"Oh, king, eh, very nice. And 'ow'd you get that, eh? By exploiting the workers! By hangin' on to outdated imperialist dogma which perpetuates the economic and social differences in our society."
I've not seen the film, and I don't know how fair the criticisms are, yet it does feel like there is an unexplored irony in making the crux of the film a battle against authority, while also trying to rehabilitate an absolute monarch. Are authority figures to be distrusted or lionised?
True, and I'm just guessing here at the tenor of the film. All the same, if he probably wasn't as comically villainous as Shakespeare had him, he was still a bad king by the standards of his day. Because he lost.
I haven't seen the film, and I don't know any of the details of the relationship between Langley and the University of Leicester. But this is a quote from the article:
> It was rumoured Richard might have been buried in an area that was now New Street car park but Langley felt strongly drawn to a private car park on the other side of the road. When there Langley felt, according to her book, "a strange sensation. My heart was pounding and my mouth was dry – it was a feeling of raw excitement tinged with fear… I knew in my innermost being that Richard's body lay here. Moreover, I was certain that I was standing right on top of his grave." She returned a year later to confirm that she hadn't simply imagined the sensation. She again felt goosebumps and, looking down, she now noticed a white "R" on the tarmac. It stood for "Reserved" rather than "Richard" but for Langley, “it told me all I needed to know”. However she also knew that a gut feeling wouldn't persuade archaeologists so she continued researching and, over a number of years, assembled a dossier of evidence supporting her instinct that the king was buried under the car park.
If I were an academic, I'd be extremely skeptical as well if that were the original description of the rationale for the exploration, even if additional evidence came along.
Watched the show long ago, and while that was incredibly hokey, the rest of the show seemed OK. They had documentation that graves were in that spot and so on, but yeah, that one scene seemed to make it a bit disreputable.
11 comments
[ 2.2 ms ] story [ 39.8 ms ] threadhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2c-X8HiBng
I think those in question would say that they are trying to develop a more accurate understanding of the person and their historical context.
Not everything is about morality.
Nice user name, by the way!
> It was rumoured Richard might have been buried in an area that was now New Street car park but Langley felt strongly drawn to a private car park on the other side of the road. When there Langley felt, according to her book, "a strange sensation. My heart was pounding and my mouth was dry – it was a feeling of raw excitement tinged with fear… I knew in my innermost being that Richard's body lay here. Moreover, I was certain that I was standing right on top of his grave." She returned a year later to confirm that she hadn't simply imagined the sensation. She again felt goosebumps and, looking down, she now noticed a white "R" on the tarmac. It stood for "Reserved" rather than "Richard" but for Langley, “it told me all I needed to know”. However she also knew that a gut feeling wouldn't persuade archaeologists so she continued researching and, over a number of years, assembled a dossier of evidence supporting her instinct that the king was buried under the car park.
If I were an academic, I'd be extremely skeptical as well if that were the original description of the rationale for the exploration, even if additional evidence came along.
Is this a thing in UK ? Never heard about it in EU (to paint a parking place with R for reserved).
Sometimes rated as the best detective fiction novel ever.
Available as out of copyright in Canada at least.