CRITICISM

Axline, Kim. “‘Sad Stories of the Death of Kings’: The Revelation of Humanity in Richard II.” On-Stage Studies 22 (1999): 108-21.

Examines the way in which Shakespeare, in Richard II, used historical fact and political rhetoric as a means of revealing serious human concerns and issues.

Barbour, David. “The Bard Off Broadway.” TCI 32, no. 5 (May 1998): 26-8.

Assesses some of the technical aspects of the Theatre for a New Audience's performance of Richard II and Richard III, finding that the set design allowed for each play to have its own strong identity, and that both the set design and lighting accorded with the production's vision of the play.

Berninghausen, Thomas F. “Banishing Cain: The Garden Metaphor in Richard II and the Genesis Myth of the Origin of History.” Essays in Literature XIV, no. 1 (spring 1987): 3-14.

Maintains that the play's garden scene (III.iv) is properly understood within the context of a grander Biblical scheme in which it is suggested that England be viewed as a parallel with the Garden of Eden.

Calderwood, James L. “Richard II to Henry IV: Variations on the Fall.” In Metadrama in Shakespeare's Henriad: Richard II to Henry, pp. 10-29. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979.

Explores Shakespeare's depiction in Richard II of the fall not only of King Richard, but of “kingly speech.”

Carr, Virginia M. “The Power of Grief in Richard II.” Etudes Anglaises XXXI, no. 2 (April-June 1978): 145-51.

Argues that while sorrow is endured without consolation in the play, it serves to teach the characters, giving them both knowledge and dignity.

French, A. L. “Richard II and the Woodstock Murder.” Shakespeare Quarterly 22, no. 4 (autumn 1971): 337-44.

Claims that while other critics have dismissed the significance of the murder of Thomas of Woodstock, Duke of Gloucester in Richard II, the event, while not portrayed, is of vital importance to the understanding of the play.

Jacobs, Henry E. “Prophecy and Ideology in Shakespeare's Richard II.” South Atlantic Review 51, no. 1 (January 1986): 3-17.

Demonstrates that a shift occurs within Richard II from the medieval view of an essentially ordered cosmos held by Richard and his loyalists, to a conception of power as essentially lawless. Jacobs contends that this shift is emphasized through changes in the characters' language, actions, and attitudes.

Moseley, C. W. R. D. “Passing Brave to be a King: Richard II.” In Shakespeare's History Plays. Richard II to Henry V: The Making of a King, pp. 112-28. London: Penguin Books, 1988.

Details Richard's decline throughout the course of Richard II, demonstrating the ways in which Shakespeare utilized his source material and crafted his characters in order to develop sympathy for Richard despite the kings shortcomings and transgressions.

Ornstein, Robert. “A Kingdom for a Stage.” In Richard II: Critical Essays, edited by Jeanne T. Newlin, pp. 45-72. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1984.

Argues that Shakespeare's recollection of medieval history in Richard II is done for the purposes of artistic pleasure rather than out of a political longing for medieval times.

Rackin, Phyllis. “The Role of the Audience in Shakespeare's Richard II.” Shakespeare Quarterly 36, no. 3 (autumn 1985): 262-81.

Traces the development of the role of the audience throughout the play, and examines the method by which Shakespeare controlled the process of the audience's interaction with the production.

Rutter, Carol Chillington. “Fiona Shaw's Richard II: The Girls as Player-King as Comic.” Shakespeare Quarterly 48, no. 3 (1997): 314-24.

Provides a critique of Shaw's portrayal of Richard II in Deborah Warner's production of Richard II in June, 1995, for the National Theatre, contending that Shaw's innovative performance offered new insights on the “player king.”

Traversi, Derek. “Richard II.” In Twentieth Century Interpretations of Richard II: A Collection of Critical Essays, edited by Paul M. Cubeta, pp. 41-57. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1971.

Examines Richard II as the conflict between a traditional conception of royalty, represented by Richard, and the uprising of a new political force, represented by Bolingbroke.

Zitner, Sheldon P. “Aumerle's Conspiracy.” Studies in English Literature 1500-1900 XIV, no. 2 (1974): 239-57.

Studies the significance of the two Aumerle scenes in Act V, which are frequently omitted from performances of Richard II. Zitner identifies the farcical elements of the scenes, noting the ways in which the scenes both diminish and enrich the play.