A Necessary Evil Analysis

Analysis of A Necessary Evil: The Inverted Hagiography of Shakespeare’s Richard III by Lainie Pomerleau Lainie Pomerleau is an English professor currently teaching at the University of Georgia. Before that she went to the University of Southern Maine for her Bachelor’s in English Language and Literature, and then to the University of Tennessee for her Master’s Degree. She is a candidate for receiving a PhD. She has studied English literature extensively and has a broad understanding of different uses of it. Therefore she has immense credibility in literature.
Lainie Pomerleau’s article, A Necessary Evil: The Inverted Hagiography of Shakespeare’s Richard III, suggests why Shakespear’s play, Richard III, is more of a reverse Hagiography rather

Here the author is trying to appeal to readers that would have an understanding of medieval writings and who would be familiar with hagiographies. Pomerleau also gives reasons as to why Richard III should not be considered realistic history and instead follows more with the Hagiographic pattern. He says, “Instead of merely presenting Richard as a raving tyrant or pagan persecutor, Shakespeare develops and presents a complete narrative of his biography and character” (Pomerleau 70). The author is using logos for his audience in showing that Shakespeare’s play actually shows depth to the character of Richard. This is effective because it helps to solidify the idea that Shakespeare was intentionally embellishing the character’s story for the sake of keeping the pattern of a reverse hagiography. The author also shows how the discrepancy between actual history and hagiography came to be with Richard III because of the use of the word Tragedy. Pomerleau claims that because the play was called a tragedy, it may have been believed by some to be a work of non-fiction. In his own words the author says, “In the medieval tradition, tragedies are stories chronicling the rise and fall of great men, both biblical and historical” (Pomerleau 71). This gives a logical reasoning as to why people

The author states that, “while less recognizable to our eyes, Shakespeare’s audiences, many of whom were intimately familiar with religious drama and saints’ plays, would have noticed Richard III’s hagiographic tropes, themes, and allegories, as well as recognized the narrative arc and structure as that of a saint’s story” (Pomerleau 73). Here the author is trying to reach the audience using some pathos, and also some logos, to explain why the audiences of Shakespeare’s day understood what he was trying to accomplish with his play. It is certainly understandable that time and place has an effect on how someone will take a story.
So according to Pomerleau, the point and goal of Shakespeare in his play on Richard III was not to accurately depict the king, but to make him a necessary evil and a villain for the sake of his anti-hagiography. The author continues to gives his reasoning for how hagiographies apply by stating, “Early Tudors’ and Shakespeare’s Richard, as well as the contemporary Richard III Society’s depiction of him, have made no discernible changes to hagiographic conventions” (Pomerleau 79). This would show that the author believes Richard’s story to be heavily depicted by hagiography and anti-hagiography