The English Renaissance in Context: Richard III

University of Pennsylvania Libraries - 1 - Furness Shakespeare Collection

Introduction

In this set of exercises, we present two tracks for the study of the relationship between theater and history in Richard Ill: one that examines the play's handling of the history (as it was known in Shakespeare's time) and one that looks at the play's stage history.

Many of us have our memories of English history indelibly printed with the images of Shakespeare's kings. But what Shakespeare created for the Tudor stage was very different even from history as it was written in his own time. As Phyllis Rackin writes, reflecting on Richard III: "From the standpoint of Tudor history, the most important event in Richard Ill is the conclusion, and the most important character is Richmond." The victory of Queen Elizabeth's grandfather at Bosworth Field and his marriage to Elizabeth of York ended the Wars of the Roses and established the

Tudor dynasty. On Shakespeare's stage, however, the future Henry VII was a pallid figure with a minimal part.

Richmond/Henry VII was not even mentioned on the title page of the first published edition of 1594, which identified the play as The Tragedy of Richard the third, Containing, His treacherous Plots against his brother Clarence: the pittiefull murther of his innocent nephewes: his tyrannicall usurpation: with the whole course of his detested life, and most deserved death.

The monstrous villain of Tudor history became the star of Shakespeare's play. Almost always onstage, he dominates the dramatic action in a role that has attracted leading actors from Shakespeare's time to our own. The most memorable scene in the play, moreover, is Richard's courtship of Anne Neville, which had no relevance, either in history or in Shakespeare's play, to his plot to win the throne. Richmond's marriage to Elizabeth of York was the foundation of the Tudor dynasty, but we see nothing of their courtship or wedding, and the bride-to-be never even appears on Shakespeare's stage. (Phyllis Rackin, "Richard Ill: A Modern Perspective" in Barbara Mowatt and Paul Werstine, eds., The Tragedy of Richard Ill (New York: The Folger Shakespeare Library, 1996)).

The English Renaissance in Context: Richard III

University of Pennsylvania Libraries - 2 - Furness Shakespeare Collection

As the text and staging of the play were modified later to suit changing theatrical taste, actors and directors further aggrandized Richard's character, playing up both his villainy and his humanity.

History and Sources

It is well known that Shakespeare's chief sources in writing Richard III were the second edition of Holinished's Chronicles (1587) and Edward Hall's Chronicle (1550). Hall, in turn, relied on Sir Thomas More's Life of Richard III and Polydore Vergil's Historia Anglica (1534).

Henry Vll (Richard III's successor) hired Polydore

Vergil to write a history of England that would justify the Tudor --that is, Henry VII's-- accession to the throne. More was also Henry VIII's Lord Chancellor. More and Vergil both rewrote the facts to demonize Richard: blackening Richard's name would justify Richmond/Henry VII's rule.

More's history was unfinished: the Latin version broke off as Richard was crowned, and the English version broke off shortly thereafter with Bullingbroke's rebellion. Since More had stopped, Hall turned to Polydore for the remainder of Richard's reign. Holinshed, in turn, copied Hall.

A close examination of Shakespeare's play shows the effect of this shift in sources from More to Polydore Vergil: while More's Richard dominated the story, Polydore's Richard is less in control. Similarly, in Shakespeare's play, Richard becomes much less dominant after his accession. For example, in the first half of the play, he is clearly in charge, and appears to know everything that will happen, even though the other characters don't. At the end of Act 4, Scene 3, after his interview with Elizabeth, however, he seems about to begin one of the gloating soliloquies he gave at the beginning:

Richard: Beare her my true love's kiss, and so farewell. Relenting Foole, and shallow, changing Woman.

But Richard can't follow through: he's interrupted by a series of messengers giving him unexpected bad news, and he becomes confused. Indeed, we find out in Act 4, scene 5

The English Renaissance in Context: Richard III

University of Pennsylvania Libraries - 3 - Furness Shakespeare Collection

that Elizabeth has tricked him, since it is made clear that she will give her daughter to Richmond.

Shakespeare invented both courtship scenes (Act 1, scene 2 and Act 4, scene 3 ): neither one is to be found in his sources. The scene with Anne is, in fact, historically impossible. The real Richard married Anne in 1472, a year after the death of her first husband. The scene is also unnecessary to the story. At the end of Act 1, scene1, Richard refuses to give a reason for his scheme to marry Anne: indeed, it has nothing to do with his plot to gain the crown, and he explicitly denies that it has anything to do with love.

The readiest way to make the Wench amends, Is to become her Husband and her Father: The which will I, not all so much for love, As foc another secret close intent, By marrying her, which I must reach unto.

(It's interesting that in his rewriting of the play Colley Cibber does make Richard's overtures motivated by love.)

? Why do you think Shakespeare inserted this scene?

? Does Richard put on this show for Anne? For himself? For the audience?

? How does it compare with the later scene where he tries to seduce Queen Elizabeth to give him her daughter?

? How are these two scenes similar and how are they different?

? In which scene does Richard have a soliloquy? In which scene is he in control of the stage events?

The scene with Elizabeth is also unhistorical, although Hall and Holinshed make reference to Elizabeth's interaction with Richard.

? How did Shakespeare change his source for this scene (Act IV, scene 3)?

? How does his Elizabeth differ from Hall's?

? How does she differ from Shakespeare's Anne?

The English Renaissance in Context: Richard III

University of Pennsylvania Libraries - 4 - Furness Shakespeare Collection

Stage History

Richard III has always been a vehicle for star actors, including Richard Burbage, Edwin Booth, Laurence Olivier, and Ian McKellen. As Phyllis Rackin has observed, the play sets up Richard as a star who tries to seduce the audience as much as he seduces Anne at the play's beginning.

Footnote: For the play's stage history, see Hugh M. Richmond, Shakespeare ill Perfornzance: King Richard Ill (Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press, 1989).

Indeed, in March 1602, one of Shakespeare's contemporaries, John Manningham, recorded in his diary an anecdote of Burbage's seduction of a "citizen" in the audience :

Vpon a tyme when Burbidge played Rich. 3. there was a Citizen greue soe farr in liking with him, that before shee went from the play shee appointed him to come that night unto hir by the name of Ri: the 3. Shakespeare overhearing their conclusion went before, was intertained, and at his game ere Burbidge came. Then message being brought that Rich. the 3d was at the dore, Shakespeare caused returne to be made that William the Conquerour was before Rich. the 3. Shakespeare's name William." (Mr. Curle)

The English Renaissance in Context: Richard III

University of Pennsylvania Libraries - 5 - Furness Shakespeare Collection

Even in his villainy, Richard's theatricality can transfix an audience.

footnote: Diary of John Manningham, of the Middle Temple, and of Bradbourne, Kent, Barrister-at-Law, 1602-1603. Harl. MS. 5353, fos. 12 bk. Edited by John Bruce, for the Camden Society, 1868, pp. 18 and 39. Quoted in The Shakspere Isicl Allusion-Book: A Collection of Allusions to Shaksperefrom 1591 to 1700. Vol 1 Gen. Ed. 1. Goliancz. (London: Humphrey Milford, Oxford University Press,1932), p. 98.

Actor, dramatist, theater manager, playwright, and eventually Poet Laureate of England, Colley Cibber (1671-1757) was one of the most influential voices in the theater of his day. Although his fame in his own time rested more on original works like Love's Last Shift; or, The Fool in Fashion (1696), Cibber continued to dominate the London stage well after his death through the long after-life of his radical revision of Shakespeare's Richard III (1700).

When he rewrote the play in 1700, Colley Cibber did all he could to magnify Richard's theatrical presence even further. Cibber's adaptation of Richard did not get off to the most auspicious start. Indeed, the entire first act of the play was excised by the censor because it was thought that Cibber's depiction of the killing of Henry VI (taken from Shakespeare's Henry VI, Part 3) might arouse sympathy for the dethroned Stuarts.

The English Renaissance in Context: Richard III

University of Pennsylvania Libraries - 6 - Furness Shakespeare Collection

Although subjected to government censorship and received poorly at first, Cibber's adaptation would remain the referred acting text for productions from David Garrick's triumphant turn as Richard in 1741 (as immortalized by William Hogarth, above) until Shakespeare's original was brought back into vogue by Henry Irving in 1871.

And even today, according to Hugh Richmond, Cibber's "simplified approach to plot, character, and interpretation remains the model for many modern productions". In fact, Laurence Olivier's 1955 film version of Richard III mentions Cibber and Garrick.

Footnote: Hugh M. Richmond, Shakespeare in Performance: Killg Richard III (Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press, 1989), p. 48.

Several lines that Cibber added, including "Off with his head, So much for Buckingham," and "Richard's himself again" have had such staying power that Richard continues to recite them in many otherwise 'Shakespearean" twentieth-century productions.

The English Renaissance in Context: Richard III

University of Pennsylvania Libraries - 7 - Furness Shakespeare Collection

By reducing the cast of characters (Queen Margaret, King Edward IV and Clarence are notable cuts), and focusing the action of the play even more fully on Richard than does the original (giving him a full forty percent of the lines), Cibber streamlined Shakespeare's play.

Moreover, by adding seven new soliloquies for Richard and creating a character both more sympathetically human and more consistent in his bold villainy than Shakespeare's, Cibber created a star vehicle that could make an actor's career.

In Cibber's version, Richard is in love with Anne, and then Elizabeth, whereas in Shakespeare's play, he's incapable of love of any kind. With his performance of Cibber's Richard in 1741, David Garrick became an overnight sensation.

To study how Cibber altered the play, you could compare Cibber and Shakespeare's versions of the Ghost scenes at the end of Richard III.

? What changes did Cibber make?

? What might be their impact on an audience?

Cibber also cut out Margaret, Richard's chief antagonist and chief rival for audience attention. Margaret has also been absent in many subsequent productions, including Olivier's and McKellen's. Shakespeare himself invented her role in this play: Margaret died in France in 1482, and Edward III died 1483 (i.e., she wasn't present at Richard's court). It is indeed appropriate that her presence in this play is almost ghostly.

In her first entrance (Act 1, scene 3 ) she is unseen by other characters and addresses the audience directly. She recalls the past and foretells the future (other characters recognize her prophetic power, as they are about to die). Margaret thus speaks for history, while Richard lives in the theatrical present.

In the play she is Richard's only real rival for theatrical attention.

? How do Richard and Margaret fight for control of (Act 1, scene 3)?

? How do they fight elsewhere in the play for the audience's attention?

When Ian McKellen produced his version of Richard III in 1995, he also eliminated Margaret, but gave some of her lines to the Duchess of Gloucester (and thus enlarged her role). McKellen also wrote in a role for Princess Elizabeth, who doesn't appear on Shakespeare's stage. He adds a sex scene for her and Richmond the night before

The English Renaissance in Context: Richard III

University of Pennsylvania Libraries - 8 - Furness Shakespeare Collection

Bosworth, giving new meaning to Richmond's statement regarding the sweet dreams he had.

Footnote: See Lynda Boose and Richard Burt, Shakespeare the Movie, especially "Top of the World, Ma: Richard III and cinematic convention." Shakespeare, the Movie: Popularizing the plays on film, TV, and video. Eds. Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt (London and New York: Routledge, 1997), 67-79.

? What difference does it make in the play if you remove Margaret and instead enlarge the role of the Duchess of Gloucester, who is Richard's mother?

? How does it change the image of Richmond if you add the sex scene with Elizabeth?