Real Richard III vs. Shakespeare’s Richard

A few months ago I had the privilege of meeting Emily Mattina, Artistic Director of Shakesperience because the company was about to put on a production of Richard III by William Shakespeare. But unlike most people involved in Shakespearean productions, Emily is keenly aware that the play is a very negative spin on Richard, who from most contemporary accounts was a good king. Emily had wanted to consult with someone knowledgeable about the real Richard III and was put in contact with me through my local library. We came to the conclusion that it would be wrong to change Richard’s character in the play—it should stay true to Shakespeare’s vision. Instead, we developed a discussion where we contrasted Richard III as he’s depicted in primary sources to the Shakespearean version that we presented prior to two productions of the play. The first was given on June 29^th at the Barnes and Noble in Waterbury, CT. The second was presented at McLaughlin Vineyards on Saturday, Aug. 25, 2012. The following video was filmed at this second discussion. The five parts of the video can be seen on YouTube.

 

Shakespeare and Richard III

Long before I became interested in the real Richard III, I enjoyed going to Shakespearean plays, and a long standing favorite was his play about Richard III. This Shakespearean Richard was the arch-villain I loved to hate. The play is brilliant. And while the Richard in the play bears no resemblance to the real medieval monarch, I have to thank Shakespeare for writing such a memorable work that Richard is alive in our minds more than 500 years after he was killed in battle. Because Richard reigned for a little over two years (June 26, 1483 to August 22, 1485) I firmly believe that without this play, Richard III would be a forgotten footnote in our books on English history.

About eight years ago, I read a historical fiction about the real Richard III—Sunne in Splendour by Sharon Kay Penman. Because her depiction of Richard was so different from Shakespeare’s, I read all I could find on him and soon became convinced that the play was not about Richard III, but that he was an allegory for the politics of Shakespeare’s time. That Queen Elizabeth’s grandfather, Henry Tudor, defeated Richard, probably helped the play’s political acceptance.

A few weeks ago, Emily Mattina, the Artistic Director for Shakesperience, contacted me because this year they are giving a performance of this play and Emily knows that the real Richard was far different from Shakespeare’s portrayal. While she is not changing the character for the play, she is introducing the audience to the concept that the real king, though flawed as all humans are, was essentially a good person and a good king. For example, one of the things that most impressed me about Richard III was his affect was on the justice system when, for example, he enacted laws where people who were charged could post bail, that one couldn't be held without charge, fixing the corrupted jury system, and protected property rights, writing that "the law shall cease to be an instrument of oppression and extortion."

Shakesperience is performing at the end of the rainbow, Waterbury Connecticut's Library Park, this weekend, June 28 - July 1, 2012. Performances of Richard III are Thursday at 7pm Friday & Saturday at 8pm & Sunday at 2pm. Library Park is located at Meadow & Grand Streets Parking is free. Admission is Free! Donations to support Shakesperience are gratefully accepted—suggested amount is $15.

Friday 6-7pm with Shakesperience’s Artistic Director Emily Mattina for Richard III: Fact vs. Fiction with Joan Szechtman, author of This Time and Loyalty Binds Me. Books are available for purchase and Joan will autograph your copy.

My mom introduced me to Richard III

 Like most people who know anything about Richard III, I got my first impression about him from Shakespeare. For me, he was the arch villain I loved to hate. And who could not love Laurence Olivier’s brilliant portrayal, or Ian McKellen’s controversial one. They both brought Shakespeare’s villain to life creating a man with whom the audience could even sympathize.

Richard III

One day, about nine years ago, my mother asked me if I had ever read Sunne in Splendour by Sharon Kay Penman. I hadn’t, but since my mom has great taste in books (I agree with her choices), I went to the library the next day and borrowed this nearly thousand page historical fiction. I was spellbound from the start. Penman introduces us to a seven year-old boy, who eventually becomes the king of England—not through treachery and murder that Shakespeare would have you believe—but through unwavering loyalty to his brother, Edward IV and through a strange twist of fate. On his deathbed, Edward IV names his brother, Richard, Duke of Gloucester, protector to his oldest son, Edward who was still a minor. Richard was not there when Edward IV died, but only learned of the events about a week after the fact. While serving as protector, Richard learns from the Bishop of Bath that Edward IV had been previously married before he had married the mother of his children, and that his first wife was still alive at the time of the bigamous marriage. All Edward’s children were legally declared bastards, thus unable to inherit title. Richard of Gloucester was next in line.

I was so blown over by these and other revelations in Sunne in Splendour, that I had to do my own research. I found Richard’s life so compelling that I found I wanted to have a chat with him. The only way I could think of doing that was to write him into the 21^st-century. It started small, but grew to three novels, the first two of which are published and the third a work in progress.

Bosworth Field--a Shakespearean spoof

Enjoy!

2009 Richard III Society Annual General Meeting

A Week ago Friday, Ed (my mate) and I flew to Las Vegas to attend the annual meeting of the Richard III Society, American Branch. Friday evening we registered and caught up with old friends and met new ones.

After a buffet breakfast Saturday, Kate Skegg presented her theory on what caused the English Sweating sickness. By her reckoning, it's a cyclical disease that's highly infectious, but not easily caught from person to person. Her research strongly points to Tularemia, an infectious disease carried by ticks, although there are other modalities that can spread the disease to humans.

Susan Higginbotham gave the next talk--one befitting the venue of this year's meeting--gambling! Dice were popular from ancient times, as was Backgammon, dating back to Mesopotamia. Even the 14th-century Luttrell Psalter has an illustration of two young people playing Backgammon in the garden. (If you're interested, you can see many images contained in the Luttrell Psalter, including this one, in Google images.) The modern deck of cards are derived from the Tarot deck and while many believe the Queen of Hearts may be that of Elizabeth of York and wife of Henry VII, the connection seems to be one of hindsight.

Following the buffet luncheon, Dr. Sharon Michalove gave the keynote speech on the reinvention of Richard III. Depending on which side of the fence you stand on, you may think of Richard as either a good king or evil as epitomized by William Shakespeare. Interestingly, as Dr. Michalove pointed out, not only has Richard been reinvented through the centuries since his defeat in 1485, but so have the the interpretations given to Shakespeares villain of the same name.

The banquet (buffet of course) followed the business meeting where many of us dressed up in our finest 15th-century style dress and we were treated to a play by Joyce Tumea, What Was That?: a modern medieval murder mystery.

As all things must, this came to an end after the Sunday breakfast, where I had the opportunity to participate in an author's panel with Susan Higginbotham, Maria Elena Torres, Sharon Michalove, and Joyce Tumea. This was my first experience participating in this sort of panel, and I found it a most enjoyable experience. I'm sure it helped that I was among friends.

Ed and I took advantage of a five hour break to drive out to Red Rock National Park, about 20 minute drive out of Las Vegas. I've taken many photos, but hopefully these two images will give you an idea of the magnitude of this park:





Ed and I stayed on with about twenty other Ricardians to attend the Tournament of Kings at the Excalibur Hotel. We had a grand time watching the fabulous horsemanship, and acrobatic show while eating a roasted chicken with our fingers--knives and forks were not allowed to be consistent with medieval times, although I couldn't help smirking at the anachronistic home fried potatoes and steamed broccoli.

Here's a photo of a bit of Las Vegas at night:




We left the next day to tour a few of the national parks and to see some of the southwest. More on this later.