Religion and Ethics Forum

General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Rhiannon on May 08, 2017, 03:27:37 PM

Title: Richard III Society want Richard III banned.
Post by: Rhiannon on May 08, 2017, 03:27:37 PM
So does Phillipa Langley.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/08/richard-iii-staging-in-leicester-cathedral-condemned
Title: Re: Richard 111 Society want Richard 111 banned.
Post by: Harrowby Hall on May 09, 2017, 11:50:43 AM
Quote from: Rhiannon on May 08, 2017, 03:27:37 PM
So does Phillipa Langley.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/08/richard-iii-staging-in-leicester-cathedral-condemned

Twenty first century bowdlerisation!
Title: Re: Richard 111 Society want Richard 111 banned.
Post by: Nearly Sane on May 09, 2017, 11:56:36 AM
The loons go in for some Richard the Third polishing
Title: Re: Richard 111 Society want Richard 111 banned.
Post by: jeremyp on May 09, 2017, 07:34:46 PM
Off topic but:

Who is Richard the hundred and eleventh?

Roman numerals use the letter "I" not the digit "1". For some reason, the title of this thread really winds me up because of that minor mistake.
Title: Re: Richard III Society want Richard III banned.
Post by: Rhiannon on May 09, 2017, 07:36:40 PM
You're quite right, Jeremy, I knew it didn't look right when I typed it and couldn't think why. Rectified so you no longer feel wound.
Title: Re: Richard 111 Society want Richard 111 banned.
Post by: jeremyp on May 09, 2017, 07:40:04 PM
On topic:

The play Richard the Third is widely regarded to be libellous. However the man himself is dead and nobody takes it seriously as history. So what is the problem?

My trouble with the play is that whenever anybody mentions it, I immediately think of Richard Dreyfuss's portrayal of the lead character as an outrageously camp homosexual in Goodbye Girl.
Title: Re: Richard III Society want Richard III banned.
Post by: jeremyp on May 09, 2017, 07:41:16 PM
Quote from: Rhiannon on May 09, 2017, 07:36:40 PM
You're quite right, Jeremy, I knew it didn't look right when I typed it and couldn't think why. Rectified so you no longer feel wound.
Thank you.

The World is in balance again. Maybe I'm as bit OCD.
Title: Re: Richard 111 Society want Richard 111 banned.
Post by: SqueakyVoice on May 09, 2017, 10:29:04 PM
Quote from: jeremyp on May 09, 2017, 07:34:46 PM
Off topic but:

Who is Richard the hundred and eleventh?
Richard Nelson.
Title: Re: Richard III Society want Richard III banned.
Post by: Rhiannon on May 10, 2017, 08:31:55 AM
Quote from: jeremyp on May 09, 2017, 07:40:04 PM
On topic:

The play Richard the Third is widely regarded to be libellous. However the man himself is dead and nobody takes it seriously as history. So what is the problem?



There's no doubt that the play's a caricature, but the recent discovery of Richard's body has shown that he did have scoliosis - revisionists have held for years that he didn't. Maybe there is a grain of truth in there? Few historians take seriously the idea that Henry VII executed the princes in the tower and most hold that Richard was responsible, from what I have read. We'll never know for sure of course.

The documentary 'The King in the Car Park' was striking not just for the amazing discovery made, but for the personality of Philippa Langley. There was something oddly touching about her devotion but she seems to have the same proprietorial attitude over Richard that a spouse would have.
Title: Re: Richard III Society want Richard III banned.
Post by: Humph Warden Bennett on May 12, 2017, 03:56:13 PM
This is every bit as silly as pretty students protesting about a performance of "Aida".