| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "RICHARD ADDINSELL": |
|
|
Richard Addinsell, 2007.
This paper discusses the life and achievements of composer Richard Addinsell.
1,770 words (approx. 7.1 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 57.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper relates that in the past few centuries, there have been countless classical composers whose music has inspired and encouraged populations around the globe. One such composer is Richard Addinsell, whose legendary works have provided entertainment for moviegoers and theater-attendants for generations. The paper reveals that he is credited for over 40 film scores and he successfully wrote music for nearly every genre in film, from historical documentaries to light hearted comedies. The paper details his personal history and his rise to fame. The paper concludes that his level of skill as well as his ability to orchestrate music flawlessly and seamlessly has made Richard Addinsell a composer to be remembered and revered for generations.
From the Paper
"Addinsell's music was primarily written for piano, either in solo or duet, as well as for orchestras or ensembles. Varying from passionate, somber pieces of tragedy to light-hearted pieces for comedy to slow moving waltzes, Addinsell's musical style is varied and versatile, which are the qualities that allowed his career to thrive in the film industry. Paid by the film studios for specific works, the funding from such endeavors allowed him to write music for less lucrative genres such as theater and radio. As a modern classical composer, Addinsell was able to combine the richness of piano with full orchestra accompaniment to provide thundering war marches, when required, or to use a simple single piano to show a softer, more subtle element of a film."
| |
|
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. "
| |
|
"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."
| |
|
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 Cory and Abraham Lincoln, 2007.
A review of the poem, "Richard Cory" by Edwin Arlington Robinson, drawing comparisons between Richard Cory and Abraham Lincoln.
997 words (approx. 4.0 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper introduces, discusses and analyzes the poem "Richard Cory" by Edwin Arlington Robinson. Specifically, the paper compares and contrasts Abraham Lincoln with Richard Cory in the poem. According to the paper, these are two very different men, but they share some common elements.
From the Paper
"Why did Richard Cory kill himself? The poem does not really answer this, but the poet insinuates that Cory seems to have everything, but it is not enough to make him happy. He is "rich as a king," but that is not the only thing that matters in life, as this poem shows. Happiness comes from contentment and satisfaction with your life and what you do. It seems that Lincoln was probably happy. He was doing an important job, and he had a family that loved him. He never had a lot of money, but he seems as if he was content with his life. In this, he was different than Cory. He would not have chosen to end his life the way Cory did, because he was content, and because he had important responsibilities. Maybe Cory was unhappy because his life was empty, and he did not have important responsibilities, and that would be a big difference between Cory and Lincoln. Lincoln was a success and he worked hard. Cory did not have to work, and he did not seem to have anything to motivate him or make him proud. Lincoln did, and so he had a reason for living, while Cory did not."
| |
|
The Two Richards, 2001.
This essay is a comparison of Shakespeare's "Richard III" and Tey's Richard III in her novel "The Daughter of Time".
865 words (approx. 3.5 pages), 2 sources, APA, $ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explores the differences between William Shakespeare?s account of Richard III and Josephine Tey?s account of the same. The author discusses such differences as historical accuracy, the protagonist?s motivations and the differences in the plots.
From the Paper
"Shakespeare?s descriptions of Richard III have been the most popular historical account. He describes Richard to be a physically deformed individual with his deformities eating away at his mind and soul turning him into a loathsome character. Moreover, he depicts Richard to be greedy for throne so much so that he went about on a murdering spree. In Shakespeare?s account, Richard killed his own brother George whose turn it was in the line of succession within the House of York. Moreover, he had the queen's brothers, Rivers and Gray and his wife Anne murdered too with the aid of the conspiratorial Buckingham."
| |
|
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."
| |
|
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', 2006.
A review of 'Richard III' by William Shakespeare.
1,219 words (approx. 4.9 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 41.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper takes a look at William Shakespeare's play 'Richard III' and two movie versions based on this play. According to the paper, 'Richard III' is both a tragedy and a historical account of the short career of the last medieval English king. The paper discusses how Shakespeare's 'Richard III' depicts Richard and his "reign of terror" both unflatteringly and beyond historical accuracy.
From the Paper
" In the movie version, "Looking for Richard," Al Pacino creates, directs and stars as Richard III's obsession for power, lust and betrayal through the streets of New York to the birthplace of Shakespeare to an emotionally charged production of Richard III (Richard III Society 1996) It is a presentation of Shakespeare with an untraditional format more accessible to the modern audience and with which this modern audience can relate better. The cast includes Estelle Parsons as Queen Margaret, Alec Baldwin as Clarence, Kevin Spacey as Buckingham, Winona Ryder as Lady Anne and Aidan Quinn as Richmond. Al Pacino also puts in the enthusiasm and help of Sir John Gielgud, Sir Derek Jacobi, Kenneth Branagh, Vanessa Redgrave, James Earl Jones and Kevin Kline in an attempt at making everyone enjoy Shakespeare and his tales truly timeless in exploring human nature. This version is different from the first two interpretations in that Al Pacino and his actors needed to break down the barriers, which render Shakespeare's history complicated and intimidating. Al Pacino allows his viewer to go behind the scenes and witness the actual process of acting. The heavier aspects of the play are made mild by informal shots of actors dealing with their roles in either a comic or heated forum. Al Pacino's methods of analysis are insightful, amusing and engrossing. He transcends the barrier between actors and their audience as he stands in London's legendary Globe Theater and the halls of New York City's Cloisters Museum (Richard III Society)."
| |
|
Shakespeare's "Richard III", 2004.
Analysis of Shakespeare's play, "Richard III", and how the main character is able to win over the hearts and minds of the audience in spite of his evil nature.
1,710 words (approx. 6.8 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper describes the four techniques used by Richard, in William Shakespeare's play, "Richard III", to win the love of the audience. Eliciting the audience's sympathy and then their collaboration, Richard's ability to charm and manipulate the audience depends are various elements; each is cited as a technique used by Richard to gain the audience's devotion.
From the Paper
"One of Shakespeare?s most memorable characters is a villain who will always be remembered for his outstanding intelligence, political intensity, and incredible language skill. Richard, Duke of Gloucester, a devilish man, who murders anyone who stands in his way, even innocent people. We ask ourselves how could anybody with a hypocritical, and deceiving nature win the hearts of the audience of so many generations: for at-least most part of the play. It is agreed then that normally one such a person would horrify and disgust one and all. However, Richard (I stress not King Richard) which will be clarified by the end of this essay; mesmerizes his audience with sly skill. He captures sympathy in his audience by convincing them that his physical deformities should excuse him of committing evil crimes. His alluring use of language is like a spell that is cast over the audience and sustained from the beginning of the play until Act IV. Richard is then able to charm his audience into a partnership of evil and corrupt manipulation. Moreover, Richard, distinguishable than any other villain, and deserves his title because of the four most vital techniques that he uses: through these techniques he is able to win the love of the audience. There are four specific techniques that are used by Richard, which will be explained in-order of importance throughout the essay. The key idea is that each technique adds to, enhances, and strengthens the effect of the situations and outcomes- to whoever is participating in the play (audience, characters etc.)."
| |
|
Machiavellian Philosophy in Shakespeare's 'Richard III', 1997.
A look at the character of Richard III, as well as the era of Shakespeare and the man himself.
4,245 words (approx. 17.0 pages), 6 sources, $ 112.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at at Shakespeare's "Richard III", but also discusses the theatre and the times in which Shakespeare lived. It starts with an overview of Elizabethan theatre and society, then moves specifically to theatres in London and the provinces. William Shakespeare, the man, his life and career in the theatre are discussed. "Richard III" is looked at in terms of historical facts, and then the character of Richard is examined.
From the Paper
"A history partly based on The Union of the Two Noble and Illustrious Families of Lancaster and York by the English historian Edward Hall and on the Chronicles by the English historian Raphael Holin?shed. Probably first performed in 1593. First published in 1597. In this play, the first history to have a self-contained narrative unity, Shakespeare accentuated the moment of death as a crisis of conscience in which man judges himself and is capable of true prophecy. He centred the drama on a single figure who commits himself to murder, treason, and dissimulation with an inventive imagination that an audience can relish even as it must condemn it; and in defeat Richard discovers a valiant fury that carries him beyond nightmare fear and guilt to unrepentant, crazed defiance."
| |
|
?In Richard's Time?, 2006.
A comparison of Shakespeare's "Richard II" and "Henry IV".
2,350 words (approx. 9.4 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 72.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper compares Shakespeare's uses time in his plays "Richard II" and "Henry IV". The paper shows that Richard's inability to use time to his advantage while he reigned led Bolingbroke to feel justified in deposing him. On the other hand, the paper demonstrates how Hal was extremely good at using his time -- in secret, to hone his battlefield skills -- and because of this, he is able to defeat Hotspur. Ultimately, the paper concludes that while Richard was a procrastinator and philosophizer and Hotspur was rash and impatient, they both come to the same end-that is, subsumed by time and death.
From the Paper
"Richard's reign is plagued with the consequences of his inaction, and although he attempts to dress his authority with powerful language, his lack of success at seeming to act makes him appear impotent, and therefore ripe for deposition. In the very first act of Richard II, we see Richard in the process of "staging" his power at court in a feeble attempt to resolve a dispute between Mowbray and Bolingbroke in which he, himself, is tacitly implicated. Richard certainly makes a show of being in control of the situation, but when the rhetoric between the two complainants becomes too hot, threatening to expose Richard's part in Glocester's death, Richard seems to be content to talk the two gentlemen down from their rage. It is a dangerous position to take, and it is not the first time that Richard has avoided this confrontation because we learn "[his] leisure would not let [him] hear" the dispute in the past. (Richard I.I)"
| |
|
"Richard III", 2002.
An analysis of the character of the Duke of Buckingham in Shakespeare's "Richard III".
650 words (approx. 2.6 pages), 1 source, $ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper analyzes the Duke of Buckingham in Shakespeare's "Richard III".The Duke was a clever, power-hungry and ambitious opportunist who supported the most dominant people in the country. When Richard was trying to be king of England, the Duke of Buckingham supported his evil schemes to punish the innocent in order to seize power. Later, the Duke of Bucking showed intelligence, wisdom and compassion when he refused to support the killing of more innocent soul during Richard's reign.
| |
|
"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, 2007.
This paper compares and contrasts five dramatic and historical interpretations of Richard III.
1,482 words (approx. 5.9 pages), 5 sources, APA, $ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines four productions and one biography of Richard III.
The paper explains that a controversial historical figure like Richard III, whose flawed character and life was filled with intrigue, betrayals, confrontations and battle has provided ample opportunities for playwrights, biographers, novelists, and filmmakers to interpret him and the events of his life in a variety of ways. The paper shows how some interpretations rely upon an understanding of the historical Richard III, others rely upon the characterization of him in William Shakespeare's famous play, while others have chosen to rely less upon traditions and more upon innovative approaches.
From the Paper
"Carefully examining the 1954 and 1995 films, both entitled Richard III; as well as Shakespeare's Richard III, Al Pacino's Looking for Richard, and historical and biographical accounts of Richard III provides many opportunities to compare and contrast these various interpretations. William Shakespeare's play is the best known of these productions, and justifiably so, for it created a memorable and lasting image of Richard III that renders the historical figure virtually irrelevant to most people. Shakespeare's interpretation of Richard is so powerful, vivid, and overwhelming that no biography or historical account can even begin to compare."
|
|
|
