Henry IV
Sinopsis:
Returning to Falstaff et. al., they rob the king's transport then Poins and Hal
rob them and Falstaff et. al. flee. At the pub, Falstaff makes up extravagant
lies about the robbery. Hal rebukes him, proving Falstaff false. In jest, the
two pretend to be King Henry IV and Hal and Hal (as Henry IV) tells Falstaff (as
Hal) that the man Falstaff is a thief and Hal promises to banish him for his
crimes. Moving to the revolt, Mortimer, Worcester, and Hotspur plan the revolt,
overseen by Glendower. Oddly, Mortimer speaks no Welsh and his wife speaks no
English, so her father interprets for them. Back to Henry IV, he criticizes
Henry V for this deeds and associations. Henry IV tells Henry V that Hotspur is
more deserving of the crown than Henry V, whereby Henry V vows to prove himself
by killing Hotspur in battle. Back at the tavern we learn that Hal repaid the
travelers from whom the money was stolen, and that Hal has arranged for Falstaff
to lead some forces in the king's army.
Hotspur's father (Northumberland) becomes sick, greatly weakening the revolting
forces since his men cannot attend the battle. This news, and Prince Hal's
newfound leadership, and a report that Glendower will arrive late disheartens
Hotspur, yet he overcomes these setbacks with renewed vigor. Falstaff, as
military leader, hires very poor and unfit soldiers. Prince Hal and the Earl of
Westmoreland observe this, but do nothing. Hotspur wishes to fight the first
battle at nighttime, but delays after Sir Walter Blunt brings kind greetings
from the king. Worcester meets the king the next morning, but no agreement is
made, though the king offers to pardon all the revolters. Worcester, however,
lies to Hotspur and tells him the king readies for battle, since Worcester does
not believe Henry IV will pardon them and doesn't want Hotspur to back off. In
battle, Archibald, the Earl of Douglas (Percies' side) kills Blunt, thinking
Blunt is Henry IV due to a disguise. Henry V then rescues Henry IV from Douglas'
sword. Falstaff and Douglas fight and Falstaff pretends to die. Henry V and
Hotspur fight and Henry V kills Hotspur. Falstaff arises and stabs Hotspur in
the leg, then claims to have killed him. Henry IV wins the battle (of Shrewsbury)
and executes Worcester and Sir Richard Vernon, but lets Douglas go free. Henry
IV also divides his power with Henry V and Hal's brother John of Lancaster. This
is a play concerning honor, as reasoned by Falstaff.
Analysis:
This play is divided in the
first and the second part. Shakespeare conceived the play as part of a larger
group to explain the fortunes of Bolingbroke and his son. In order to achieve
this aim he gives a strong importance to the relationship between father and
son. He describes Henry IV as a strong efficient and admirable ruler but at the
same time he is described as an usurper and as a consequence he is described as
having a bitter personality; he has characteristics of a Machiavellian
character. The several wars and conflicts which disturb the kingdom and the
irresponsible prince cause the king unhappiness. He has to suffer for his sins,
both in public and private.
If we analyse the way
Shakespeare presents events and characters in these plays, for example,
analysing scene II from act III in Henry IV, we have to begin by saying that the
characters speak moving from political themes to personal matters. In the
dialogue we will see that conflict is present and also the regret of the king
about the prince’s behaviour. When the king speaks he laments his condition and
appears himself as a martyr. He considers the behaviour of his son a punishment
for his sins and accepts it because he did not act correctly in the past.
When he utters the words:
I
know not whether God will have it so,
For some displeasing service I have done,
That, in his secret doom, out of my blood
He'll breed revengement and a scourge for me;
He seems to be suffering and
repenting for his actions and through public confession he seems to regret his
past sins. But, acting according to divine instructions although failing because
he is a human being, he seems to be trying to cause pity and manipulate, through
emotions caused to the audience, the future actions of the prince.
The choice of lexical items
like doom, revengement or
scourge, are used to make the king
look as a powerful ruler but to be judged as a human being. The king will be
recognized and admired as a man and as a father who has to be forgiven for his
past sins.
Shakespeare also presents
the king in Henry IV as a monarch making him speak as such. Using an
intimidating tone, the king describes the kind of society to which the prince’s
friends belong that is rather rude. He presents this society as very different
from the society that the prince belongs to. Shakespeare makes the king appear
as a ruler who defends the order and the harmony in his kingdom.
Tell me else,
Could such inordinate and low desires,
Such poor, such bare, such lewd, such mean attempts,
Such barren pleasures, rude society,
As
thou art match'd withal and grafted to,
Accompany the greatness of thy blood
And hold their level with thy princely heart?
The reference to the
prince’s blood and heart makes us think of the humanity which he associates with
royalty and lineage. He seems to be defending and representing the family
Bolingbroke. Through this speech the king calls the prince’s attention to his
behaviour in politics and reminds him that he is heir to the throne of England.
He shows fear for the future reign of the prince. The king wants to present the
prince as somebody who has to change and prove his competence to be successful.
He is trying to persuade the
people that he is a good king and that his son is behaving wrongly and will have
to change so that he is admired by his people. When he makes reference to the
wrong behaviour of the prince he seems to be referring to Richard II as a king
who caused suffering to the country and in doing so he presents as the king who
saved the country from a bad administration.
He seems to be trying to
prevent his son from doing this. As Amanda Mabillard says “In addition, his
association with Falstaff and the others gives him a relationship to the common
people that will be vital to his reign as Henry V. The passage quoted below
foretells how successful Hal will be when he obtains the throne. The scene is no
doubt incorporated into the play for the sake of comedy, but it also shines a
light on Hal’s nature and his motivation for consorting with the likes of
Falstaff. We soon see that Hal is not simply having a good time – Hal is
politically motivated:”
So
when this loose behavior I throw off,
And pay the debt I never promised,
By
how much better than my word I am,
By
so much shall I falsify men’s hopes,
And like bright metal on a sullen ground,
My
reformation, glittering o’er my fault,
Shall show more goodly, and attract more eyes,
Than that which hath no foil to set it off.
I’ll so offend, to make offence a skill,
Redeeming time when men least think I will. (I.ii.214-223)
Throughout the play we find
the confrontation the new king, now King Harry, and his former friend friends
Falstaff. He insults them, we can see that he criticizes Falstaff’s behaviour.
Falstaff:
Amongst the devices used by
Shakespeare to present his plays as a mixture of tragedy and comedy, the
character of Sir John OldCastle, better know as
Falstaff, is one example of
the marks of comedy in the scenario of Henry IV. In the chronicles of English
History there is evidence that a man called Sir John Oldcastle existed and
fought in the French wars. The descendants complained and therefore Shakespeare
had to change his name to Falstaff. He appears in the play as a sort of a
theatrical device so that both, the world of fiction and non-fiction creates a
bound difficult to separate that will make of drama a recount of life very
similar to reality of everyday situations where comic situations follow tragic
moments and the other way round. This character, who is fictional, will help to
construct the prince’s character through the play. He represents the more human
side of the prince. Falstaff then helps on the one hand to construct the play
and on the other his role as a character will be important to shape as a complex
character who exploits the two sides of sovereignty, the human and the
institutional.
Falstaff represents in the
several plays the idea of exaggeration and insanity of the characters as well as
the inversion of reality, a world where everything is possible and excused. As
it happens in a carnival, everyone is equal. The order and hierarchy are not
taken into account. The dominant style of this situation is the
grotesque. Falstaff is big, his
dimension and amplification of his words help to contribute to the formation of
the character. He is an absurd creature and, at the same time, the fantastic
creature. He constitutes the opposition to official tone of authority and power:
his discourse challenges those of king and state. Falstaff leaves in a world
with no rule. He has a constant attitude of parody towards authority and power.
By doing so he forces the audience to see that authority and power are in a
constant confrontation between sense and non-sense.
His language is always
abusive and vulgar in clear contrast with his social position. This device of
coherence between the character and his speech works to make the character loose
his individuality on behalf of a dramatic function which is determinant in the
construction of a critical environment for the reception of the play.
The prince is aware of
Falstaff’s function and of his inexistence as a person, because there is no
space in his character for faith, truth or honesty, which are abstract entities.
He translates the abstract into the concreteness. The rejection of Falstaff in
Henry V proves that the prince has become mature and that he is ready to be a
virtuous king. The way Falstaff speaks is using images and fantastic
constructions so that the hearer can have different interpretations of his
words. His speech is very informal and colloquial. He very often insults and
uses obscenities to explain his reasons and thoughts. His speeches are always
based on eating, drinking, sex and on his relaxing attitude, sleeping, never
knowing the time and preferring the night to the day. He is the permanent
negation of discipline and order.
When he addresses the
prince, he does it in an insulting tone. He offends the king sometimes and
disrespects him. He keeps making fun of the prince through his words as man and
monarch.
You can take a look at Henry IV parallel text and compare the original text and the modern text of the play.
Sources:
Bloom, H. La invención de lo humano, Ed. Norma, 2001
[Visited 18 December 2008]
Visited: 06 December 2008
http://www.rhymezone.com/r/gwic.cgi?Word=_&Path=shakespeare/histories/1kinghenryiv/iii_ii//
Visited 09- January 2009