Ambiguities Answered in Derek Jacobis Richard II Essay -- Richard II

Ambiguities Answered in Derek Jacobis Richard II The plain text of a script does not live and breathe as a ocular performance must. Both director and actors have to make choices in a production, to interpret and make clear the plot and purpose of the play. The Derek Jacobi Richard II uses the capabilities of scoot to remove many of the ambiguities that plague interpretation of that text. In doing so, it creates a lusty yet ineffective King Richard who, between his own insecurity and Northumberlands conniving, hurls the summit meeting to the willing if uneasy Bullingbrook. Richards character becomes evident through tog out, acting, and script choices. end-to-end the play, Richard reveals some of the lightest colors on stage -- his white robe at court in I.i, his sky-blue garments at the lists in I.iii, even a pure white robe as opposed to the off-white the caterpillars wear in the bathroom in I.iv. Even in the deposition order of IV.i, the brown robe Richard is clad in is sti ll light, almost pastel. This mechanical press choice has two effects. The light colors draw visual heed to Richard, just as he continually tries to draw aural oversight with his high-flown speeches. Yet the constant parade of pastels and watered-down shades also makes Richard require weak, particularly next to the more soberly-dressed court or the much darker-clad Bullingbrook and Northumberland. Richards costume style reinforces the impression in the white robe he seems to typically use for court occasions, the huge sleeves incapacitate his hands (obviously intended in the period as an emblem of leisure, but here also portion as an image of powerlessness) and the high collar forces his neck up, strengthening an visual aspect of arrogance and aloofness. ... ...n the shoulder and thrusting the summary of charges at him, expressively bowl his eyes at the dethroned kings constant refusals, to his smug parting of Richard and his queen. The Derek Jacobi production of Richard II provides its own answers to many of the ambiguities posed by the text alone. Richard is portrayed as an ineffective ruler ripe for overthrow, and Bullingbrook as a more up to(p) man boosted to power by the scheming of the Machiavellian Northumberland. Many different interpretations are valid -- indeed, some of this productions choices were made easier by judicious cuts in the script -- but this production provides an entertaining, reasonable, and self-consistent interpretation of the welter of events surround the deposition of a king. And, in so doing, the production proves the almost unconditioned variety of theater, particularly of Shakespeare.