Richard II A Tragic Hero Analysis

1124 Words5 Pages
Shakespeare really wrote tragedies of great heights and earned standard category. His one of the best creation Richard II is a historical play rather being a tragedy. The history play is usually distinguished especially by its political purposes from other kinds of plays. Shakespeare 's use of his sources shows that he wanted to emphasize the political issues involved in the conflict between Richard and Bolingbroke, mainly the privileges of kingship and the right of rebellion. The play is consequently written not about the down fall of its hero but around the chronological stages by which Bolingbroke threatens, captures, and retains the crown. Throughout a tragedy play readers suffer with the hero and feel sympathy for the hero but it does not happen with Richard II. So the play cannot be claim as a tragedy. From the point of view of Harold Bloom, it can be mentioned that Richard II is not a character of a real tragic hero because of its having lack of the qualities of a tragic hero. In the same way he is an incomplete politician also. We cannot justify him as a complete human being rather he can be stated as a helpless king who has declined for his stubborn nature. He is neither a hero nor a villain rather he is a victim of his self-indulgence. (Bloom. 249-150) In Shakespeare 's view, Richard is a failure as a king not because he is immoral, nor because he is too sensitive and refined for the job, but because he misunderstands the nature of kingship. (Elliott. History and

    More about Richard II A Tragic Hero Analysis

      Open Document