In everyday life, people are faced with thought provoking questions regarding the legitimacy of their observations. For some, it can be mind blowing metaphysical questions, for example, is what people observe actually present and real. Then for others, it can be minor issues like whether or not a certain person is who they say they are or if their appearance matches their personality. Nonetheless, appearances can be deceiving. Often time creating illegitimate realities that can influence people’s decisions and perception. William Shakespeare demonstrates this issue in the historical play, Henry IV part 1. Through his primary characters, Shakespeare demonstrates how the first impressions of people can be misleading. He also suggests that certain …show more content…
When Shakespeare first introduces Falstaff, he characterizes him as a fat-witted, round old lazy man who spends most of his time at the Tavern drinking and eating while spending the day napping. Though technically a knight, Falstaff does not demonstrate the chivalry and honorability of a true knight. For instance, He enjoys being a thief, stealing money for a living and getting entertainment out of it. All these traits portray Falstaff as a lazy old man who cares more about the pleasures of life than the necessities of courtesy and honor. Falstaff’s close friend Hal, the Prince of Wales, is like a son to him. Acting like his godfather, he occasionally gives advice to the young prince and speaks with him as if they have a tight relationship. Though they constantly poke fun at each other, Falstaff is very loyal to his best friend. He hides the identity of Hal by proclaiming “An old / lord of the council rated me the other day in the / street about you sir, but I marked him not; and yet / he talked wisely, but I regarded him not” (1.2. 189-194). Falstaff watches out for Hal and he manages to keep the business of the prince discreet for the time being. Further on in the play, Falstaff is appointed the leader of a small group of warriors and before the the clash of the rebel army and the king’s army, he has a soliloquy revealing his thoughts about honor. It is …show more content…
The first impressions of Hotspur is portrayed when he is recognized by Henry IV as a model son that he envies. When Hotspur’s outstanding courage is combined with the numerous wars he has won, he becomes the princely figure that Henry IV hopes his son, Hal, will aspire to be. Later it is noted that with all this praise as a bold, courageous warrior who laughs at the face of danger, comes a quick tempered man who can get unnecessarily angry at the frivolous things in life. While respiting after a battle, Hotspur gets word from a inappropriately extravagant messenger that the king demands he hand over the prisoners he had captured. Hotspur refuses the messenger and pathetically defends himself by saying “He should or he should not; for he made me mad / To see him shine so brisk and smell so sweet / and talk so like a waiting-gentlewoman / Of guns and drums and wounds, - God save the mark-” (1.3. 378-381)! Hotspur overreacts when he sees this messenger dressed spiffly. His temper gets the better of him, and so he stubbornly refuses to give up the prisoners. Furthermore, in the scene where Lady Percy tries to figure out the problems she notices in her husband, Hotspur demonstrates another aspect of his character that differs from his former recognition of a model son. He is unsympathetic and inconsiderate towards
According to F. Scott Fitzgerald, "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." Indeed, very few people have this quality, the playwright William Shakespeare being one of them. In many of his plays, "Henry IV, Part One" among them, Shakespeare juxtaposes different worldviews, ideologies, and even environments. His characters usually provide a clear example of a split among them in one of many perspectives. One of his characters in "Henry IV"Falstaffis first seen as an endearing, uproariously funny scoundrel and later reveals himself more of a lowlife with his view of honorhe seems
"What is honor?" That question is one of the central themes from Shakespeare 's Henry IV. Throughout the play Shakespeare provides many different views of honor, but never directly states what honor is. Which makes sense because honor is a rather abstract concept that seems to vary depending on who states their opinion. There are some universal ideas of honorable deeds but the word itself is rarely defined by individuals. Two of the characters within the play have very different ideas of honor and vary greatly in their desire for it. They are Hotspur and Falstaff, Hotspur appears to have a very clear idea of what honor is and he pursues honor with great fervor. However, Falstaff questions the very existence of honor and has little to no desire for it. The ideas of Falstaff and Hotspur about honor are vastly different.
Hal, assuming that it is about his interactions at the Tavern, because royalty usually does not “hang out” with common folk, is hesitant to go. Falstaff then sets a mock rehearsal to prepare Hal for his meet up. When the mock audition nears an end the immersion is broken as Falstaff question if he and Hal would still be friends and not banish him from his presence, Hal speaks “I do. I will.” the importance of this, is that when Hal is declared king, he will no longer be friends with Falstaff. He will terminate any friendship that does not seem fit with the courts. This scene is a key point which shows that Hal is not just Hal, but a Prince, who is conscious of his actions and mistakes; he knows fully well the responsibility and power which he has over the country. A boy who is changing to a man, a leader of men, and this will become more apparent as the play continues
Act one, scene one, stresses the motif of honor in war, in characters, and, most importantly, in offspring. However, while Henry sees “riot and dishonor” in his son, Hal sees a father who has stolen his title by disgracing a king (1.1.84). Shakespeare wouldn’t dream of imposing his personal beliefs of who is honorable or who is dishonorable for the simple fact that it is obvious honor is perceived differently by each individual, as in each character’s perception and the imagery that surrounds that character. As Hal tries to discover the true meaning of honor, readers take the journey along with him. Hal realizes that honor is ambiguous when utilized to plead for emotional retort, yet leaves no margin for error when used as personal description,
Hotspur's is decidedly not political or diplomatic in his orientation. Quite to the contrary, he is a figure unafraid to express anger, resentment and hostility toward the King. As he does so, he speaks with the tongue of a warrior, impassioned by his sense of honor and resistant to any calming reason. He speaks sarcastically and derisively with his own father for being reluctant to turn his back on Henry IV. Particularly because the Duke of Northumberland and his son had been so critical to helping Henry
The question that Shakespeare raises throughout the series of Henry IV, Part I, Henry IV, Part II, and Henry V is that of whether Prince Hal (eventually King Henry V), is a true manifestation of an ideal ruler, and whether he is a rightful heir to his father’s ill-begotten throne. England is without a true king, being run by a ruler without the right of divine providence on his side– altogether, a very difficult situation for a young, inexperienced, and slightly delinquent Prince to take on. The task of proving himself a reliable Prince and a concerned ruler is of utmost importance to Hal, as he does not enjoy the mantle of divine right– perhaps by being an excellent ruler, Hal can make up for the
Falstaff’s soliloquy questioning the value of honour is an ironic contrast with how Hotspur and Hal regard honour. By now the contrast between their highly ordered morality and Falstaff’s own moral disorder is obvious. Falstaff’s inclusion at this point, when Hal has left his side and moved on, is necessary to point out the differing morality between the two, which was once so similar. Falstaff is of paramount importance to the sub-plot dealing with Hal’s decision between continuing his carefree lifestyle or maturing into the role he is destined to play as a respected prince and later king. This soliloquy continues the theme of another of Falstaff’s in Act 4 Scene 2, in which he is equally undisturbed by his amorality, and shows that his highest concern is for his own well being.
In Henry IV, Part One Shakespeare revels in the opportunity to suggest the idiosyncracy of character through his command of a wide range of both verse and prose. As a result the play is full of rich and different character parts (Wells 141). Two in particular, Falstaff and Hotspur, hold diverse beliefs concerning the main theme of the drama, honor. In Shakespeare’s time, honor was defined as the special virtues which distinguish those of the nobility in the exercise of their vocation–gallantry in combat with a worthy foe, adherence to the accepted code of arms, and individual loyalty to friends, family, and comrades in arms (Prior 14). Throughout the play, honor plays an important role in
The relationship between Hal and Falstaff, however, is perplexing. Hal is either using Falstaff to serve his ends and when he does not need him anymore he totally discards him or he truly loves the man but lost all hope in reforming him. Prince Hal used to put up with Falstaff, covering him, paying his bills and tolerating his lies, but if this is the price that
Prince Hal’s destiny is shaped for him by many forces: his association with the ne'er-do-well Falstaff, the expectations of his father, King Henry IV, and the constant comparison between himself and Hotspur. All three of these forces create in Hal a sense of honor that is an integral part of his education as the ideal king, and throughout the action of Henry IV, Part I, Hal is gaining a knowledge of honor that will shape him into the King that he will become. However, it seems that Hal ultimately chooses one form on honor over the other, although he must compare the honor of Falstaff and the conceptual honor of a chivalric hero before he comes to a final conclusion.
In I Henry IV and II Henry IV, William Shakespeare brings together drama and comedy to create two of the most compelling history plays ever written. Many of Shakespeare's other works are nearly absolute in their adherence to either the comic or tragic traditions, but in the two Henry IV plays Shakespeare combines comedy and drama in ways that seem to bring a certain realism to his characters, and thus the plays. The present essay is an examination of the various and significant effects that Shakespeare's comedic scenes have on I Henry IV and II Henry IV. The Diversity of Society
Although King Henry and Falstaff are extremely different characters, both do act as father figures in Hal’s life with Falstaff as a surrogate father and King Henry as Hal’s birth father. With King Henry, this fatherly relationship emerges as one of blindly scolding and ordering around his son, an example being when the King criticizes Hal’s friends, “rude society” (3.2.14). The relationship with Hal and his surrogate father, Falstaff, though is much more relaxed with Falstaff teasing Hal, by touching on Hal’s slight insecurity of taking care of his princely duties, calling Hal “true prince” (2.4.106). Although both these relationships are very different in how relaxed they are, there is a similarity of King Henry and Falstaff acting as fatherly figures in Hal’s life.
"Why, Harry, do I tell thee of my foes, / Which are my nearest and dearest enemy? / Thou that art like enough, through vassal fear, / Base inclination, and the start of the spleen, / To fight against me under Percy's pay, / to dog his hells, and curtys at his frowns, / To show how much thou art degenerate." (Henry, III, ii, 127-133).
Henry V is a wise and loyal king, changing from a wild youth to a mature king. He is described to be an intelligent, thoughtful and an efficient statesman. He thinks carefully whether to invade France or not which represents his responsible character. King Henry gives a very strong speech which gave courage and confidence to his army that they could win the battle. This character describes him to be a king of great ability to fight and having good administrative skills. Throughout the play Henry’s nature is religious, merciful and compassionate.
Throughout history there has been a general understanding that appearances can be deceiving. A person may go through life without anyone understanding the true reality of their character. William Shakespeare, one of the greatest writers of all time, understood the relationship between appearance and reality and often gave characters two sides to their personality.