Shakespeare: Richard II vs. Richard III vs. Henry IV Part I
According to Shakespeare, being a moral king is of utmost importance. William Shakespeare demonstrates this in his plays, The Tragedy of Richard II, The Tragedy of Richard III, and Henry IV Part I. In these plays Richard II and Richard III are immoral, although for different reasons, and ultimately fail in their quest to be king. In the first part of Henry IV, Henry does not yet fail as king because he is not yet immoral man. In evaluating these plays of Shakespeare, being immoral is a determinant of failure. In the instance where a king or aspiring king is not immoral, success is still possible. Through his plays, Shakespeare creates a scenario that to have the opportunity for success, one has to be a moral, and thus a successful king is morally good because has to be. To succeed as king, and not retain power and not fail in an attempt to have control, a king must act as the righteous king toward his people as otherwise he is undeserving and will fail to maintain control during his reign.For a king to be success he should have authority, control, and respect. In his depictions of Richard II, Richard III, and Henry IV Shakespeare presents three very different kings with very different levels of success. Richard II is a
King Henry IV's portray shows that to be successful, a king as to be morally good. "Then this remains, that we divide our power," King Henry IV says, reflecting on his morality as he volunteers to share power as he wins against the rebellion that opposes him (Henry IV Part I, Act 5 Scene V, 34). To be a success a king must retain power. A good man as king will be just to his people and his fellow leaders and ultimately deserves to be a king. He is deceptive and manipulative, and plans to use these immoral skills to eventually become king. Richard II and Richard III both are immoral, just in different respects. Richard III is not yet king, but plans to become king using immoral means. If a successful king is the rightful king, then a good man is thus one that behaves properly. Henry IV sums up this point best in Shakespeare's Henry IV Part I as, "Then with the losers let it sympathize, / For nothing can seem foul to those that win" (Henry IV Part I, Act IV Scene I, 8-9). Richard III is therefore an immoral man in his aspirations to become king. This ultimately states that to be a success, a king must be moral. This suggests that according to Shakespeare, those that win are legitimate and almost destined to win, and those that lose are meant to lose. Richard II is already the king, unlike Richard III, yet he acts in way that will lead to his downfall. In comparing these three kings, a successful king can be said to be one that has control over his kingdom and is the rightful king.
Common topics in this essay:
Henry IV,
Richard III,
Richard II,
IV Henry,
IV Act,
richard ii,
henry iv,
richard iii,
IV Scene,
III Scene,
Richard II's,
Richard III's,
king henry,
Till Richard,
richard ii richard,
ii richard,
successful king,
king henry iv,
ii richard iii,
iii henry iv,
richard iii henry,
iii henry,
according shakespeare,
iii immoral,
king immoral,
|
Acceptance Essays
