings and we only need to look at his actions to determine this fact. He would have never earned his kingship had it not been something that was given to him by right of his birth. In short, Richard is a bad king with no real vision. He never takes time to learn what it means to be king and, as a result, does not care about the responsibilities that come along with the title of being king. To make matters worse, he breaks laws and traditions that are essential to his own kingship and his bad behavior forces those under him to feel helpless, hopeless, and without direction. He does not care for the people and while he may have been an intelligent man, he was not strong in the way that a king needs to be strong. Undoubtedly, King Richard's strongest and best characteristic was his eloquence."
| |
|
The Ideal King, 2002.
An examination of the concept of a good king as portrayed in William Shakespeare's plays "Richard II", "Richard II"I and "Henry V".
1,150 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 3 sources, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper analyzes the ideal of a good king as presented by Shakespeare in "Richard II", "Richard II"I and "Henry V" and discusses to what extent these kings fulfilled the ideal. The reasons for the discrepancy between the ideal and the real are examined as well, as is the question of whether morality has any place in the game of power politics.
| |
|
Richard the Lionhearted, 2002.
A study of the life events of Richard I, particularly those traits and experiences that contributed to his success as medieval English King.
2,115 words (approx. 8.5 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 66.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The life and experiences of King Richard I of England are examined. Key topics of interest include continual family conflict, early development of military prowess, defense of English provinces in France and involvement in the Crusades.
From the Paper
"Richard I was the son of two of the most interesting and formidable royal characters of medieval history. The marriage of his parents, Henry of Anjou and Eleanor of Aquitaine brought together an empire that included not only England, but half of France as well. Richard was the third son born to this union and as such did not expect to inherit his father's crown. Unfortunately, both of his older siblings died, leaving Richard in a position of contention for the throne with his two younger brothers. This paper will examine and discuss the life of Richard I and the events that caused him to be regarded as one of the strongest military Kings of medieval England."
| |
|
Shakespeare's History Plays, 2002.
Looks at the similarities and differences in three of William Shakespeare's plays - "King Henry IV", "Richard II" and "Richard III".
1,876 words (approx. 7.5 pages), 3 sources, $ 60.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
By analyzing "King Henry IV", "The Tragedy of King Richard III" and "The Tragedy of King Richard II", the paper shows that the underlying message in Shakespeare's history plays seems to be that kings who are extreme in their execution of power provide a representation of a weak and vulnerable monarchy, whereas kings who apply a modicum of moderation to their exercise of power provide a representation of a strong and indestructible monarchy. The paper shows that King Henry IV is the epitome of a successful ruler, in the simple fact that he manages to remain alive at the end of the play and do what is best for the country and its people by continuing to fight the rebel armies until they have lost the ongoing battle with the monarch. This in and of itself suggests that he is able to find a delicate balance between being overly powerful and yielding to others under pressure. The paper shows, on the other hand, that King Richard II is unable to exert any power whatsoever, partly due to his fear of confrontation and partly due to his overwhelmingly pathological view of himself as being a Christ figure. It shows that Richard III is, as well, equally unsuccessful as a ruler because he exerts too much power as a result of a delusional likeness with Richard II's antithesis, Satan.
From the Paper
"Likewise, Richard III also holds himself in very delusional esteem, though it is expressed in a different manner than with Richard II. Like Richard II, Richard III believes he is worthy of the throne despite being, by definition, an illegitimate ruler. However, this misleading conviction triggers murderous "[p]lots [he has] laid" (I.i.32), including the murder of his brother Clarence, the murder of King Edward's sons (including the heir to the throne, the Prince of Wales), and an incestuous scheme to marry the late King's daughter, Elizabeth, in order to seem more fitting to be king. Undoubtedly, he believes wholeheartedly that he has been rejected and/or cheated by God, and that he is deserving of the kingship. His belief system allows his mental health to shatter in such a manner that leads way to an excessive use of force and power in order to obtain the things he so desires. His own delusional belief system leads the reader to deem it likely that Richard III is as much a Satan figure as Richard II is a Christ figure. The extreme self-views held by each of these kings guide them to act in highly radical manners that are not at all conducive to governing a successful monarchy."
| |
|
"Richard III", 2003.
An analysis of Shakespeare's play, "Richard III".
1,448 words (approx. 5.8 pages), 0 sources, $ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the play, "Richard III", focusing on the main character, King Richard III of England. It discusses whether he should be considered a villain and asks, "Did he repent in time?" It explains that, in the play, Edward IV is on the throne, but his brother Richard plans to usurp Edward and be crowned king. To accomplish this goal, he must manipulate and murder, but in the midst of all the chaos he creates, there are glimmers of a better man.
From the Paper
"He has decided that since he is no good at being happy, he will become an outstanding villain. He will soon show just how power-hungry he is. His reasons for acting as he does seem thin, and at this point it is hard to imagine how any good traits could be spotted in such a man. Richard is intelligent and manipulative, and has the ability to lie through his teeth and bee believed. He convinces a just-widowed noble woman, Lady Anne, that she should marry him, even though she knows he murdered her husband. He has his trusting and na ve older brother executed. King Edward is already in poor health, and Richard uses Clarence s death to hasten Edward s death."
| |
|
"Richard III", 2005.
An analysis of Shakespeare's play, "Richard III", focusing on the relationship between the Duke of Buckingham and Richard.
2,143 words (approx. 8.6 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 67.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper concentrates on exploring why the Duke of Buckingham helped Richard III as extensively as he did to lie, cheat, steal, and murder his way to being king. It also explores why Buckingham left Richard III at a certain point after he was asked to arrange for the murder of Edward. The author argues that Buckingham left Richard not because of his conscience regarding the murder of the boy, but out of a fear that by helping the tyrant to gain his power, he would not get anything in return but his own death.
From the Paper
"Shakespeare's "Richard III" was a play in the series of historical texts that also includes "Henry IV." With these texts, the author left the convention of setting his plays is exotic places like Athens and Italy, and concentrated on the theme of English history. Richard III was a monarch who is shown in Shakespeare's "Richard III" to have lost touch with reality more than a little bit in his quest for power, which has corrupted him deeply. At the end of the play there is little that can be done to redeem Richard III, such is his rejection of morality and his overriding ambition. These qualities caused Richard III to murder many of his own family members, and throughout the play he treats everyone as either someone to use or a potential threat. One of the people whom Richard III used was the Duke of Buckingham, who became his right-hand man during his quest for the throne."
|
|
|
