Free Richard II by William Shakespeare Page A

to the occurrences of the time, and to the measures and character of the ministry … when Ross said “The earl of Wiltshire hath the state in farm” it was immediately applied to Walpole, with the loudest shouts and huzzas I ever heard. 6
    During the previous decade, the prime minister, Robert Walpole, had been attacked viciously on stage and in the press for perceived attempts to censor both. The London audience, experienced in recognizing satirical portraits, evidently responded well to the employment of Shakespeare’s text in the continuing war of words. Over a century after the Essex rebellion,
Richard II
continued to be read by spectators as a commentary on the ruling classes.
    While failing to establish the play as a regular repertory piece in their own century, both Theobald’s and Rich’s versions of the play laid the groundwork for future revivals. Most influentially, Rich’s production foregrounded spectacle. Sketches from the promptbook show highly formal compositions for the lists and deposition scenes, supporting Davies’ assertion that “the ancient ceremony which belonged to the single combat was very accurately observed.” 7 This tendency toward spectacle and historical accuracy would continue into the next century.
    The first major production of the nineteenth century was an adaptation by Richard Wroughton conceived as a star vehicle for Edmund Kean, performed at Drury Lane in 1814–15, and which later served as the basis for the first North American production of the play in 1819. 8 Kean’s performance, predictably, was the center of attention, and William Hazlitt notes the general consensus that “Ithas been supposed that this is his finest part,” though he goes on to give his personal opinion that this is “a total misrepresentation.” 9 A natural successor to Theobald’s adaptation, Wroughton aimed for similar sentimental and pathetic effect, but chose to do so through increased focus on Richard himself; thus, where Theobald had expanded the Aumerle conspiracy, here it is cut altogether. In editing his play, Wroughton “makes his hero more decisive, less prone to lament his condition, less culpable and less pettily vicious.” 10 Isabella is again present in the final scene, and her death concludes the action, with King Lear’s dying speeches transferred to her lips.
    The success of Kean’s production established the play’s potential as a star vehicle, and the move toward pathos and spectacle additionally served to distance it from the troubling political appropriations of previous centuries. The stage was set for a full-blown Victorian spectacular, which Kean’s son Charles provided in 1857 at London’s Princess’s Theatre. Theodor Fontane’s description of one moment shows the production’s scale:
    Between the third and fourth acts is an interlude devised by Kean: Bolingbroke is treated like a god as he enters London. Behind him is Richard, greeted by the people first with silence, then with muttering and curses … the representation (for good or ill) is a masterpiece. It is no exaggeration to say that the whole effect is that of a part of a street brought onstage, with the genuine London life and bustle. 11
    Kean’s interest in antiquarianism and full-scale reproduction led to jokes that even the playbills were printed on “fly-leaves from old folio editions of the History of England.” 12 In 1902, Herbert Beerbohm Tree followed in Kean’s footsteps with the inclusion of a triumphant entry into London for Richard on a real horse.
    Following Kean, the play fell again into obscurity until Frank Benson’s revival in 1896 for the Stratford-upon-Avon festival. While the sets of Benson’s production followed in the grand tradition of the Victorian spectacular, the production was more notable for remaking Richard II himself as a star part:

    1. Charles Kean’s large-scale antiquarian production at the London Princess’s Theatre, 1857.
    Mr Benson’s Richard is a figure