Neva McConnaughey

ENGL 345

Jennifer Black

September 19, 2011

He Who Laughs Last, Laughs Best

There is little dispute that one of the most surprising and possibly disappointing moments

of Shakespeares Richard III is that of Richards actual death. I wasnt alone in expecting his

slaying to be encapsulated by some immortal, final words. This lack of commentary or

description leaves much to be speculated about the ultimate swordfight or the events surrounding

it, but the agenda of such a technique is to illustrate a loss of power in every sense of the word.

Why are last words so important? Weve come to rely on them as a summation of

character, the proverbial last supper as all heroes and villains reach their deaths. In Shakespeares

play, words are as powerful as actions, if not more so. Richard may have done a lot of dirty work

himself, but it was his sweet-talking and considerable argument that led him to a crown. For

Richard to die without words means that he died without power. The only phrase to Richards

death is A horse! A horse! My kingdom for a horse!(5.7 13) He knows that he will either die or

lose his Kingdom, and perhaps both. By dying without the final word, he has lost all his personal

power over people around him, against him, and the audience.

On the surface, it feels almost insulting for the reader not to have a clear picture of

Richards demise at the conclusion of the play. Up until that point, the audience has been

involved not just as spectators but as co-conspirators. Through the use of asides, Richard actually

clues the audience in to his scheming throughout the plot, as seen in his opening soliloquy and in

the lines following his wooing of Lady Anne. Was ever woman in this humour wooed?/ Was
ever a woman in this humour won?/ Ill have her, but I will not keep her long (1.2 215-217).

Speech is what takes him to the top, but as Richards loftiness and the efficacy of his words

declines, so do his personal chats with the reader. This is an interesting parallel that acceptably

explains why Shakespeare might not have given us any description for Richards final

confrontation with Richmond. At first he gives us all the information, and then he gives us

nothing.

Moreover, there is a lamentable want for rhetoric at his death. As exemplified through his

personal interactions with characters throughout the play, Richard demonstrates an impeccable

gift of speech. His words are not just convincing, they are powerful. We know him to be the anti-

hero, but his oratory is alluring even unto the reader. To witness his death without even one

resounding word is a disappointment for the audience, who has been wooed themselves by his

introductory monologue, impossible persuasion, and ambitious battle speech. It is difficult to

grapple with, but it leaves an important note about Richards end: he wasnt given the last word.

To summon a clich, he who laughs last laughs best. In the case of this authority-hungry king,

Richmond had the final laugh, and it his victory was sweeter because of it. There is a theme of

ill-wishes for characters that do bad things here, all heavily reliant on suffering. The description

of Richards death holds no torture, and no suffering; however, his character didnt pass into the

other world scott-free. Richard didnt just die as you might believe by the simple phrase They

fight. Richard is slain(5.8). His character suffers karmic repercussions when he is denied a final

speech, proving that suffering needs no physical pain to do harm.