Tragedy of King Richard III (00) by Shakespeare, William [Paperback (2001)]

The Shakespeare Collection

by William Shakespeare

Tragedy of King Richard III (00) by Shakespeare, William [Paperback (2001)]

Genres: Shakespeare, Classics, Drama, Fiction, Plays

Paperback

Published January 1, 2001

About the author

William Shakespeare was an English playwright, poet, and actor. He is widely regarded as the greatest writer in the English language and the world's pre-eminent dramatist. He is often called England's national poet and the "Bard of Avon" (or simply "the Bard"). His extant works, including collaborations, consist of some 39 plays, 154 sonnets, three long narrative poems, and a few other verses, some of uncertain authorship. His plays have been translated into every major living language and are performed more often than those of any other playwright. Shakespeare remains arguably the most influential writer in the English language, and his works continue to be studied and reinterpreted.
Shakespeare was born and raised in Stratford-upon-Avon, Warwickshire. At the age of 18, he married Anne Hathaway, with whom he had three children: Susanna, and twins Hamnet and Judith. Sometime between 1585 and 1592, he began a successful career in London as an actor, writer, and part-owner ("sharer") of a playing company called the Lord Chamberlain's Men, later known as the King's Men after the ascension of King James VI and I of Scotland to the English throne. At age 49 (around 1613), he appears to have retired to Stratford, where he died three years later. Few records of Shakespeare's private life survive; this has stimulated considerable speculation about such matters as his physical appearance, his sexuality, his religious beliefs, and even certain fringe theories as to whether the works attributed to him were written by others.
Shakespeare produced most of his known works between 1589 and 1613. His early plays were primarily comedies and histories and are regarded as some of the best works produced in these genres. He then wrote mainly tragedies until 1608, among them Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, Othello, King Lear, and Macbeth, all considered to be among the finest works in the English language. In the last phase of his life, he wrote tragicomedies (also known as romances) and collaborated with other playwrights.
Many of Shakespeare's plays were published in editions of varying quality and accuracy during his lifetime. However, in 1623, John Heminge and Henry Condell, two fellow actors and friends of Shakespeare's, published a more definitive text known as the First Folio, a posthumous collected edition of Shakespeare's dramatic works that includes 36 of his plays. Its Preface was a prescient poem by Ben Jonson, a former rival of Shakespeare, that hailed Shakespeare with the now famous epithet: "not of an age, but for all time".

Reviews

[Sasha · Rating 5 out of 5]

This thing is awesome. Richard's one of my favorite characters.

Y'know, I thought it was the Queen of Hearts who came up with "Off with her head!" But I should've known, it was Richard. He says it at least twice.

On the other hand, I assumed that "Heads will roll" was from Shakespeare; it sounds like the kind of thing he'd say. But apparently it was actually Hitler, of all people. Who knew?

No, you're right: I don't have much to say about Richard III. I love it, it's awesome.

[Sheen Sandhu · Rating 2 out of 5]

yoooooo act 1 scene 2 went crazyyyyy 😏

[Mici T · Rating 4 out of 5]

Act 1 scene 2, act 4 scene 4 was SUPERB 😜🤭💀🤞. Richard the rizzler ig 😍😍 LOVEDDD the cursing every 5 minutes throughout too 🤓

[Ashlynn · Rating 4 out of 5]

Richard was a smooth talker.

[Xanthe · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is the worst Shakespeare book I’ve read. Here are the things that I liked
- the strong women having their little soliloquy moment that was cute
Here are the things that I didn’t like
-Richard III is awful to read about he’s evil and unlikeable, feels very 1 dimensional
- it’s quite a long play and it didn’t need to be that long
- No complexity to it
- Has the good guys and bad guys and not really anyone in between
- I guess it’s the nature of reading the script of a play but like there was no real feeling behind the words of like Richard III trying to manipulate literally anyone in sight and everyone was like “yeah that checks out”
- the soliloquies that Richard III had were annoying and I hate him
The end

[krystel · Rating 3 out of 5]

Richard is a whiny whore and the ending was anticlimactic

[Kurt · Rating 3 out of 5]

I actually really enjoy Shakespeare. Yes, the language is a tad difficult to grasp sometimes, but the stories, plots, dialogs, and soliloquies are frequently really fabulous and thought provoking. Richard III is the first of Shakespeare's "historical" plays for me. The story of evil King Richard, who knows no bounds on what he is willing to do in order to obtain and maintain power, is fascinating and terrifying. Terrifying because I have no doubt that many who are in power today throughout the world (and even here in the U.S.) are as amoral and self serving as Richard. Of course, the Richard of this play is likely a gross exaggeration of the actual Richard of history, but reading Shakespeare's take on him has been extremely interesting and educational as I have spent time researching the actual history of the subject.

As always, the SparkNotes version is great for people like me. I really don't have the patience to re-read and analyze and research the many archaic idiomatic peculiarities of ye olde Elizabethan English, so having the side-by-side modern language equivalent is a real enhancement.

[Mark Dickson · Rating 4 out of 5]

An extremely easy read. Each set of two pages contains a page from the script and the corresponding commentary.

McKellen provides some great insight into his adaptation process and some behind-the-scenes information about reasons why things were cut.

[Rach · Rating 2 out of 5]

I dont Shakespeare

[Realini Ionescu · Rating 4 out of 5]

Richard III by William Shakespeare

Another version of this note and thoughts on other books are available at:

- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...


This is an adaptation with Ian McKellen in the title role and listed as one of the executive producers of this classic play.
And the cast was stellar, no less

- Annette Benning as Queen Elizabeth, Jim Broadbent as duke Buckingham, Robert Downey Jr. –lately the highest paid actor in the world- as Lord Rivers- a supporting role, Nigel Hawthorne – magnificent in the lead role of The Madness of King George by Alan Bennett- as Duke of Clarence, Kristin Scott Thomas as Lady Anne and the champion of longevity Maggie Smith, nominated at the age of eighty two for her roles in Downton Abbey and The Lady in the Van by the same Alan Bennett

So the premises of this spectacular and modern version were fantastic…
As Donald Trump likes to repeat: fantastic, beautiful, great.

Being so modern, this version has made me think of:

- Trump and Richard III

And I think they have so much in common.
Yes, The Donald has not killed anyone, except for a good number of small businesses that worked at his towers and real estate properties and that he has refused to pay, which in the case of small players meant death.

But the two leaders share a pathetic and pathological love of their own persona
And the list of similarities goes on:

- They would do anything to get to the highest position in the land and they finally get it, undeservedly, if you ask me
- Lying and accusing others of the most outrageous, preposterous and yet false acts or associations comes naturally to these individuals
- A psychopath is one who feels nothing, but can perceive and use other’s emotions to his own benefit…both do that
- They say what their audience wants to hear, even when that is a “post-truth”, a word elected as the word of the year by Oxford, for 2016

I was flabbergasted when Richard III has a dialogue with Lady Anne.
She is mourning near the dead body of her husband.

Both the spouse and the father in law have been murdered and Richard III, the ultimate villain is responsible.
And this is just the beginning of a long series of assassinations.

Clarence is killed.
Then young princes, Buckingham and others who have helped the tyrant obtain one of the most coveted thrown in the world at the time.

There is no limit to the ambition of either Richard III or The Donald.
They both see themselves as capable of superhuman endeavors, with Trump declaring a couple of days ago that he would be able to run both America -as yet the greatest democracy in the world- and his business empire.

Indeed, here is another shared element:

- Richard III is a king and the elected leader-alas- of the free world sees himself more as an emperor or a monarch than a leader of a democracy
- His latest press conference showed a discretionary bent, with King Donald refusing to grant CNN the right to ask any question

Meryl Streep has chastised a man who mocked a disabled journalist, laughing at his disability and addressing the lowest instincts in people, especially his flawed supporters, from the height of his powerful position.

The answer came quickly, via tweeter:

- Meryl Streep- nominated for 20 Golden Globes, winner of- I don’t know, 7?- and awarded the Oscar three times, among other outstanding achievements- is an over rated actress according to the man who has a disgusting video on a bus, bragging about what he can do to women…anything

Yes, Richard III has a confirmed violent history
But The elected Clown has spoken about torture, killing the families of suspected or confirmed terrorists.

Let’s hope, Insha’Allah that we can say at the end of the next four years:

“Now is the winter of our discontent
Made glorious summer by this sun of York;
And all the clouds that lour'd upon our house

In the deep bosom of the ocean buried.”

[Richard Rogers · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm almost through reading Shakespeare's history plays, and my consistent experience has been that they're pretty entertaining, more than I expected. Same with Richard III.

It still presents challenges in a light reading. This isn't study; I'm not taking notes or re-reading parts or drawing diagrams of who's who. (Maybe a little, sometimes.) Mostly, I'm just reading, so some of it gets confusing. Too many damn Edwards over a few generations. Too many people known by their titles when titles are passed to their descendants. I get them mixed up. But it's not crucial to keeping up with the action, and there's pretty good action.

"My kingdom for a horse" is in here. I've been waiting to read that line. And we have the murder of the princes in the tower--that's pretty famous stuff. Still sad all these years later. And old Queen Margaret, throwing out real curses at Richard and everyone still supporting him. That's bound to be awesome to see performed. She was pretty nasty, in a great way.

The ending is most fun, of course. (No spoilers to worry about 400 years after publishing.) The ghosts visiting Richard and then Richmond, cursing the former and blessing the latter, are pretty fun. I would have liked to ask how that was staged, with both tents visible at the same time even though they were in different camps, but it's okay; I figure it out, sorta. Then the fighting stuff is always fun. Though the final battle between them is all stage directions and no dialogue, and it's pretty terse: "Alarum. Enter Richard and Richmond. They fight. Richard is slain." That might look good on stage, but it's subpar reading.

I'd also like to see the bit where Richard woos Anne not long after killing her husband, convincing her to marry him. She curses him and spits at him for pages, then gives in. It's hard to believe, so my hope is that good acting makes it make sense. And convincing the mother of the dead princes--Queen Elizabeth, Edward IV's wife--that he should marry one of her daughters to make right all the wrongs he had done them... Well, that's just nuts. Unless they're all Machiavellian schemers with no human feeling whatsoever. But maybe a good bunch of actors could make it work. I dunno.

Lots to think about. Interesting to read. English history is crazy. Good play, though, so this is recommended to anyone left who hasn't read it or watched it. :)

Just Henry VIII yet to go. It's in the mail, so I've gotta wait.

[Laurie Wiegler · Rating 5 out of 5]

I somehow missed this book in my youth, both in high school and undergrad, so relished the opportunity to read it when a tutee wanted to.

I did not find Richard III pleasant, and did find that modern-day antiheroes such as Trump, seem to mirror this tyrant. For example, when Richard's lackey Buckingham decries, "And is it thus/ Repays he my deep service With such deep contempt? Made I him king for this? O, let me think on Hastings and be gone To Brecknock, while my fearful head is on!" made me think about the formerly imprisoned Trump attorney Michael Cohen.

Set against the light of the modern Royal family, the intrigue is clear. What won't stop a monarch? While/whilst Queen Elizabeth would not have someone beheaded, how do we really know what goes on behind the scenes? What would befall a disgarded Royal, such as Harry or Andrew? The imagination soars, even if 2022 sensibilities remind that murder is illegal and apart from that, unlikely in her Jubilee years!

We have gotten too many of our sayings from Shakespeare to mention here. It was exciting to read that familiar phrase, "A horse, a horse, my kingdom for a horse!' and understand that it meant the difference between life and death. Death does come to Richard III, in an arguably much more dramatic though no less deserved fashion than occurred at the War of the Roses.

[Ebony · Rating 3 out of 5]

3/5 - read for school

[Asra · Rating 3 out of 5]

read for school

[Tim Dooley · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great plot, made easier to read by the no fear edition.

[Ashlee · Rating 3 out of 5]

I mean, it’s Shakespeare, but ugh. He’s pretty much the worst person (character or no) that ever walked the planet. He’s a villain through and through

[Gabrielle Geddes · Rating 2 out of 5]

Look not my fave from Ol' Will. It just made like -1000% sense to me because everyone had the same name and I don't understand English history whatsoever. Richmond was a slay tho.

[Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

For a long time, I considered myself a staunch opponent of setting the Shakespeare plays in times/places other than how they were written. I find myself more divided these days. Sure, there are some that don't work for me (Luhrmann's Romeo + Juliet, and Branagh's Love's Labors Lost, for example), but there are people doing amazing things with the plays. One is Julie Taymor's "Titus", which is strange and beautiful enough to break the mold. Scotland, PA was a clever update on Macbeth. Another is this version of Richard III, set in an alternate history-type fascist England.

The setting fits the play, and the adaptation is done amazingly well by actor Ian McKellen and director Richard Loncraine. A fun bonus of the screenplay book is that McKellen has annotated it, telling the reader about the writing process and the production of the film.

I'm hoping that my McKellen bias doesn't cloud my judgment of the film, but I don't think it does. This was the first film of his I ever saw, so my rabid fandom came later. I really love the man. He's a spectacular actor, and a clever, sarcastic human being. I've seen most all of his films, and am eagerly awaiting the PBS broadcast of his King Lear (a play I was planning to see in Stratford until expenses intervened).

Recommended for Shakespeare and/or screenwriting aficionados.

[Bernie4444 · Rating 5 out of 5]

“FIRST MURDERER Remember our reward when the deed’s done

SECOND MURDER Zounds, he dies: I had forgotten the reward.”

There is no good place to start the play “The Tragedy of Richard III” by Shakespeare without having spoilers. Yet people who know the history or at least Shakespeare’s version of 1592 or 1593 or are familiar with Virgil’s “Historia Angliae” will want this book for a good copy of the details of the play.

This is the GLOUCESTER: “Now is the winterer of our discontent” play.

I have several hard copies, but the Kindle adds portability and text-to-speak.

I have a hunch we have not seen the last of Richard III. No telling what can be dug up nowadays.

[Michael P. · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very good performance by the Stratford Festival of Shakespeare's play. There is a pointless discovery of Richard's body in the 7 minute-long dumbshow to start the play and a very few unnecessary interloped scenes or actions here and there, all of which smell like the director putting his stamp on the play. It is odd that Richard seems twice the age as his older brother George, but all of this amounts to quibbles about a production that is otherwise one of the better performances of this play I have seen. Some scenes often cut are intact, yea, the casting is strong throughout, the pace is quick and concise. This is very, very good.

[James · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great look at the conception and production of a terrific film.

[Sharlene · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well edited. I would have kept more of the scene with the ladies "cursing Richard" though.