I believe there Is a purpose in lady Anne's curses in act¹ scene 2 basically line 15 onwards
but can't seem to figure it out can someone verify.
Also in general throughout the play it is evident that the form / method of cursing is used by women. What does this
Demonstrate ( is it worth exploring this idea for essays and analysis?)
The curses are dramatic irony. Lady Anne curses any woman who would be the wife of Richard on countless times, and after the scene she ends up marrying Richard and ironically her curses inflict herself as she prophesized.
Women in Richard III have no agency over court politics or any situation but they are able to accurately predict the future; their prophecies come true. This is part of the dramatic irony as Shakespeare's context were highly religious, and so curses would be taken with full extremity. This also ties back into Richard as his cavalier and dismissive attitude towards Queen Margaret's curses as well as Anne's exemplifies his inhumanity which ties back into the "Tudor Myth" in which Richard is being portrayed as more of a demonic character, "Son of hell" - Queen Margaret, through subtle features such as his ignorance (there might be a better word) to providentialism and explicit events such as his murder of his two nephews. There's so much to analyse but I'm getting off track here.
Women were marginalised in Shakespeare's context and so they had no means of direct power or authority, and so their self-worth/value was derived from their husband and so the only things they were able to do is enact curses upon others. The irony is that the individuals in power, (Hastings, Clarence, Edward), were oblivious to Richard's scheming but the individuals with no power, (the women [Queen Elizabeth, Anne, Margaret. Duchess of York], citizens etc) fully knew Richard's villany but could not do anything.
These are just my thoughts from the top off my head, there's plethora of examples that can be used to back this up as the curses/prophecies are a strong component to Richard III, and you can talk about how such an important/vital theme is omitted in Looking For Richard as a dissonance and further how LFR as a reimagination is still able to produce meaning even without such an element.
