ENG331H1S
Drama to 1603
Prof.
Matthew Sergei
By
Jasmine Cornforth 998143940
February
27, 2014
Richard III's Deformity
and Malleability: Not Just a “Child King”
Bethany Packard's
chapter, “Misappropriation: Richard III's baby teeth”, suggests
that Richard III “tries to fit the versions of his gestation,
birth, and childhood into a cohesive narrative on which to base his
adult life and reign, only to fragment along the fault lines of his
paradoxical tale.” Looking at the first two parts of this chapter
only, I argue against this, finding it to be a strange idea despite
the various mentions of Richard's gestation, birth and childhood, and
of children in general. While I do agree that Richard can be a
paradoxical character, I argue that his childhood is not quite as
significant as Packard makes it out to be. Instead, Richard's actions
are not always based directly on his gestation, birth and childhood.
Richard only uses his past when it can serve as a tool that can be
used to serve his wicked purposes.
In part II of this
chapter, Packard claims that Shakespeare characterizes Richard III as
a child king. Then, she says that Richard is “like a many-headed
hydra” in that he “avoids containment in a single definition and
retains numerous angles from which to strike back”. I agree with
the second statement. Richard is indeed a malleable character who
will play any role that serves to his advantage, as I stated earlier.
However, this contradicts Packard's earlier statement that Richard
III is characterized as a child king. Richard cannot resist being
contained in a single definition if he is also, at all times, a
“child king”.
In the first
section of her essay, Packard writes of a “linguistic convergence”
between the child, York, and his uncle Richard. This is due to the
word “perilous” (or “parlous”, depending on the edition)
being attributed to York by Richard himself for his sharp, witty
tongue (III.i.154). While Richard himself is “perilous” – he is
undeniably a dangerous person – York is more “parlous”, which,
as Packard points out, seems like a slightly less dangerous adjective
than “perilous”. He is only Richard's equal in the way that his
speech is just as full of wit, which is odd for a child, and it makes
him seem somewhat unpredictable, as Packard points out. Ultimately,
however, Richard is far more dangerous than York is, as he murders
the child before he is able to do anything to get in his way.
Packard then goes
on to say that “Richard’s encounters with his nephews serve to
expose, and ultimately undermine, his political strategy of childlike
self-presentation”. This argument does not sit well with me;
specifically, the word “childlike” seems incorrect. With little
exception, Richard does not strategically present himself
specifically as a child, but rather as a sympathetic, innocent,
deserving and trustworthy adult in order to fool people. This is
especially true in regards to his nephews, because in looking at the
way in which he speaks to them, he still sounds slightly
condescending at times, as though he wishes to remind them that
although they may appear to have greater political power, he is still
the adult in the situation, and the adult knows best. For example, he
uses the word “little” to refer to York twice in a very short
amout of time (III.i.111&122). Of his sword, he tells York that
“It is too heavy for your grace to wear” (III.i.120) as if to
suggest that the young lord is not yet as strong and capable as he
himself is because he is a child and Richard is an adult. One might
also see the sword as a metaphor for political power, which Richard
thinks he is more capable of bearing than the young Duke of York is.
Richard is clearly posing as an adult here, and there is no solid
reason to compare this behavior to that of a child. In sum, there is
no “childlike self-presentation” here for Richard's nephews to
undermine. This is not to say that Richard never compares himself to
or draws attention to his childhood, but within the only actual
discussions between Richard and his nephews, childlike behavior
simply does not come into play, so his encounters with his nephews
cannot serve to undermine it.
Most of the
references to Richard's overly long gestation, his birth and his
childhood are made by other characters, and not always in Richard's
presence. For example, these things are brought up in Act II, scene 4
during a discussion between the Archbishop of York, the Duchess of
York, the young Duke of York and Queen Elizabeth – to be specific,
this is the vital discussion during which his baby teeth are
mentioned, along with the notion that he therefore has potentially
grown into a dangerous man. Richard himself did not voluntarily bring
up these ideas about his childhood as he was not present, and he
seldom calls attention to them. Instead, Richard tries to fit
whichever role will he believes to be best-suited for deception and
his own personal gain. For example, in Act 1, Scene 2, Richard
creates a deceptive persona in order to woo Anne In part II of her
chapter, Packard actually makes reference to this scene with Anne
and, again, argues that Richard is posing here as a child. Richard
does present himself to her in a false way in order to win her
over, but it seems like a stretch to say that he is trying
specifically to seem childlike. Rather, some adjectives that would
suit his self-presentation here are “trustworthy”, “innocent”,
“emotional” (and yet “rational” at the same time, as he comes
up with witty arguments in an attempt to win Anne over – something
that an irrational child would not be able to do). “Innocent” is
implied in “childlike”, of course, but the words are not
synonymous with one another. Therefore, it would be more correct to
say that Richard tries to make his actions seem innocent when doing
so will help him achieve some goal.
However, the
actions and intentions that Richard tries to hide by way of his false
innocence are not innocent at all. Packard states that “some of
Richard's most prominent, and ludicrous, childish posturing
emphasizes Henry VI-like innocence and openness” and uses Act 1,
Scene 2 (“the Anne scene”) as proof. If innocence and
childishness are basically one in the same, as Packard suggests, then
Richard is indeed posing as a child. However, bringing up this scene
and other instances of when Richard compares himself to a child does
not help to argue that Richard himself is a “child king”. Richard
simply uses a childlike (or simply “innocent”) persona to fool
people. Of course, as Packard suggests, he does not do so when it
would seem more advantageous for him to act differently (she says
that “he is all manly firmness” in the face of battle).
Rather than calling
Richard a “child king” or arguing that his decisions are all
based upon his gestation, birth and childhood, I argue that his
deformity is the culprit. It does not matter so much how he got to be
the way he is, because there is no apparent cause for him to have
been born malformed, and no one to blame for it. We know that this
malformity is the prime motivator for his behavior because he says,
after lamenting his physical state, “And therefore, since I cannot
prove a lover/To entertain these well-spoken days/I am determined to
prove a villain” (I.i.28-30). This unhealthy determination to wreak
havoc on his family and on others could then be associated with
jealousy, bitterness, boredom or perhaps a deeper psychological
issue; it is difficult to know for certain (he could have been born
with a “deformed” mind as well as body). Richard's deformity
makes him is what makes him such a unique character – both in the
intended sense of the word and in another. If we unpack the word
“deform” to obtain the prefix “de-” and “form” and
consider some of their alternate meanings, we might understand “de-”
to imply “a separation from” and “form” to simply mean
“manifestation”. From this, we might gather that Richard is not
limited to or trapped in only one manifestation of himself. He is
“deformed” in that he is malleable, and that he can and will take
on any “form” or persona, including but not limited to a
childlike one, to the point where he no longer knows who he is.
(Incidentally, that point takes place in Act V, Scene iii, lines
178-207 – Richard's soliloquy after being haunted by the ghosts of
his victims, during which he no longer appears to understand
himself). Again, Packard's comparison of Richard to the many-headed
hydra and her suggestion that Richard is a paradoxical character are
absolutely correct, but Richard's gestation, birth and childhood
should not be the focus of our attention when his prime motivator is
really his deformity.
Works Cited
- Packard, Bethany. Problem Children: Troping Early Modern Reproduction and Development. Diss. Vanderbilt University, 2010.
- Shakespeare, William. Richard III. Ed. Peter Holland. Pelican Shakespeare, 2000. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment