Customer Reviews

Richard II (Arkangel Complete Shakespeare)

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(6)

 

 

The thing with Shakespeare histories is that almost no one reads them, as opposed to his tragedies and comedies. I don't know why that is. The histories that are read are either Henry V (largely due to Branagh's movie), Richard III (because the hunchback king is so over-the-top evil), or the gargantuan trilogy of Henry VI, with the nearly saintly king (at least by Part III) who much prefers contemplating religion and ethics to ruling and dealing with the cabals among his nobles.

So why read a relatively obscure history about a relatively obscure king? Aside from the obvious (it's Shakespeare, stupid), it is a wonderful piece of writing - intense, lyrical, and subtle. Richard II is morally ambiguous, initially an arrogant, callous figure who heeds no warnings against his behavior. Of course, his behavior, which includes seizing the property of nobles without regard for their heirs, leads to his downfall. Nothing in his character or behavior inspires his subjects so he has no passionate defenders when one of the wronged heirs leads a rebellion to depose Richard II. But Richard now becomes a much more sympathetic figure -especially in the scene where he confronts the usurper, Richard acknowledges his mistakes, but eloquently wonders what happens when the wronged subjects can depose the leader when they are wronged. What then of the monarchy, what then of England?

On top of the profound political musings, you get some extraordinarily lyrical Shakespeare (and that is truly extraordinary). Most well known may be the description of England that was used in the airline commercial a few years back... "This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle, ..."

If you like Shakespeare and haven't read this play, you've missed a gem.

Richard II was incompetent, wastefully extravagant, overtaxed his nobles and peasants, ignored his senior advisors, and lavished dukedoms on his favorites. His rival, Henry of Bolingbroke (later Henry IV), was popular with the common man and undeservingly suffered banishment and loss of all his property. And yet two centuries later Elizabethans viewed the overthrow of Richard II as fundamentally wrong and ultimately responsible for 100 years of crisis and civil war. Queen Elizabeth's government even censored Shakespeare's play.

Shakespeare masterfully manipulates our feelings and attitude toward Richard II and Bolingbroke. We initially watch Richard II try to reconcile differences between two apparently loyal subjects each challenging the other's loyalty to the king. He seemingly reluctantly approves a trial by combat. But a month later, only minutes before combat begins, he banishes both form England. We begin to question Richard's motivation.

Richard's subsequent behavior, especially his illegal seizure of Bolingbroke's land and title, persuades us that his overthrow is justified. But as King Richard's position declines, a more kingly, more contemplative ruler emerges. He faces overthrow and eventual death with dignity and courage. Meanwhile we see Bolingbroke, now Henry IV, beset with unease, uncertainty, and eventually guilt for his action.

Shakespeare also leaves us in in a state of uncertainty. What is the role of a subject? What are the limits of passive obedience? How do we reconcile the overthrow of an incompetent ruler with the divine right of kings? Will Henry IV, his children, or England itself suffer retribution?

Richard II has elements of a tragedy, but is fundamentally a historical play. I was late coming to Shakespeare's English histories and despite my familiarity with many of his works I found myself somewhat disoriented. I did not appreciate the complex relationships between the aristocratic families, nor what had happened before. Fortunately I was rescued by Peter Saccio, the author of "Shakespeare's English Kings". Saccio's delightful book explores how Shakespeare's imagination and actual history are intertwined.

I hope you enjoy Richard II as much as I have. It is the gateway to Henry IV (Parts 1 and 2) and Henry V, all exceptional plays.

The first of the bard's great Henry tetrology does not have the power or greatness of the its titular character to the extent that the latter plays have, but it still contains some of Shakespeare's greatest soliloquies. Richard II orates famously:

Of comfort no man speak:

Let's talk of graves, of worms, and epitaphs;

Make dust our paper, and with rainy eyes

Write sorrow on the bosom of the earth;

Let's choose executors and talk of wills:

And yet not so -- for what can we bequeath

Save our deposed bodies to the ground?

Our lands, our lives, and all are Bolingbroke's,

And nothing can we call our own but death,

And that small model of the barren earth

Which serves as paste and cover to our bones.

Richard the II is a tragedy about folly, about the farce of monarchical politics. It is clearly ahead of its time, though it falls short of the philosophical depth that Shakespeare would reach in such masterpieces as Hamlet and Macbeth. An indispensable part of the canon all the same.

Yes, Mr or Ms Reader, this is a hidden gem of Shakespeare's. Perhaps it is a bit too weighed down with history to ever attract Mr Di Caprio, but the story is intriguing and one's opinion of Richard changes scene by scene. Wonderful wordplay and nobility in abundance make this one to turn too immediately should you wish to delve beyond the traditional canon of the Bard's works.

This is one of my favourite Shakespeare plays, but in the Kindle edition the footnotes are not activated. Because of this you have to go to the end of the scene/act to look up a word, phrase, or historical data...then there is the issue of getting back to where you were before.

Is it too much to ask for publishers to do their job, and stop producing substandard Kindle books thinking the consuming public will take whatever crap they offer us.

Remember, Amazon allows us to return Kindle books withing a week of purchase. All you have to do is go to Manage Your Kindle and then find where all your books are kept, from there you go to the Actions Tab and select Refund.

If we all begin to complain and return these books then publishers will get the message and begin to do their jobs correctly/thoughtfully.

Again, this is one of my favourite Shakespeare plays but I am NOT going to stand for substandard eBooks anymore.

I'm not terribly fond of this publisher's edition. The first thing I noticed was that the book is bulky and cumbersome; it is far too thick for a book of its size, rendering one-handed reading highly difficult. The notes and supplemental material cover as thick a section as the text itself--which isn't inherently a bad thing--but it makes keeping the book open wide enough to read without cracking the spine almost impossible.

In addition to the book's width being too short to comfortably hold, it also means numerous lines must carry over into the next line. While this is annoying, it would not be an issue, except the line numberings appear to be done automatically and so include these one- or two-word spillovers as a separate line. This means that when my professor references a certain line number from his edition, I have to hunt around to find the corresponding section. I feel that a work such as this, with distinctive, predetermined lines, should not undergo different numbering conventions.

Finally, I believe the annotations are poorly done. I have read many different publishers' versions of Shakespeare, and I have to say this is one of the few times I've ever wished more information were provided. Often I feel books annotate more than necessary with commonly recognized definitions or explaining easily understood syntax. However, I have found myself repeatedly looking to the annotations for a definition to some archaic word or unclear usage only to be disappointed. Also, --and this is more just a pet peeve-- the annotated words do not have any sort of textual indication, such as a number or bubble. I used to think that was distracting and wished it gone; well, now I have an edition without it and it is even more inconvenient, as I have to check the annotations page to see whether a word even has an explanation. The annotations also often spill over onto the next page, causing the reader to have to flip back and forth.

Overall, I feel the text and annotations of this edition were poorly organized, resulting in difficulty for the reader.

The product came within a couple days of ordering it, which was amazing because I needed it for school. And the condition is good. It was from a library, so it had the plastic still on it, which preserved the book itself.

Richard II is a lyrical treat for the reader, and one marvels at the creation of a character as complex as Richard. King Richard is a hopelessly deluded and inept monarch who believes supremely in the divine ordination of kings. He leans on this belief to the exclusion of all of the other king's responsibilities. He makes one poor decision after another, and never reflects on the choice or its consequences before he makes them. However, we still feel a tug at the heart when this monarch is murdered, and this is attributable only to his glorious poetry. Richard speaks in some of Shakespeare's finest verse, and he has the mind for metaphor. I would recommend reading Shakespeare's History plays in order of the king's reign, and one comes to appreciate the complexities and strength of Shakespeare's storytelling.
There really are no exceptional characters in this play other than Richard. His antagonist Henry Bolingbroke is a cold hearted dud (and master politician) who plays to the common man and ruthlessly kills those who oppose him. All the while, telling us, and himself, that all his actions are justified and are the results of other's choices. Really he is no different from Richard, except he lacks the King's sense of poetry and theater. There are also some good speeches from secondary characters in this text, especially John of Gaunt. Shakespeare's genius is too large to be contained to only the main characters.
Richard II is worthy of a read, if only for the extraordinary experience of feeling revulsion AND pity for the title character.

Shakespeare's age was the high renaissance in England. Most of the plays were performed at the Globe. The date of the writing and the first performance of RICHARD II is 1592. Richard has two roles. They are God's deputy and Adam's heir.

A Machiavellian conflict between the king and his usurper is set forth in the play. Richard exiles Mowbray and Bolingbroke. John of Gaunt is sick and England is sick. England is subject to misrule by Richard, Gaunt asserts.

Following the death of John of Gaunt, traitors, so-called, appear. Many of the nobles in the kingdom go over to the side of Bolingbroke, (Gaunt's son, also known as Henry IV).

It is Act III and Richard lands in Wales. His rule still shows outward splendor. When he learns of Bolingbroke's advance, he loses his air of authority. Richard learns that his uncle, the Duke of York, has joined with Bolingbroke's forces.

Bolingbroke seeks to have his banishment reversed and his lands restored. (At first he did not seek a complete regime shift.) Richard is imprisoned at Pomfret Castle. His queen is sent to France. Sir Pierce Exton slays Richard.

The Penguin production of Richard II is full length and well done. The other version(s) are abridged and not so good. I find it increases understanding and satisfaction of Shakespeare to listen to the tapes while reading.