I read and, posteriorly, watched a performance of William Shakespeare’s “Richard III” for a literature class. If anything, it taught me how portrayal changes perception.
By analyzing the five acts of the written play, I could identify Richard as a character I did not like: he was egotistical, machiavellian and violent. Richard’s actions against his own family could easily make him be perceived as a villain – and they did – even if he was the protagonist of the story.
He killed the former Lancaster king and heir, prayed for his brother Edward’s sickness and orchestrated the deaths of Clarence, his other brother, his nephews, the young princes, court members who did not align with him, and his wife Anne. Still, and funny enough, not his actions but another factor was what allowed him to be such a detestable villain: he was ugly.
Richard III, in play and life, was known for a hunchback and distasteful features which align with his personality. It is easy to identify a villain when they are ugly; Disney has done that too many times. However, when Disney turned Malevola into Angelina Jolie, regardless of the switch the live-action gave the story, she was suddenly more understandable, easier to resonate with and empathize for. By not seeing an illustrated description of Richard, I almost imagined him as Victor Hugo’s Quasimodo; it was easy to dislike him.
A great switch of conscience happened when I saw a production of “Richard III” performed at the New York Central Park by The Public Theater’s Free Shakespeare in the Park. Richard III was played by none other than a beautiful and charismatic woman, Danai Gurira, an actress from Zimbabwe.
The play has many comedic relieves. For example, when Richard is trying to manipulate his future wife, Lady Anne, into marrying him. She says, “And thou unfit for any place but hell,” to which he answers there is only one other place, “Your bedchamber.” Still, those moments of comedy were read by me in a tone of disgust; however, Gurira performed them in such a funny way I forgot Richard was indeed a murderous predator.
All of this makes me think of how many “wolves in the skin of sheep” we encounter every day and do not even realize. If only watching the performance, I would have probably forgotten Richard III was a real person who committed horrible crimes because he was portrayed by a beautiful, well-spoken woman.
Now, we may think we have mastered media literacy. At least, as an English major, I thought I did. Still, even knowing Richard III existed in real life and committed atrocious actions, I cannot help but like him because of Gurira. So, how much can we accept as the truth when narratives are so easily changed with a smile and nice features?
