Shakespeare’s approach to
the role of power can be considered as a guide in order to understand the role
of politics and the relations with the authority. His description of the kings
and their relationships with the kingship and citizens and the way action is
developed can be very useful nowadays as, in many aspects, the role of power he
described.
For example, if we consider
the character of Henry V: an ambitious leader who envies the possessions of his
rival (France) and makes an offer for them. This offer is not accepted but, with
the help of the kingship, separating the indecisive and with courage and a new
technology (the arch) he manages to win the battle.
In this sense, we can learn
the lesson and apply this practice nowadays not only to face the challenges but
also to look for possible solutions and therefore to open new horizons.
Henry V is considered as an
example of how a young person gets into the power and manages to overcome the
difficulties he finds. A very good example of the importance of language is the
way Henry V speaks to his soldiers when they are about to fight against the
French. He speaks not only about winning the French, but also about England and
God and this is how he motivates his troops in the Battle of Hafleur during the
third act. The use of language to make things look real is one of the skills a
good ruler must have, this means transmitting the passion and speaking to the
people spreading a message. But the play is not only about the language of
persuasion: before the battle, the king ordered to kill three noble kinsmen
accused of treason which can be interpreted as the importance of making
decisions in an uncertain moment.
Another thing we learn from
Shakespeare is that in almost all the history plays, the representation of power
is based on ceremony and it becomes clear the relationship between the image of
power and the power of image or how power is represented.
Finally the author also
brings to light the theory of the two existing bodies of the king. On the one
hand the king is a man, a human body which can suffer illnesses and that gets
old and dies. On the other hand, the political body is an invisible body
established to rule the people but the symbols and the ceremony that surround it
becomes a whole, the visual representation of his power. There is a perfect
example when Richard II has to give Bolingbroke all his belongings and a
traumatic separation between the political body and the physical body is
produced which will lead Richard to the total loss of his mental and physical
power.
We can interpret from the
way Shakespeare wrote the plays that getting and keeping power is something
inherent to man and in some ways this concept remains pure even in a modernized
concept of leadership.
http://www.elmundo.es/1998/07/14/opinion/14N0017.html
http://www.clarin.com/suplementos/economico/1999/06/27/o-01801e.htm
http://www.clarin.com/suplementos/economico/1999/06/27/o-01801e.htm
Visited: 15 January 2009