"Don't Believe Everything You Read Online" -Abraham Lincoln

Post date: Feb 26, 2017 9:20:08 PM

Upon finding myself at a loss of what to write about today, I took to Google in order to find memes relevant to Richard III. After ciphering through numerous one's retelling of him being a "hide and seek champion" or commenting on his body being found in the parking lot, I stumbled around this gem.

Looking at Richard III from both a historical and literary perspective, I cannot help but make this an overarching post into all things Hust. I have slowly become more and more suspicious of the reason why authors chose to write what they do and when they do. Reading Shakespeare's Richard III, I was struck with some familiar lines as well as some commentary on how Shakespeare viewed Richard. I would say he hated him. He is continuously describes himself as a villain, actually he makes the actor playing Richard describe himself as a villain and highly mischievous person. After doing some reading for Shinner's class, I think I have some ideas.

It seems as if the prominent account that Shakespeare is drawing on is from is Sir Thomas More's or at least an account influenced by him. More mainly grew up in the Tudor dynasty and was only 8 when Richard was killed. The Tudor's, namely Henry VII, bumped Richard III off the throne. So in writing this, Shakespeare is propagating the myth that Richard's reign was so terrible in order to legitimize the current reign of the Tudor's and paint them as the "saviors."

I mean, but what does this all mean for me reading Shakespeare now? There's still validity and history entangled in his work but just comes off biased...ok extremely biased. But honestly, I think this makes it more interesting for me to read the next few acts of Richard III. How do you paint an ok person as a monster? How does the myth he propegated still last even to today? I love having this conspiracy aspect of the play and am more excited to read what's coming next.