It is the fate of king to govern the people of the land, but what happens when the king seen as inept at his job and at the will of other candidates that seem more compatible for the job.
At 2.1.42-68, Gaunt recounts his vision of England as blessed entity, or as “This other Eden, demi paradise, / This fortress built by nature for herself.” Associating this natural imagery with England creates the idea that this region was naturally created by the will of the powers that be, to service these exact powers. Since the conception reveals a divine intervention onto the land, there is a sense that the fate of the country was to carry out this plan of conquering other regions. Later in the speech, Gaunt mentions “That England and was wont to conquer others / Hath made a shameful conquest of itself,” which brings to mind the idea that even though this land had such a grandiose fate, it was not able to complete this, thus falling victim to destroying itself. In this case, he is referring to King Richard’s treatment of the land he was given. Because Richard seemed to disregard the land, there was the idea that he could not properly convey the fate of England, even though as the king, he is seen as the divine leader of the land who has natural insights onto how the land should be governed.
During his reign, Richard was seen as an unfit king by the masses, while also being flattered by those in his immediate surroundings. He personally felt that he was not affected by the will of the “common people” When talking with some of the Royal Court, he mentions that Bolingbrook “How he did seem to dive into their hearts / With humble and familiar courtesy;/ What reverence he did throw away on slaves,/ Wooing poor craftsman with the craft of his smiles/” (1.4.25-28) Here Richard feels that conversing with people outside of his court is a pointless endeavor, which contributes to the idea of his fate being above those around him. Considering the fate he ended with, there is the idea that one’s fate involves corporation from those around him. Bolingbrook managed to overthrow Richard because he had more support from those around him. Had Richard tried to involve himself in less superficial bonds, he may have a more positive fate.
This post thoughtfully explores the pressure put on the concept of fate in RICHARD II. What Gaunt supposes England's destiny should be is not the fate the realm has met under Richard's kingship; Richard's confidence that sovereignty is his fate doesn't protect him from being un-kinged. So we have to ask what fate is in these contexts. Is it subject to human manipulation, or does it find its way, like fate does for the Greeks, to fulfillment despite the best human efforts to change it? If fate turns out to be flexible in the play RICHARD II, what are we to make of the truth of RIchard's prophesies as they come to fruition in the HENRY IV plays?
ReplyDelete