Shakespeare's Richard III describes the unscrupulous rise to power and subsequent brief reign of Richard III of England. Through all of his works, Richard is becoming known as the perfect villain due to the way he rose to power. We know that Richard is obviously a villain by the way he single-handedly orchestrates all the chaos and violence throughout the show. However, Richard III makes readers reevaluate the meaning of what a hero truly is. As evil as he is, there is no doubt that he is the protagonist of the work. He is motivated by self-interest, and the plot of the play ultimately develops around his battle to become king and remain in power over the people. The reader delves deeper into his character and almost develops a false sense of sympathy for the jealousy and pain he has endured, blatantly ignoring the fact that he is a murderer. On the other hand, he can be seen in some respects as the hero of the work. As crazy as he may be, Richard shares some noble qualities that heroes have. During his rise to power, he showed perseverance and courage in a way he never thought possible. The Oxford English Dictionary defines a villain as "a character whose evil actions or motivations are important to the plot." By this definition, making the argument for why he is the villain of the play is quite simple. It's clear that Richard will stop at nothing to achieve his ultimate goal, whether it be betraying his own flesh and blood or killing someone to rise to power. As he speaks to his brother Clarence, who is in prison, he says, “Well, your imprisonment will not be long; I will or I will lie for you. (RIII 1.1.10) Richard is as cunning as he is intriguing. While... middle of paper... Richard makes a series of costly choices. The most obvious mistake he makes throughout the show is his childish persistence in "proving himself as a villain". He tries so hard to prove the latter; in turn it does the opposite. This tragic flaw ultimately brings to light his greatest mistake in the entire play. There are very considerable arguments on both sides as to whether Richard is the play's most obvious villain or the unsung tragic hero. Putting them together, I feel that although he meets all of Aristotle's requirements to be called the tragic hero, the argument that he is the villain is much more convincing. Richard's display of malevolence and manipulation is enough to prove his intentions. Being classified as a tragic hero would give readers a false sense of his character and would be a complete misrepresentation of how Shakespeare depicted him as such..