Richard III Essay
To what extent are acts of invention and reinvention the primary point of connection between
King Richard III and Looking for Richard?
At the root of all acts of reinvention is interpretation. Interpretation shapes how one views a
text, and influences what elements of it they will reimagine. This involves issues expressed
within a text, and their role within the reinvention defines their relevance to the new context.
This encourages textual conversations between the invention, reinvention and audience about
these themes and values of interest. Ultimately, texts are linked through these acts of invention
and reinvention, which are characterised by interpretation.
Shakespeare’s Richard III (RIII), 1593, and Al Pacino’s Looking for Richard (LFR), 1996, are
primarily connected through acts of invention and reinvention. Critical to both texts is
interpretation, influencing how the formation of these reinventions. Through Pacino’s
interpretation of RIII, textual conversations are held surrounding both common and disparate
issues raised within the texts. Pacino’s LFR upholds the values of its contemporary context and
Shakespeare appears to also, but upon analysis, subtly challenges them.
It is important to first recognise that both these texts are reinventions. In RIII, Shakespeare
reimagines the War of the Roses for dramatic purposes. Through his use of historically
inaccurate characters and plot, he has reframed history itself. Shakespeare’s interpretation of
Richard III aligns with his representation throughout history and resonates with contextual
beliefs. This is seen through the characterisation of Richard’s ‘deformity’ symbolising inherent
evil, by metaphorically describing him as “the devil” and “dreadful minister of hell”, reinforcing
Elizabethan religious beliefs. Furthermore, the plot promotes ‘the divine right of kings’,
emphasising the consequences of Richard acting against God. The sacrifice of Richard’s morality
for power is symbolised through the ghosts in the climactic Act 5, Scene 3. The repetition of
“despair and die”, and accumulating staging of the ghosts represent the extremity of his sin and
guilt. Shakespeare does so to appease the Tudor rule, reflecting the social and historical
contextual values held. Hence, Shakespeare’s interpretation of King RIII is a reinvention which,
on the surface, upholds the attitudes of the time.
Pacino’s LFR reinvents Shakespeare’s RIII, upholding modern values and thus evoking
dissonance between them. This reframing is seen through the adaption of form, with Pacino’s
use of a “docudrama”. Within this, however, Pacino experiments with the notion of
interpretation, seen through Pacino’s criticism of scholars who think they ‘know’ Shakespeare.
Throughout the docudrama, he repeatedly challenges the academic interpretation of the play,
for instance, when one scholar comments on the excitement of the opening word “now”. Her
To what extent are acts of invention and reinvention the primary point of connection between
King Richard III and Looking for Richard?
At the root of all acts of reinvention is interpretation. Interpretation shapes how one views a
text, and influences what elements of it they will reimagine. This involves issues expressed
within a text, and their role within the reinvention defines their relevance to the new context.
This encourages textual conversations between the invention, reinvention and audience about
these themes and values of interest. Ultimately, texts are linked through these acts of invention
and reinvention, which are characterised by interpretation.
Shakespeare’s Richard III (RIII), 1593, and Al Pacino’s Looking for Richard (LFR), 1996, are
primarily connected through acts of invention and reinvention. Critical to both texts is
interpretation, influencing how the formation of these reinventions. Through Pacino’s
interpretation of RIII, textual conversations are held surrounding both common and disparate
issues raised within the texts. Pacino’s LFR upholds the values of its contemporary context and
Shakespeare appears to also, but upon analysis, subtly challenges them.
It is important to first recognise that both these texts are reinventions. In RIII, Shakespeare
reimagines the War of the Roses for dramatic purposes. Through his use of historically
inaccurate characters and plot, he has reframed history itself. Shakespeare’s interpretation of
Richard III aligns with his representation throughout history and resonates with contextual
beliefs. This is seen through the characterisation of Richard’s ‘deformity’ symbolising inherent
evil, by metaphorically describing him as “the devil” and “dreadful minister of hell”, reinforcing
Elizabethan religious beliefs. Furthermore, the plot promotes ‘the divine right of kings’,
emphasising the consequences of Richard acting against God. The sacrifice of Richard’s morality
for power is symbolised through the ghosts in the climactic Act 5, Scene 3. The repetition of
“despair and die”, and accumulating staging of the ghosts represent the extremity of his sin and
guilt. Shakespeare does so to appease the Tudor rule, reflecting the social and historical
contextual values held. Hence, Shakespeare’s interpretation of King RIII is a reinvention which,
on the surface, upholds the attitudes of the time.
Pacino’s LFR reinvents Shakespeare’s RIII, upholding modern values and thus evoking
dissonance between them. This reframing is seen through the adaption of form, with Pacino’s
use of a “docudrama”. Within this, however, Pacino experiments with the notion of
interpretation, seen through Pacino’s criticism of scholars who think they ‘know’ Shakespeare.
Throughout the docudrama, he repeatedly challenges the academic interpretation of the play,
for instance, when one scholar comments on the excitement of the opening word “now”. Her
