History and Tragedy in Richard II - Literature Essay Samples

How valid is the distinction between history and tragedy in Richard II?An attempt to sort Shakespeares plays into neat categories may appear to have its benefits when striving to understand his work, but even a superficial reading of Richard II indicates that this approach is largely futile and sometimes misleading. While it cannot be doubted that the play is of a historical nature, based on events recorded in Holinsheds Chronicles of 1577 and named after an actual king, a sense of true Shakespearean tragedy is also present throughout. Instead of trying to analyse or appreciate the differences between these two forms, it is more interesting to understand how they complement each other. Shakespeare vividly brings the past to life in Richard II, and it is surely the careful mingling of historical fact and tragic elements that is responsible for the great dramatic value of the play.Knowledge of the period of history from which the play is drawn means that the audience is prepared for Richards fate, for example, and this only serves to illuminate the tragic inevitability of his downfall. The audience is aware that Richard II is only the first in a series of history plays, and will be followed by Henry IV (parts one and two) and Henry V. In this sense Richard could be viewed in a potentially unemotional light, as a component of English history whose reign simply linked the reigns of two others. The fact that he was usurped from the throne and murdered is not overwhelmingly tragic when seen in the context of world history, especially if his reign is being viewed with cold hindsight. However, Shakespeares colourful portrayal of Richard and his fate means that the audience can in many ways appreciate the king in terms of a tragic hero; Coleridge asserting that the play throughout is an history of the human mind (p.128).The fact that the majority of the plays characters can predict Richards downfall almost as accurately as the omniscient audience creates a sense of inevitability, which is central to the notion of tragedy. His friends and enemies are united in their experiences of negative presentiment, from which only Richard seems to be immune. The Queen relates that,Some unborn sorrow, ripe in fortunes womb,Is coming towards me; and my inward soulAt nothing trembles.(II.ii.10-13)Despite the ambiguity of these lines regarding the nature of the unborn sorrow, there is an overwhelming sense of unavoidability. The passiveness of the Queen is notable (the sorrow is coming towards her), and the emphatic positioning of Is at the beginning of the second line suggests that there is no escape from this looming disaster. The dramatic irony of the audience knowing that her intuition is correct can only lead to increased pity for her situation. Meanwhile the tragic inevitability of Richards plight is touched on with the image of fortune giving birth from her womb: the King and Queen are going to be presented with their decided destiny and they c annot change it. The fact that they cannot create their own children only adds a cruel irony to this idea of enforced passivity.Later in the scene Green also predicts the inevitability of Richards downfall, sympathetically likening his task in overcoming Bolingbroke to numbring sands and drinking oceans dry (II.ii.146). The grand scale of this language emphasises the kings lack of control: only a god could accomplish these universal feats. Similarly, Salisbury declares that he envisages Richards glory, like a shooting star,/ Fall[ing] to the base earth from the firmament (II.iv.19-20). Like Greens metaphor, this use of exaggerated simile is reminiscent of Richards limitations, the use of shooting star particularly appropriate in describing the brief drama of his reign. Once again, the historical knowledge of the audience can serve to enhance appreciation of this description. Most fascinating are Bolingbrokes comments regarding Richards imminent downfall, and once again the sen se of inevitability dominates his sentiments. Intriguingly, he does not boast of his own confidence in overpowering Richard, but instead sends messages of kind commends (III.i.38) to the Queen. This rather unexpected gesture of sympathy seems to imply that Richard is suffering from an incurable disease. It is as if Bolingbroke is completely uninvolved in the matter of Richards downfall and is instead witnessing it from a distance, marvelling at the kings misfortunes like everybody else.The fact that, ultimately, Richard brings about his own collapse is what makes this peculiar image of Bolingbroke seem plausible. Shakespeare depicts the king like one of the heroes of ancient Greek drama, whose blindness to fate means that nobody can convince them to act rationally and for their own good. The Aristotelian notion of the tragic flaw can often be recognised in Shakespeares characters: it tends to be a weakness of a casual nature which escalates to disaster, such as Hamlets habit of procrastination. Richards main flaw is his reluctance to recognise and address the problems surrounding him. From the beginning his ear is stopped with flattering sounds (II.i.15) which distance him from reality. He is particularly unimpressed with the power of logic, as can be seen from his haphazard conduct when dealing with Mowbray and Bolingbroke at Coventry. John of Gaunt, who enjoys reminiscing about England as This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,/ This other Eden, demi-paradise (II.i.41-42), is disliked by Richard. The kings reaction to his death, So much for that (II.i.155) is disrespectful in its apathy. Holderness provides an explanation to Richards behaviour by suggesting that he is hopelessly overwhelmed by the overbearing authority of that patriarchal past, [and] simply rejects history altogether (p.187). His sense of discomfort when around Gaunt, a painful reminder of Englands past glory, stems from this unwillingness to acknowledge his duties and responsi bilities as king.The most frustrating aspect of Richards flaw is his inability to recognise it, despite the advice and help of others. Whatever happens, he is destined to be oblivious of his imminent downfall until it has actually occurred, when it will be too late to prevent it. York becomes aware of Richards inability to make rational decisions, and (in vain) tries to enlist the understanding and support of others:I have had feeling of my cousins wrongs,And laboured all I could to do him right.But in this kind to come, in braving arms,Be his own carver, and cut out his wayTo find out right with wrong (II.ii.140-144)Although York is still attempting to sound hopeful, there is a sense of finality about his words and a real frustration in laboured all I could. This aggravation is similarly apparent in Bolingbroke when he is condemning Bushy and Green to death. He accuses them of mis[leading] a prince, a royal king,/ A happy gentleman in blood and lineaments (III.i.8-10). Boling broke seems confused in looking for someone else to blame, as if he cannot bring himself to accept Richard foolishness. This acceptance comes later on, however, when he is asking Northumberland to pass on his demands to Richard:Be he the fire; Ill be the yielding water.The rage be his, whilst on the earth I rainMy waters: on the earth, and not on him. -(III.iii.57-59)This sudden personal attack conveys Bolingbrokes loss of patience with Richard. His fire and water analogy describes his view of the kings passionately destructive nature, while his emphatic the rage be his indicates his frustration with Richards troublesome character. The pun on rain (reign) indicates his desire to become king and deal logically with all the problems Richard has created, but he does not want to rain on Richard himself. This is presumably because Bolingbroke does not have the tolerance to deal with Richards self-destructive problems: he has finally come to terms with the kings tragic flaw.Richard on ly begins to recognise his shortcomings once he has lost the throne to Bolingbroke, and this adds to the tragedy of his situation. When looking in the mirror, he expects to find physical evidence where all my sins are writ (IV.i.265) but is surprised by the pleasant reflection. He exclaims, O flattring glass,/Like to my followers in prosperity,/Thou dost beguile me! (IV.i.269-270). It is only now that he begins to acknowledge his own weaknesses, which means he can be pitied more readily. The moment when he refers to himself as a traitor with the rest (IV.i.238) for causing the downfall of the king, is particularly poignant. Now the all-knowing audience can empathise with Richard as he tries to live with the consequences of his actions, for which it is still hard to believe he was ultimately responsible.Shakespeares emphasis on Richards poetic and dramatic qualities undermines the potent historical nature of the play. It is very difficult to take serious note of the actions and thoughts of a king who seems more interested in acting out the role of king, almost satirically, than attending to his duties. For instance, when in trouble he appeals poetically to nature for help:Feed not thy sovereigns foe, my gentle earth,Nor with thy sweets comfort his ravenous sense;But let thy spiders that suck up thy venomAnd heavy-gaited toads lie in their way,Doing annoyance to the treacherous feetWhich with usurping steps do trample thee.(III.ii.12-17)The lyrical beauty of these lines is effective in showing the power of Richards language. The content matter, however, suggests that he does not have an equally impressive grasp of reality. His address to my gentle earth suggests that he views himself as a god-like figure capable of controlling nature, despite the fact that he is about to lose his throne. His beautiful language is juxtaposed with a complete lack of logic. Richards mention of treacherous feet and usurping steps indicates that his problems are clearly t roubling him, but his solution centres around venomous spiders: hardly practical. Even Isabella tends to create a distance from reality, asking What sport shall we devise here in this garden, /To drive away the heavy thought of care? (III.iv.1-2) when awaiting news of Richard. This very human trait of failing to accept everyday reality can endear the couple to the audience, but does not lead to much respect for the pair.Later, Richard mocks the public ritual of handing over the crown to Bolingbroke by turning the whole event into a farce and refusing to read out his sins, making himself out to be the victim (which, arguably, he is). This can only be described as childish behaviour, not something which is generally associated with royalty. Richards failure to accept the usurpation is, however, another crucial element of the tragic: the protagonists protests against his fate make him all the more pitiful.Shakespeare has added a tragic dimension to historical fact by positioning Ri chards wrongdoings regarding Bolingbroke against a context of inevitability. The fact that Richard clearly never had the qualities of a good king is seen as a tragedy in itself, rather than a simple historical statement. As Coleridge puts it, We cannot help pitying [Richard], and wishing he had been placed in a rank where he would have been less exposed, and where he might have been happy and useful (p.128). So while Richard II does display signs of a typical history play, such as the extensive number of personages, the scenes of parliament and the ambivalent ending, the character of Richard means that the audience is concerned with his plight in a tragic, personal manner rather than as a representation of history. For this reason, despite knowledge of his ultimate fate, the spectators can experience pity and fear for the tragic Richard as the play develops, and thus appreciate history in a new, more colourful light.

Battle of Stalingrad Essay - 1650 Words

Battle of Stalingrad (Essay Sample) Content: The Battle of StalingradStrategic Lessons From the Battle Of StalingradCourse Title Your NameProfessor Name DateStrategic Lessons From the Battle Of StalingradThe Battle of Stalingrad is considered as a core turning point in World War II and is often perceived as one of the bloodiest battles that have occurred in recent history as evidenced by the high number of casualties that occurred on both sides amounting to well over two million. The battle included the German siege of Stalingrad, the battle which took place inside the city and the Soviet counter offensive which ended in the destruction of the German Sixth Army. As a result of the Battle, the Axis powers lost over 850,000 people, about 25% of its power on the Eastern Front and a large amount of both supplies as well as equipment. It was difficult for Axis powers to regain their strength after this battle and eventually led to their decision to make a retreat from Eastern Europe. Aside from being a significant tu rning point in the war, Stalingrad also helped to reveal a significant amount of the discipline and determination of both the German as well as Soviet armies. This paper will therefore examine the Stalingrad Campaign looking at the strategic implications that were learned. First the manner in which the battle was conducted will be analyzed including the events that led up to it and those that immediately followed it. Thereafter the paper will examine the important consequences and lessons that were learned from it with a focus on the core strategic and operational mistakes that essentially led to the defeat of the Germans. Stalingrad is significant in the fact that it marked a distinct turning point in the war that was being carried out on the Eastern Front. Whereas the ultimate outcome of the war effort that German engaged in was perhaps determined by the countrys failure to defeat the United Soviet Socialist Republic in the 1941 campaign referred to as Operation Barbarossa, Stalin grad was the essential mark of Germanys advance eastward. After the defeat that it suffered in Stalingrad, Hitler and his government were unwilling to occupy as much Soviet territory as it had before since it was retreating. Conduct of the CampaignThe Battle of Stalingrad came about a year after the Germans invaded the Soviet Union in an Operation termed as BARBAROSSA whose major aim was to launch a major surprise attack against the Soviet Union that would essentially capture the large majority of the territory located west of the Urals and therefore Moscow to surrender to Germany. BARBAROSSA did achieve a number of successes providing the Germans with the chance to move to Leningrad and Kharkov located in the South. In the process, they were able to surround and get rid of Soviet divisions. However, the Soviets Armys resistance was far stronger than had been anticipated and the campaign dragged on for much longer than had been anticipated by the German. A soviet counter attack th at was launched in December 1941 stopped their advance. The German advance was believed to be doomed from the start since Hitler made the decision to attack the Soviets across a broad front stretching from the Barents to the Black Sea which only reduced on the combat power of the German Army. There were a number of critical outcomes of BARBAROSSA impacted on Germanys efforts at war in the East with the first being that because the campaign failed to defeat the Soviet Union, the war continued in the East further compounding the challenges that the German military had on its resources. Moreover, the campaign cost Germany in terms of manpower and material, with the country incurring a large overwhelming number of casualties. However, the most critical aspect was that in failing to overcome the Soviets within the first year, Germany gave them the chance to mobilize more adequately. Consider that as the war moved on, the military capabilities of the Soviet Union grew and that of German y declined. In 1942, the German High Command made the decision to put in place a new offensive named Operation Blue which was much smaller in both its focus and scope as an answer to the losses incurred in the first year of its war. This campaign was largely aimed at taking control of Soviet oil resources and creating the stage for advance later into the Middle East. However, this only led to a wide range of negative consequences for Germany including a significant loss of military forces which the country could not afford. The loss demoralized German forces; the officers themselves had little confidence that they could win the war on the Eastern front and the German civilians no longer felt the war effort should continue. Lessons from the Battle of StalingradThere were numerous lessons that could be taken from the Stalingrad campaign with some standing out not in terms of the overall outcome of the war but also with regard to contemporary military policy. One of the more importa nt lessons learnt from the Battle of Stalingrad was the fact that Germans largely overstretched the military resources they had. This was an aspect that led them to fail to gather the requisite combat power that would have ensured they achieved their objectives. Hitler made the decision to divide the Army Group and move against Stalingrad and the Caucasus at the same time thereby reducing on the number of soldiers who were available for both campaigns. In addition, he ordered the capture of Stalingrad on top of capturing the Volga which also expanded on the mission of the Army without adding on the requisite forces. The end result was an Army that had fewer forces than it should have had in order to clearly and successfully executes its mission which in the end led to its defeat. If the Army group had not been divided, it would have been entirely possible that its forces would have concentrated defending themselves and the encirclement of the Army might not have occurred. Another lesson was the need to avoid frontal assaults when they can be avoided since these types of assaults often provide the enemy with the chance to take advantage of the defense. Consequently history has proved that they are costly to the attacker as was evident in the Battle of Stalingrad which went on for two months with frontal assaults being carried out against the defensive line of the Soviets. The result was that the Armys combat power was slowly drawn out and in the end it ran out of the requisite forces that would have ensured that a successful attack was carried out. A more preferable strategy would have been that of envelopment where the enemy would have been caught unaware and has therefore not prepared a deliberate attack since he expects the attack.The Germans did not use the envelopment strategy effectively in the early stages of the war and especially not in the Battle at Stalingrad. Instead they mistakenly believed that the defense of Stalingrad was near to collapsing and that another big assault would help to defeat it. It might also be possible that Hitler believed that an envelopment of the City would have been too difficult. Whatever the case is, if the Germans had chosen to envelop Stalingrad, they would have been able to cut them off from their sources of supply and therefore succeeded in eliminating them. Another lesson was in the need to ensure that plenty of reserves were available since this provides some type of support against any uncertainty in strategy. Clearly, there was such an uncertainty in the case of the Battle of Stalingrad which was expressed as early as July 1942 when concerns were brought forward regarding the splitting of the Army Group. It became more apparent when the battle for Stalingrad went into October and it was not clear that the Army would be in a position to capture the city. The German Armys commander was urged to put in place a reserve in the instance that Russians went on the attack. However, the armies h ad no reserves which it could use to decisively and effectively influence the war that it had with the Soviet Army. Reserves often serve two core purposes of providing the force with additional soldiers to deal with instances when unexpected attacks occur and they also ensure that the commander has the distinct ability to take advantage of any chance that occurs within the battlefield for instance an opportunity to penetrate the defensiv...