Despite being composed centuries apart, William Shakespeare’s play ‘Richard III’ (1593) and Al Pacino’s docudrama ‘Looking for Richard’ (1996) provides stark commentary on human nature. Through reimagining and reframing textual aspects, perspectives of power and ambition, and the idea of providentialism and free will are depicted. While both texts explore aligning characterizations of Richard III, the intertextual conversation through different mediums of production and language illuminate the power of art in enhancing our understanding of different contexts and values as well as resonances and dissonances between the two texts. Shakespeare critiqued the Machiavellian pursuit of power and the moral vacuity it causes, whereas Pacino’s post-modern film uses a framework of secular values to engage a contemporary audience with Shakespeare’s legacy, acting as an artistic mechanism to express the existential imperfection governing human intention.
In Shakespeare’s ‘Richard III’, Richard rejects contextual expectations of theocentric values in his desire for power, by subverting the morality and values of Elizabethan England. In his opening soliloquy by openly admitting he is “subtle, false and treacherous” and “determined to prove a villain”, Shakespeare presents him as the duplicitous embodiment of the dichotomy of ‘morality and vice’, which is seen further in his ability to feign charm and honor through theatricality. Through the façade of Richard, Shakespeare critiques humanity’s demonic nature: “From blood to blood/Your right of birth, your empery, your own”, in which Richard is portrayed as immoral and unholy as he rejects the paradigms of Christian morality. During Richard’s era, the War of the Roses and Richard III’s proceeding reign were acknowledged as a dark period of horror and disorder in English history. The use of bestial symbolism of ‘toad’, ‘boar’, ‘foul swine’ and ‘hedgehog’ shows how his compassion deteriorating, consumed by his desires, where Richard sacrifices his humanity for retribution. In “O that deceit should steal such gentle shapes, and with a virtuous visor hide”, the use of theatrical imagery reveals one’s appearance as a mechanism for hiding duplicity in character. Shakespeare therefore portrays a debased Richard, who arrogantly seeks to furtively usurp the very crown of England and thereby violate the deepest principles of Elizabethan morality, embodied in the notion of the divine right of kings. Richard’s oxymoronic declaration “seem a saint when most I play the devil” suggests the contextual significance of the holiness of a king. Thus, through Richard’s character, Shakespeare elucidates the immorality and divine consequences of deceit in a world governed by moral absolutes.
Differing contexts influence the motivations of individuals shaping a new understanding of the human nature. Shakespeare reflects the tensions between providentialism or determinism and free will, within his Elizabethan context. Besides, he portrays the devout Protestantism of the Elizabethan era through his delineation of the shifting changes towards free will underpinned by the humanism within 16th-century paradigms. This is epitomized through Richard’s facade of Christian values, shown through theatrical and religious imagery, “a book of prayer in your hand”, however, this is undercut through the paronomasia of Richard’s determination, “I am determined to prove a villain”. Thus, Shakespeare exemplifies the conflict between Richard’s motivation as his personal construct and his beliefs of being preordained. Shifts in political and social paradigms through the influence of Renaissance humanism influenced Shakespeare to promote the legitimacy and principles of natural order. By employing dramatic irony, “The course my noble father laid on thee, when thou didst crown his warlike brows with paper”, he underpins Richard’s free will in his downfall. Characters are shown to be aware of Richard’s machinations, yet unable to control the consequences, prompting the audience to question the rising power of the individual and its negative ramifications on society when one acts against the prevalent religious tenets.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
Correspondingly, in ‘Looking for Richard’ power is defined as a human construct. The film begins and ends with the intertextual use of ‘The Tempest’ coupled with a voiceover, suggesting that life is transient and ‘our life is rounded with a sleep’, which implies that life cannot provide us with moral certainty. This is followed by the mis-en-scene, which depicts a gothic spire ‘church’ fading into a ‘New York’ basketball court, symbolizing life is a game, that we conjure. The positioning of Pacino’s menacing figure over the sick King Edward implies his premature domination of the kingdom displaying his control, further amplified through, “plots have I laid ... inductions dangerous”. This ambiguity is enhanced as Pacino wears black, using the literal darkness to evoke Richard’s corruption, resonating with society’s post-modern perception of evil. Furthermore, Pacino explores the comparison of the Machiavellian politics and the stratified power structure of the Elizabethan era and 20th century politics when he questions contemporary authority, “The truth is that those in power have a total contempt for everything…”. The chiaroscuro of Pacino reciting Richard’s opening monologue reinforces Richard’s hidden self. Moreover, his employment of vox populi and interviews demonstrates contemporary democratic power structure counteracting this ultimate darkness. Pacino’s desire to exert his influence for the advancement is ambiguous, as it appears noble yet ironically it elevates Pacino an intellectual authority. Conversely in Richard’s asides, Shakespeare presents no such moral high ground, remaining literally evil within this theocentric world. In the final scene of ‘Richard III’, Richard is cast as a pathetic figure, abandoned by his followers, dying alone, thus reducing the moral lesson, where even the beast cannot not pacify, “My horse, my horse, my kingdom for a horse”. Morality is shaped in Shakespeare’s ‘Richard III’ by Christian moral paradigms, which is re-shaped by Pacino to reflect post-modern secularism. Thus, ‘Richard III’ and ‘Looking for Richard’ both didactically provide a warning against illicit use of power.
‘Looking for Richard’ mirrors contemporary values through Pacino’s exploration of secularism, which highlights the growth of humanism and individualism in shaping 20th century morality. This is revealed in the appreciation for Richard’s pragmatism by interviewed scholars. “Irony is really only hypocrisy with style... We love Richard’s irony in a way”. Pacino juxtaposes the contextual intervention and an opportunity for Richard to gain redemption but as a 20th century amoral society, we view Pacino’s views on Richard’s irony as a manifestation of his guilt from his subconscious. Pacino, by juxtaposing twentieth century values with those of the Elizabethan audience collides with Shakespeare, when he posits that individuals are guided by their own moral compass and not by religion. Instead, he chooses to focus on their own individual guilty conscience and the impact on their lives: “Faith, certain dregs of conscience are here within me”. Richard is haunted by the ghost of his conscience and ultimately, is punished by his madness rather than his death, as explored in William Shakespeare’s ‘Richard III’. In twenty first century context, justice comes in the form of one’s own psychological fragmentation and guilty conscience, rather than sanctions by God. This resonance can also be seen in ‘Richard III’, in which Richard himself compares himself to a vice, “Thus, like the formal Vice, Iniquity/ I moralize two meanings in one world”, highlighting how he is confiding with the audience by sharing his devious plots, reflecting his lack of morality. Only in the last scene, he questions himself saying, “Richard loves Richard, that is, I am I. Is there a murderer here? No. Yes, I am”. This indicates the internal conflict he faces because of his moral revelation, demonstrating the impact of religious beliefs on the individual, emphasizing the idea of human nature.
Appropriations of texts provide the readers with an enriched understanding through different perspectives and form. Composed during the Tudor Monarchy, William Shakespeare’s ‘Richard III’ manipulates the authority of Richard to highlight the key ideas of power, providentialism and freewill. Pacino reshapes these ideas to reflect 20th century society’s growing secularism. Thus, both texts resonate that the transcendent hypocrisy in the form of one’s pursuit for power, whereas their intertextual conversation reveals the dissonance of values due to their contextual differences, inviting reflection on contemporary society and what shape one's life.
Stuck on your essay?
