Don't be angry with me, Shakespeare lovers. (Do we have a word for Shakespeare's fans, you know, like Sherlockians for Sherlock Holmes?) This is the first Shakespearian History that I truly read from enter to exeunt. But I cannot say that it's as entertaining as As You Like It (and I doubt it's supposed to), or as intriguing as Hamlet, or even its kin, Julius Caesar.
Richard III focuses on the events leading to Richard III's enthronement, complete with the killing of Clarence, the king, and later on, the two princes. Then the story goes to the military campaign of Richmond which later succeeded the crown.
In the play, Richard is depicted as cruel, sly, ugly, and wicked. He has been very detestable even since the start of the play. The more annoying he is, the more I don't believe the story. I mean, nobody could be that cruel. I wonder if the play could be categorized as “historical fiction” instead of “historical play.” I think I need to do further research before I determine which story I should trust and which I should distrust.
Still, the play is a good thing. Well, of course it is, Shakespeare wrote it. (Perhaps I am a little bit biased when it comes to the Bard.) My favourite scene, is perhaps, the ghosts coming to Richard and Richmond's tent, threatening and cursing the one and blessing the other. Similar scene appears in Julius Caesar, but the ghost comes to Brutus only. In this play, however, the ghosts come to both parties and make the contrast between Richard and Richmond even stronger.
That's all I think. I can't wait to do some little research and post it as a part of the #LRP event. You shall hear more Richard from me. ;)