If you are wondering what to get your Ricardian friend or relative as a birthday present, you might like to consider the ‘Richard III Armchair’ (see here).  It was designed in 1985 by Phillippe Starck.  I’m not sure whether the 500th anniversary of Richard’s death at the Battle of Bosworth is coincidental.  If it was, it would be interesting to know why Phillippe Starck chose to commemorate Richard III.  The chair is supposed to be a “personification of the Shakespeare character.  The chair represents the two sides of the character in terms of being both traditional and modern, concave and convex and have both strength and delicacy.”  It’s not quite clear in which way the designer considered Shakespeare’s Richard (or the real one for that matter) as ‘both traditional and modern”.

The chair certainly looks interesting and strangely attractive, but somehow it does not look like the right kind of chair to curl up in and read a good book.

Tags: Richard III, Shakespeare

Julia reviewed The Final Act of Mr Shakespeare by Robert Winder.  This is a fascinating novel about William Shakespeare continuing his cycle of history plays by writing about Henry VII.  A book not to be missed.

You can find her review on our Bookshelf in the Medieval Library or just click  here.

Tags: Books, Henry Tudor, Shakespeare, Theatre

A recent article in The Australian (1) alerted me to a new production of Shakespeare’s Richard III by the Melbourne Theatre Company, which according to the reviewer is outstanding.

So I decided to find out a bit more.  Instead of setting it in a historical context (and as the historical accuracy of the play is questionable at best, this makes a lot of sense), the play takes place in the boardrooms of the corporate world.  “Set as a contemporary political thriller, this gripping production dissects the corruption of power in testing times; when peace is abandoned and enemies mount in the minds of the paranoid.”(2)  Should politicians like George W Bush come to mind when watching the “spin and chicanery” in this performance this is not unintentional, the director Simon Phillips explains.  He does, however, not limit the analogy to one particular politician, as ”A lot of politicians try to hide their dirty laundry in the same way that Richard does, someone with ‘neither pity, love nor fear’.”

The director did intentionally not set the play in a totalitarian state as it was often done, as this “allows people to put everything at arm’s length from contemporary life because nobody identifies with them today. But I believe the play has so much to offer the modern sensibility.” (3)

In line with the modern setting the media are playing the role of the nobles of the play, while Buckingham is Richard’s ruthlessly ambitious PR man.  However, the stage belongs to Richard, as it should in this play, and it is him that the audience is interested in, as one reviewer says “we can’t but be moved by him”.

I particularly liked the comment on Richmond’s overthrow of Richard:  “his [Richmond’s] promises of peace uneasily echo Richard’s empty words at the beginning of his reign, hinting that the cycle of violence is by no means over.”(4)  Whatever your opinion of the historic Richard, these words are certainly true for the historic Richmond (ie. Henry Tudor).

The play runs until 12 June – maybe we should consider a little trip south?!

Notes:

1.   The Australian.
2.   Melbourne Theatre Company.
3.   The Age.
4.   The Australian.

Tags: Shakespeare, Theatre