The most interesting thing about this play to me is the way it functions as Tudor propaganda. Richmond, Richard’s successor, has a logical and necessary role as his adversary in this story. The historical record documents a struggle between two men which results in the death and usurpation of the loser, and Richmond is indispensable to creating that dynamic onstage. The inclusion of Richmond itself is not propaganda, but the treatment of his character appears that way. His final monologue is the clearest way Shakespeare reaches directly out to his royal audience to flatter them.

We will unite the white rose and the red.

Smile heaven upon this fair conjunction,

That long have frowned upon their enmity.

What traitor hears me and says not “Amen”?

This monologue comes after Richmond decrees a pardon for those who fought on the side of Richard, him knowing that maintaining the divisions of the war will not set England back on the right path. He feels the need to make amends between the two sides of the conflict if he is going to avoid yet another war. Here Shakespeare has contrasted Richmond’s governing style with that of Richard. In the most straightforward terms, Richard is a leader who holds grudges, favors conflict, and encourages division. Juxtaposed with him is Richmond who forgives his enemies, avoids fighting, and fosters unity. Richmond’s moves to unite the Yorks and Lancasters are even purported by him to be the will of God. He communicates that heaven has wept over the wars in England, and now rejoices at the rise of the new king and the beginning of a peaceful era.

Oh, now let Richmond and Elizabeth,

The true succeeders of of each royal house,

By God’s fair ordinance conjoin together;

And let their heirs, God, if Thy will be so,

Enrich the time to come with smooth-faced peace,

With smiling plenty, and fair prosperous days.

This quote is where the groveling really gets started. It’s a happy coincidence that the queen whose cooperation means the reunification of England’s ruling family has the same name as the queen Shakespeare is putting on this play for. His character, who lived over a century before the drafting of this play, can mention Shakespeare’s contemporary queen by name as well as the peace and prosperity she brings. When Richmond appeals to God to sponsor the new union and the new heirs of the English throne, the stakes are quite low because the audience already knows the answer. God must have endorsed the future of England if the new dynasty survived to Shakespeare’s time. Richmond is Queen Elizabeth I’s paternal grandfather, and as the inheritor of the kingdom he patched, she is the one who has been favored by Providence. Explicitly outlining evidence for why God wants your queen to be in charge is some serious propaganda. This is certainly a sanitized version of the actual Tudor dynasty. Richmond’s son, King Henry VIII caused plenty of chaos in England with the break from the church. After his rule, uncertainty of succession became a theme of the dynasty, with a short rule by Henry’s son which was followed by another conflict involving Lady Jane Grey which led to the rise of Queen Mary, and then the childless Elizabeth.

As we know from our conversations in class, perception is a central concept in Shakespeare’s writing. In addition to toying with the uses and perception of language, he creates multifaceted characters whose complexity allows for them, and their actions, to be viewed in a myriad of ways. One of the most intriguing characters yet is that of Richard III. Taken at face value, Richard is evil, manipulative, vindictive and sinister. He seems to plot against everyone he knows with little to no remorse for the pain he causes them, finding motivation for his bad deeds in his thirst for power and control. At the same time, however, the reader has the option to view Richard in a sympathetic light if they so choose to– even if it may be a stretch.

To do so, it is important to remember and acknowledge Richard’s status as ‘deformed’. People with deformities, especially overt physical ones, face heavy stigmitization from society and those around them. Richard’s external maladies can either be viewed as representations of his evil soul, or the root of the strife that fuels his bad behavior. Voicing early on in the play that he is, “rudely stamped and want love’s majesty,” (1.1.16) Richard is the only one who truly has to deal with the weight of his alienation and loneliness.

Furthermore, Richard faces heavy rejection and disdain from his family, especially his own mother. Referring to him as “my shame” (2.2.28), his mother works to viciously oppose his entire being. This turbulent mother son relationship signifies the deep void of consideration and love in Richards life, and could work to justify his wrongdoings. Perhaps, the reader could consider, that Richard is simply acting out because even the woman who brought him into the world does not care for him.

Another intriguing aspect of Richard’s characterization is the way in which he views himself. Seeming to never backdown from his enemies, he proves that while he may be physically unfortunate, he is rich in other abilities. A skillful manipulator, communicator, and strategist, Richard doesn’t ever seem to emotionally react to his deformity. In fact, with the way in which he strives for control and ruthlessly pursues the throne, Richard seems to have nothing but confidence in himself and his abilities. He uses this confidence and self-motivating perception of himself to fuel his strive for power. While the rest of the world may view him as a cripple, or an underdog who can be deemed ‘incapable’, Richard finds strength in his self-perception in order to fight for the life he wants– regardless of how the reader views it morally.

Sometimes it’s easy to get wrapped up in the drama going on between our favorite characters in one of these plays, and often we forget the true impact on the world of the play that the drama directly affects. I have often heard the term “window scenes” to describe scenes that feature the common people that live in the universe of the play to help give some context to the actions that take place in the remainder of the play. Richard III features two such scenes, and I believe they provide some interesting perspective to the events of the play.

In Act II Scene III, we meet three citizens who are discussing the latest current events. They are unaware of the specifics of the drama in the kings household; all they understand is now they are without a king. One of them is optimistic about the future of the country, as surely the council that rules in the boy-king’s place will do a good job. The other citizens disagree, as use France as an example of a place thrown into chaos when they too had a boy king. In response to the optimism of his comrade, one of the citizen’s says:

“When clouds appear, wise men put on their cloaks;
When great leaves fall, the winter is at hand;
When the sun sets, who doth not look for night?
Untimely storms make men expect a dearth.
All may be well; but, if God sort it so,
‘Tis more than we deserve, or I expect.” 2.3.31-37

The people are all aware that only trouble can come from the loss of their king, and they are right in fearing for who will come to reign. We are all too aware as an audience at this point that Richard has his eyes set on the crown, and the chaos and pain that Richard causes to achieve the crown is exactly what these men are speaking of. At the same time, the citizens recognize that regardless of who is king, they must carry on and live their lives.

The second scene that shows some flashes of the common people is in Act 3 Scene 6, in which the scrivener reveals to the common people the news of the indictment and death of Lord Hastings, of whom Richard as recently ordered the imprisonment and murder of. The scrivener acknowledges that he was given the papers the day prior, at a point in time before Hastings had even been jailed, better yet killed. He comments on the common people’s lack of strength to stand up to the obvious dirty politics being dealt here, and boldly proclaims that the world will continue to be bad for as long as we only think our feelings and don’t act on them. This is a pretty powerful sentiment to be heard from a character that doesn’t appear for the rest of the play, in a scene that only features himself and his words. I believe this reflects the reality of what the common people would have gone through during a crisis like this, as without knowing who would come out on top in the end there was no way to pick a side politically, and no one could really trust anyone. Both this scene and the one mentioned previously are great insights into the conversations being had outside the palace gates, as while often our favorite characters are members of the high court, it is important to always remember the little people

While many of Shakespeare’s more secondary villains will often use brute force, mindless raised voices, and nerve to achieve their goals (i.e. Demetrius from A Midsummer Night’s Dream and Rodrigo from Othello), it seems that his most memorable and sinister villains are masters of physiological manipulation. Using their false words of comfort, and back door wheeling and dealing to con those who are less cunning and weaker than they are to attain their ultimate end goal. Richard, Duke of Gloucester is no exception to this, and he might just be the ultimate example in this case.

At the beginning of the play, he shows himself to be bitter and twisted over his self-proclaimed deformity, and finds himself to be unfit for a world that is engulfed in peace.

“But I, that am not shaped for sportive tricks, Nor made to court an amorous looking glass; I, that am rudely stamped and want love’s majesty To strut before a wanton ambling nymph; I, that am curtailed of this fair proportion, Cheated of feature by dissembling nature, Deformed, unfinished, sent before my time Into this breathing world, scarce half made up, And that so lamely and unfashionable That dogs bark at me as I halt by them— Why, I, in this weak piping time of peace, Have no delight to pass away the time, Unless to see my shadow in the sun And descant on mine own deformity.” (1.1.lines 14-27)

However, he manages to use his mastery of language and manipulation to his advantage over others. While learning of Clarence’s imprisonment in Act I, he manages to display thoughtfulness and concern for his current situation,

“Well, your imprisonment shall not be long. I will deliver you or else lie for you. Meantime, have patience.” (1.1. lines 114-116)

Richard seems so convincing in his consolation of his brother that we as the audience are almost led to believe him ourselves, we already forget that he has promised to himself and us, the audience that his brother Clarence would be but another fatality in his ultimate scheme. This is just another example of his unwavering and uncompromising manipulation. It is almost as if he as a character is playing multiple other characters within the play, purely towards the deception of others. His manipulative ways take an even darker and more disturbing turn in Act I, Scene II, when he attempts to convince Lady Anne to marry him,

“I would they were, that I might die at once, For now they kill me with a living death. Those eyes of thine from mine have drawn salt tears, Shamed their aspect with store of childish drops. These eyes, which never shed remorseful tear— No, when my father York and Edward wept To hear the piteous moan that Rutland made When black-faced Clifford shook his sword at him; Nor when thy warlike father, like a child, Told the sad story of my father’s death And twenty times made pause to sob and weep, That all the standers-by had wet their cheeks Like trees bedashed with rain—in that sad time, My manly eyes did scorn an humble tear; And what these sorrows could not thence exhale Thy beauty hath, and made them blind with weeping. I never sued to friend, nor enemy; My tongue could never learn sweet smoothing word. But now thy beauty is proposed my fee, My proud heart sues, and prompts my tongue to speak. Teach not thy lip such scorn, for it were made For kissing, lady, not for such contempt. If thy revengeful heart cannot forgive, Lo, here I lend thee this sharp-pointed sword, Which if thou please to hide in this true breast And let the soul forth that adoreth thee, I lay it naked to the deadly stroke And humbly beg the death upon my knee. Nay, do not pause; for I did kill King Henry— But ’twas thy beauty that provokèd me. Nay, now dispatch; ’twas I that stabbed young Edward— But ’twas thy heavenly face that set me on. Take up the sword again, or take up me.” (1.1.lines 149-169)

The entirety of this scene perfectly encapsulate Richard’s masterful use of manipulation. It is apparent from the outset of the scene that Lady Anne holds incredible disdain and hatred for Richard, threatening to at one point kill him with a sword pointed to his chest, but through sheer cunning and his beautiful use of language and acting, she agrees to marry him. He is able to play upon people’s most sensitive and deepest held emotions, and does so all whilst every word that he speaks is nothing but an absolute lie. Again, he is a character in a play playing another character for whichever suitor is unlucky enough to hear his poisonous and deceitful words.

In my opinion, the most interesting part about Richard’s character is his ability to alienate literally everybody in his life and still achieve his goals. Granted, Richard does a fair amount of pretending and lying to get where he wants to be, but in the end his allegiance is always known, and that is to nobody but himself. He is not loyal to his family, to his country, or to his most trusted lackeys. I find it interesting because it seems so obvious how dastardly he is being that you would think a rebellion against him would have begun a long time ago, like when he initially had his brother Clarence killed. Instead, Richard gets to the point of being crowned king without much resistance. This is because of his lack of allegiances, it gives him the freedom to eliminate anybody standing in his way, even the people who are helping him.

This stands in contrast to a character we have spent a lot of time comparing to Richard, and that is Iago. Iago takes on the opposite position, and accomplishes his goals by feigning allegiance to practically everybody. Sure, he betrays and kills a couple people along the way, but he never directly attacks his one true enemy, Othello. Othello instead is taken down by letting Iago get close to him and befriend him. Othello drives himself to ‘madness’ and eventually death because of Iago’s influence, but Iago never makes even an indirect attempt at his life. At no point during Richard III does Richard ever try to befriend an enemy, because he doesn’t need to. He uses a strategy of fear rather than manipulation.

The strategy of fear is key to Richard’s character because physically, there is no reason to fear Richard. His use of fear lies in power, and his power lies in fear. The only reason he can accomplish what he does is because his family is in power, and he uses that to his advantage in a major way. Everybody is afraid of him because of the influence he holds, and because only he is terrible enough to orchestrate a plethora of murders without having a murder plotted against him. Obviously, a lot of this begins to change towards the end of the play, but it is critical to recognize how easy it is for him to get to the point of being king in the first place. Richard has very little respect for primogeniture and the meaning that the royal family holds to the throne, however, he uses both of those influences on society to his advantage.

This makes Richard’s motivations the most interesting part of all of his sociopathic behavior. He doesn’t really care about his family name or royalty, so why does he bother to become king at all? I honestly think it comes down to control, and Richard essentially treating the world as his sandbox. His addiction to chaos directly manifests itself as an addiction to conflict and war. In my mind, the only reason Richard does what he does is because to him, peace is boring. When there is peace, he has no reason to exist, because he has no love or happiness in any other aspect in his life besides proving that despite the way he was brought into the world, he can still come out on top. Even once he gets to the top, he is still unsatisfied because he does not to want be stagnantly at peace. He welcomes rebellion with happiness because he doesn’t care about anything besides fighting to win. Even winning holds less value to him than the actual fighting for it. I think this makes Richard’s character complex in a very simple way, because nothing else matters besides the act of fighting and opposing whatever force he can get himself on the opposite side of.

Shakespeare lived and wrote during the time in which Britain was making its first earnest attempts at building an overseas empire. Voyages and colonization are themes he writes about multiple times, in The Tempest, Pericles, and others. Othello appears to anticipate racist justifications for colonialism which would develop more clearly later in in the British Empire. Shakespeare may have seen the beginnings of these theories and attitudes which would eventually form racism as we understand it today, with a hierarchy of ethnicity and a responsibility of Europeans to civilize and Christianize. Othello, in the most straightforward way, is a play about race. The attitudes that some characters hold toward Othello are familiar racist attitudes toward us. The clearest and most prevalent example is the comparison of Othello to an animal. It appears in the very first scene when Iago says the following to Brabanzio:

Sir, you’re robbed. For shame put on your gown.

Your heart is burst; you have lost half your soul:

Even now, now, very now, an old black ram

Is tupping your white ewe. Arise! Arise!

Awake the snorting citizens with the bell,

Or else the devil will make a grandsire of you.

Arise, I say!

In one of the first descriptions of Othello, he is likened to an animal. Modern audiences should be familiar with comparisons between black folks and animals with the insinuation that their intelligence is lower, and their instinctual impulses are stronger than those of white folks. Later in this scene, Iago and Roderigo speak of Othello’s powerful sexual appetite and his savageness. This Iago quote even includes a more contemporary American anxiety; that delicate and impressionable white women will be lured in by charismatic black men who will corrupt them. The illegitimacy of a union between people of a different race is not a foreign concept to us. When Iago calls Othello a devil, we are reminded that he is an unchristian, even anti-Christian force, being a Moor. That is part of the threat he poses, even though Othello is a collaborator on the side of Iago in a conflict with the major Islamic empire of the time.

We discussed in class the idea of Iago as a villain without any reason for being evil. The more I consider his character, the more I am convinced that he is motivated by unambiguous racism. Iago seems prepared to undermine Othello’s relationship with Desdemona from the introduction of his character. We never observe Iago in a monologue on his motivations or his reasons for dismantling Othello’s life. We can only assume that, by the way he speaks about Othello and the parts of his life he targets, he hates seeing a dark skinned person in a position of power, wed to a white woman. He sees an illegitimacy there which he feels he must point out to the other characters. When the other characters do not heed his warnings and give Othello their favor, Iago appears to fall into line behind him, to target him more covertly. Iago is not a villain without a motivation, racism is a perfectly legitimate motivation for a character so evil.

We spent a good deal of time in class discussing what “The Moor of Venice” meant, and we came to many interesting conclusions. I believe that we get some closure to this issue at the end of the play within Othello’s last breaths. HIs final speech displays not only his final thoughts before death, but also speak to his perspective on his actions and what he has done. This is where he famously says about himself “[as] one that loved not wisely, but too well” (V.II.363). He recalls his actions as ones done from someone who is “not easily jealous” (V.II.364), but by someone who was tricked. By the end of his speech, he gives me the feeling that his pride has gotten in the way of his ability to see reality, so in the end he is able to equate his killing of his wife to throwing a pearl away, not knowing it’s worth.

The most interesting part of his speech is the very end, in which he is drawing upon allegories related to his situation. The last one he thinks of involves comparing himself to a Turk he beat in the street for beating a Venetian. He stabs himself immediately after, and the biggest question I had was why was this his last speech, his last say in the story? After much thought, I decided that a pretty plausible reason for it ties in with the secondary title of the play, The Moor of Venice. We talked about what this title really means in reference to Othello, and I believe the ending speaks to that. Othello is, at the end of the play, comparing himself to a Turk, or a Moor. He dies with this comparison clinging to his heart, and so it makes sense for the play to have this title, as it is ultimately how Othello views himself at the end of his life.

One of the most important messages in Act 4, and arguably the whole play, is that which Emilia makes when speaking to Desdemona about the concept of cheating on one’s husband. Desdemona is definite about never cheating on her man, not even in exchange “for the whole world” (4.3.64). In fact, she goes into the conversation not claiming, “I do not think there is any such woman” (4.3.60) who could do such a thing.

Emilia disproves Desdemona’s belief by saying, ” I think I should, and undo ’t when I had/ done,” (4.3.56-7) claiming that she would commit the act if she could undo it immediately afterwards. She calls adultery a “small vice,” (4.3.53) and explains that it would be worth doing in exchange for much less than the entire world.

When confronted by Desdemona about her unconventional approach to the issue, she explains her beliefs surrounding the relativity of right and wrong:

“Why the wrong is but a wrong i’ th’ world, and

having the world for your labor, ’tis a wrong in your

own world, and you might quickly make it right.”

Emilia’s approach to this moral dilemma makes a strong point focused around the play’s theme of manipulation. With this quote, Emilia is expressing that the wrongness of one’s actions is solely determined by the way in which one decides to view them. In the society they currently live in, adultery is deemed as wrong. Since this is something they were socialized to agree with, they also view it as the wrong thing to do. Emilia is arguing that when we place wrongful actions in the context of yielding positive results, or when we simply decide view it separate from it’s negative connotations, it can become a positive action.

By posing the question, “who would not make her/ husband a cuckold to make him a monarch?” (4.3.60-1) Emilia is exemplifying the way a wrongful action like adultery can become positive when placed in a different or positive instance.

This ability to perceive and support one’s actions as good or bad depending on a chosen perspective gives explaination as to how characters have come to behave they way they do in previous acts. For example, applying this thought process to Iago’s actions and intentions allows the reader to justify his ruthlessness. Perhaps, the reason why he is able to instigate so much heartache and negativity is because he has convinced himself that it is not the wrong thing to so. Furthermore, this method of thinking can be seen in Iago’s manipulation of Othello and Roderigo. Iago is able to successfully play both of these characters because he fools them into thinking the bad degree hey agree to do for him are justified by the positive results they yield.

While reading the end of the play, I think one of things that stood out to me most was how little Iago speaks while everything is going on. He has a few lines in which he manipulates, lies, and eventually reveals the truth, but there are no moments towards the end where he has a long speech. I think this is indicative of his character in a big way, because he knows that speaking has more of a likelihood of revealing some truth than it does covering it up. Instead, he waits it out and essentially watches all of his plans unfold before him.

In the scene where Roderigo and Cassio face off, he does a great job of goading the two of them into battle, especially as he wounds Cassio without being seen, as well as finishing the job on Roderigo so he can’t leak the truth. He also does a great job acting as if he had no idea it was Roderigo, and Shakespeare does an even better job conveying this through the language:

Lend me a light. Know we this face or no?
Alas my friend and my dear countryman
Roderigo! no:–yes, sure: O heaven! Roderigo.

This keeps Iago’s plan in action, just as effective as if Cassio had actually been killed, because he still has Othello right where he wants him. It’s amazing how much of Iago’s plan Othello is willing to believe, especially when his wife is in front of him facing death and explicitly telling him that none of it is true. Iago has given Othello way to much evidence and plenty of cause, as he believes Cassio to be dead already. I think that obviously so much of this has to do with perfect timing, because if Othello stuck around long enough to see that he had lived, or even waited long enough to kill Desdemona, he would have learned the truth.

All of this working out, however, even with Othello killing himself, really feels almost anticlimactic, because Iago doesn’t really act the way you think he would after having everything he wanted happen. Sure, he is essentially caught in his own deception, but when it is all over, you would think he would still “wear his heart on his sleeve” as he had intended at the beginning of the play. Instead, he basically just stands there bleeding without explaining himself at all:

Demand me nothing: what you know, you know:
From this time forth I never will speak word.

At least he could have acted like an actual villain and reminisced about all of the foul deeds he committed. But instead, he continues to act for himself. It really begs the question of what Iago’s true motivations are, because he never really gains anything, and probably wouldn’t have even if nobody found out it was him who devised the plan. In fact, it seems he would’ve gained more had Roderigo lived and he could have coerced him into giving him all of his riches. The play ends with him basically being chastised before his execution. None of it is really all that satisfying, and while it is tragic, Iago’s ineptitude at being a good villain makes all of the tragedy feel worthless.

Despite the fact that the play is called Othello, a truly valid argument could be made that the central character of the show is actually Iago. While it is true that the entirety of the play details Othello’s torturous and tragic downfall, every scheme and maneuver to that contributes to it is executed by Iago. It should also be noted that he has more lines throughout the play than Othello does. Despite his various schemes, lies, and poisonous interactions with other characters, the most interesting aspect of Iago’s character is his extended use of soliloquies. While it is known to the audience that Iago is a repulsive and sinister character, Shakespeare somehow manages to convey Iago as multifaceted. We are usually disgusted by his actions, and especially his words, yet we are made to almost feel occasionally sympathetic towards his motivations. For example, in Act II, Scene I, Iago states,