Manipulation And Determinism In Richard III And Looking For Richard
An original story can never be the only story as composers are constantly borrowing, appropriating and re-imagining texts. The two texts, William Shakespeare’s 1593 King Richard III and Al Pacino’s 1996 Looking for Richard have a strong intertextual connection which creates an ongoing cultural connection for a wide audience. While there may be some similarities in the content, the changes in form, perspective, values and assumptions will ensure differences. It is through my study of these texts that I have discovered manipulation and determinism are a commonality between both texts. While both resonate through the downfall of Richard III, the two texts have significant dissonances resulting from the attitudes and values of their respective contexts and forms.
Studying Shakespeare’s Richard III demonstrates how the appreciation of ambition has changed over time while the possession of integrity has remained valued. In Richard III, Shakespeare’s biblical allusion encapsulates the Elizabethan belief that one’s life is predetermined by God. This is established through Richard’s opening soliloquy, where he uses a bitter tone to lament about how he was “Cheated of feature by dissembling nature/deformed, unfinish’d, sent before my time”, and “determined to prove a villain”. Shakespeare characterises him as a machiavellian villain and uses diction consisting of adjectives “deformed” and “unfinish’d”, denoting an image of him where his physical deformities are an exterior sign of his spiritual evil. Within the Elizabethan era, people held the thought that a person should be satisfied to stay on the level which they are on since they were placed there by God. Any attempt to challenge the status quo would be met with divine retribution. In the play, Richard’s humanist quest to become king is portrayed as a disruption to this chain of being as he strives to usurp the throne. This is seen as a sacrilegious act, invoking God to punish Richard for his profane actions. Shakespeare explores the idea of divine retribution as a force of reckoning against such transgressions within the play. This is evocatively highlighted by the final Battle at Bosworth. In a grand and eloquent speech to his army, Richmond uses high rhetoric to denounce the evil of Richard and his supporters “traitors”, “bloody Day”, “England weep in streams of blood”, and “civil wounds”. In comparison, “the true successors of each royal house” and “peace lives again” introduce Richmond’s reign. The final word of the play is “Amen” reinforcing the position of an all-powerful God on the side of Richmond and against Richard. This religious connotation generates an ongoing conversation, however as time transcends, it has slowly lost its value amongst society’s changing morals.
However, reflective of the more secular and egalitarian society of the late twentieth century, Pacino believed that people have control over their own destinies and that they succeed and fail on the basis of their actions. Due to social conformity, Pacino limits his focus on predeterminism and focuses more on presenting Richard as a schemer, forcing his will on everyone else. Pacino emphasises the final act as Richard is exposed to more pressure than before to maintain his status, continuing to shape his destiny until the final blow descends. The cinematic close-ups alternating between Richmond and Richard add to the intensity of the scene and the lack of a soundtrack followed by some sharp musical chords increases the tension. Moreover, the intercut of Kimball describing Shakespeare’s opening soliloquy as “a sick king and everybody maneuvering around” highlights how humans, especially Richard are so driven by their ambitions that they rely on manipulation in the pursuit of power. Unlike the Elizabethan era, ambition is now a trait that contemporary audiences value. This is intrinsic to aspirations such as the American Dream. Richard’s villainous nature is emphasised in the docudrama and because of societal tropes of good over evil, contemporary viewers see that Richard who caused chaos has been brought to justice. In act four during the ghost scene, Shakespeare’s rapid montage to superimpose Richard’s villainous deeds is coupled with repetitive voiceovers of “despair and die”. Pacino thus rejects the play’s religious parallelism between the curse, “despair and die” and blessing, “live and flourish”, favouring determinism in which Richard’s final destiny is self-inflicted rather than predestined. This links to the idea that there would always be an ongoing cultural conversation, especially if different values are conformed within the society at different points in time. This is in direct correlation to the different contexts that Pacino and Shakespeare took place in when writing their texts.
Richard III further explores the power of language by highlighting its effectiveness as an agent of influence over individuals. A notable moment that showcases the power of language and Richard’s desperate and hypocritical manipulation is in act one scene two. During Richard’s exchange with Lady Anne, Richard demonstrates a skillful mastery over language as he uses his manipulative rhetoric to woo her and “take her in her heart’s extremest hate.” Shakespeare utilises stichomythia and a skillful play on diction, such as when Richard responds to “moral poison for thy sake” with “never came poison from so sweet a place” in order to emphasise Richard’s cunning duplicity and dexterity in language. Richard’s ability and tendency in identifying and exploiting other characters’ weaknesses allows him to achieve great short term success. Richard decides to marry Lady Anne so that he can get the power of the throne. He states this at the end of the first scene, “For then I’ll marry Warwick’s youngest daughter”. He uses Lady Anne as a stepping stone to get to the throne by filling her with lies of love. He has no intention of marrying her for his love at all and he explains this to the reader: “The which will I, not all so much for love, As for another secret close intent, By marrying her which I must reach unto.” It can be seen that Shakespeare utilises religious values and draws on concepts from medieval morality plays to depict Richard as “subtle, treacherous and false”. The desire for power serves as a major theme in Richard III, depicted strongly in both the play and film with Richard being the most powerful person in the play from the very beginning. However, this power is not authentic as it spirals from Richard’s duplicity and deception. The intensity of the scene reinforces Richard’s moral treachery and enables the retelling of the story for a different audience, hence creating an ongoing cultural conversation that transcends centuries.
Pacino responds to Shakespeare by reshaping this downfall to focus on an individual’s moral dilemmas through a psychoanalytic lens. Confronted by Richard’s intense desperation to achieve his ambitious goals, Shakespeare's 17th century audience understands Richard’s charismatic responses to Lady Anne’s curses in act one scene two. Pacino recreates this by employing chiaroscuro lighting, which is symbolic of his duplicity to highlight Richard’s hidden agenda and aspirations. Further, Pacino represents Richard’s rising egotism by having him stare at the camera, almost breaking the fourth wall. Despite the different contextual perspectives on ambition, this comparative study highlights an individual’s ability to sacrifice their honesty, and subsequently, morality to achieve their goals. Pacino conveys the power of manipulative language, skilfully employed irony and flattery in the deception of others and the audience. This is particularly evident in the scene of wooing Lady Anne. Pacino emphasizes the moral weakness of Lady Anne and strongly victimizes her character by choosing a young actress, Winona Ryder. This is further conveyed through stichomythia dialogue and the cinematic technique of dissolving close-ups which highlight the trance-like state Lady Anne falls into as she is seduced by Richard. The audience is reminded of Richard’s villainy through his soliloquy where he states, “Was ever woman in this humour wooed? Was ever woman in this humour won?” This is supported by Pacino’s implementation of low key lighting to develop a dark mood, symbolising evil. The use of a docudrama makes Shakespeare’s play more accessible to a modern audience, with numerous different film sections such as vox pops, academics, and interviews. This allows the film to display itself to a larger audience and hence, enhances an individual’s understanding of the themes, values, and attitudes pronounced. This allows viewers like us to appreciate the texts and share a direct intertextual relationship with both the classic and contemporary text to allow for an ongoing cultural conversation.
The exploration of duplicity and predeterminism, resulting from Richard’s relentless pursuit of power, is reshaped across successive contexts due to ever-changing shifts in society’s moral framework. As such, a comparative study of Richard III and Looking for Richard explores a consistent human flaw, the individual’s ability to abandon morality when driven by intense ambition. Thus, these texts beseech audiences to maintain honesty and integrity. It is through my study of these two texts that I’ve discovered that Pacino reimagines Richard III with a more secular and psychoanalytical understanding in response to Shakespeare examining the religious influences and ramifications of Richard’s desire for power. The exchange of values, alongside the common and disparate thematic concerns, has allowed Pacino to recreate King Richard III through a different mode even when the contexts of composers are many centuries apart, allowing for an ongoing cultural conversation that lasts many centuries and yet only developing more and more values and ideas.
