The father and son relationship is one of the most important aspects through the youth of a young man. In Shakespeare’s play Henry IV, he portrays the concept of having "two fathers". King Henry is Hal’s natural father, and Falstaff is Hal’s moral father. Hal must weigh the pros and cons of each father to decide which model he will emulate. Falstaff, who is actually Hal’s close friend, attempts to pull Hal into the life of crime, but he refuses. Hal seems to lack honor at the commencement of the play, but near the end we see him display a different kind true honor which will be explained more in depth. Hal also shows his honor when he rejects the requests put forth by his good friend Falstaff and sides with his natural father to fight loyally. Even though Henry views Hal as an unworthy candidate for the thrown, Hal proves him wrong by displaying attributes that are very honorable. In King Henry’s point of view, Hal doesn’t seem much like an heir to his thorwn. Instead of living at the court to aid his father govern England, he frolics in the Taverns of Eastcheap with a group of petty thieves. There are two different views that the audience can perceive as to why Hal constantly goes to the Tavern. Firstly, it might be so that he can escape his responsibilities. Second, it could be so that Hal can learn the lives of the people that he will eventually be governing. Depending on which one you believe, it will show your own decision as to whether you conceive Hal as being responsible and honorable or vice versa. Falstaff who seems to be Hal’s role model while in the Tavern, is putting forth a great deal of effort to have Hal conform into the lowlife that he himself has made himself out to be. Falstaff teaches Hal how to lie, cheat, and steal, but Hal seems to have a mind of his own. He tells his father that at any given moment he can change his character and be what his father wants him to be. Henry declines to believe these statements. Before the final battle Falstaff asks for Hal’s protection. Hal’s response is, "Say thy prayers, and farewell. Why, thou owest God a death"(5.1.124-126). This statement gives the impression that Hal has had a change of heart. In Act 5.2, Hal shows a different kind of honor when he attempts to take away all of Hotspur’s honor. Hal isn’t as interested in gaining honor for its own sake as he is in forcing Hotspur to render up all of his. This scene displays how Hal is honorable for himself and for himself only.
Hotspur is displayed as a valiant soldier. He is not afraid of a fight and is the one who initiated a battle with Hal. Shakespeare writes, “Nor shall it, Harry, for the hour is come/ To end the one of us; and would to God/ Thy name in arms were now as great as mine!” (Shakespeare, 5.4.67-69). Hotspurs is not afraid to die in this battle, and knows that there is a chance he will
the first of his six marriages. Henry was a good looking man and was an
While Hal does not always hold honor in such a high esteem - as seen in The First Part of the King Henry the Fourth - he understands the role of honor in his life. In Henry IV, Prince Hal is ridiculed because his private life is less honorable than it should be, which affects how people view him publicly. However, in Act 3, Scene 2 of Henry IV, Part 1, Hal recognises that he cannot continue to neglect his position as prince, he promises his father that he will change, and it is evident that Prince Hal is able to control his behavior for the public. Therefore, it is not too surprising that in Henry V, King Hal shows different private and public behaviors. In Act IV, Scene 1 of Henry V, Hal is privately disdainful and wary of the honor or “ceremony”
He is happy being a drunkard and someone who indulges what he wants. But he also realizes that it is not the type of life that a prince, or a king, should associate himself with, which leads him to his pleading—another reason the scene is prophetic. He pleads with Henry about his morality, much like he will do later in the play and in Henry IV: Part II. Though the play extempore is supposed to prepare Henry for his encounter with his father. Falstaff realizes it may be a good time to practice the inevitable encounter that he will have with Hal once he becomes king. This argument can be further developed when one realizes that it was Falstaff that called for the play extempore, not Hal. Falstaff knew he wanted a trial run before Hal’s kingship, so he gave himself one. However, Hal’s only reaction to Falstaff’s final speech is his line, “I do, I will” (2.4. 465). Some may take this as his answer to Falstaff that he will pardon him, and continue to be his friend. But the argument could be made that Hal is saying that line more to himself than to Falstaff. He is saying that he will do what’s necessary to be a good king. That he does have what it takes to leave a life he enjoys for a life of
In Act 1, Scene 2, Hal and Falstaff are dinking at the bar. We get the
.... In response and gratitude to Hal’s materialized promise, King Henry refers to his power as "our power" (V.v, 34). And where is the courtier of the "Golden Mean"? Dead. And it certainly was not a noble death. There’s no better way to shame a person than to totally uproot their confidence. By the end of the play, Hotspur is not honorable, even in his own terms.
One of the great issues of Henry IV, Part I is summed up, but hardly concluded, by Sir John Falstaff at the end of the first scene in Act V. Falstaff, fearful of the coming battle, has just asked the prince to find him on the battlefield, to which Prince Henry replies, “Why, thou owest God a death” (V.i.126). Falstaff takes this opportunity to expound on the nature of honor. He repeatedly wonders what honor is good for: It doesn’t bandage wounds or perform as a surgery; it means nothing to a dead man. This runs contrary to Hotspur’s views on the matter, as the young man esteems honor as a virtue, and something to be earned on a battlefield or retained in the face of insult (perceived, implied, or otherwise). Furthermore, at the end of the second scene of the play, Prince Henry reflects on the façade he makes of his behavior to hide his intentions: He intends to become a great and honorable ruler, and surprise everyone by being so.
The father/son relationship is a significant theme in this play, alongside Prince Hal’s other relationships with important male figures such as Hotspur and Falstaff. Falstaff is one of the favorites of this play, rather obvious that he is the brunt of a multitude of jokes; somehow maintains certain poise. On the other hand, we have Hotspur, a talented and brave young man the King wishes were his son: “That some night-tripping fairy had exchanged/ In cradle-clothes our children where they lay/ And called mine “Percy,” his “Plantagenet”!/ Then would I have his Harry, and he mine” (1.1.86-89). Both Hotspur and Hal are the intended future leaders of their country, but Hal doesn’t seem to understand his role in its entirety (at least his actions haven’t proven his maturity to the likes of King Henry IV). The King would prefer Hal act in a more appropriate manner when...
Hal’s remark to his father indicates a now strong, independent mind, predicting that Douglas and Hotspur will not accept Henry’s offer because of their love for fighting. Henry’s reply in turn indicates a change in attitude towards his son, a newfound respect. Acknowledging Hal’s prediction, the king orders preparations to begin, and we see he has his own set of solid moral values: knowing that their ‘cause is just’ helps him to reconcile with his highly honourable conscience that there is indeed cause for war. Still maintained is the conflict between the very format of the text, with Hal and Henry’s conversation held in formal verse typical of the court world, in which Hal is now firmly embedded. Falstaff, however, sustains his equally typical prose speech, which indicates to the audience the enduring division between the court and tavern worlds.
During the Wars of Roses, a European royal house of Welsh origins rose to power, a dynasty, which rules England for the next one-hundred and eighteen years. The powerful and most well known dynasty is the House of Tudor. Henry VII became king in 1485 and took Elizabeth of York as his wife. T They had four children: Prince Arthur of Wales, Margaret Tudor, Henry VIII, and Mary Tudor (2).
A major reason why these character parallels do not perfectly hold up is because of the marvelous character of Falstaff. Absent from Richard II, Falstaff is introduced in Henry IV to create intricacy and ambiguity regarding likenesses among these characters. Falstaff significantly complicates the Hotspur-is-to-Bolingbrook-as-Hal-is-to-Richard II assumption because Falstaff has so much in common with the King. Therefore, as opposed to Hotspur's becoming the Bolingbrook persona, it is the drunken and disorderly Falstaff who becomes the character most parallel to the King. However, the King associates himself with Hotspur, who, as his name suggests, is a relentless warrior. The King puts forth a sense that Hotspur will act as Bolingbrook did in Richard II, by challenging the Prince's right to the throne; he feels that Bolingbrook's rivalry with Richard is reflected in Hotspur's position as Hal's challenger.
In the second scene in the play, when he made his first appearance, you can tell what kind of a leader Henry V was. It showed that he was tough and and a clever leader, “ We must not only arm ourselves to invade France, but must also apportion troops to defend against invasion by the Scots, who will see this as a perfect opportunity to attack.” (1.2.159-162). This quote shows that he a fearless leader who will lead his people and stop at nothing until he gets what needs to be done finished. Hal was a character that the audience knew he was going to live and was going to be inspirational.
In Henry IV parts I and II we see Falstaff as the romantic character that is stated in the definition above, defying everything that the Classical character, Prince Hal, stands for and believes.. He refuses to take life seriously. He believes that "War is as much of a joke to him as a drinking bout at the Boar's Head." He uses people solely for his own purposes, either for money or for food and drink. He is rude and crude to all those around him and is one of the best liars who continually gets caught in his lies but makes new ones to cover for the old failed ones. Yet Baker states that, "His presence of mind and quickness of retort are always superb; his impudence is almost sublime. Yet the man thus corrupt, thus despicable, makes himself necessary to the prince that despises him, by the most pleasing of all qualities, perpetual gaiety. Falstaff creates around his capacious bulk a sort of Utopia which frees us temporarily from the worries and troubles of the actual world. What does it matter that Falstaff ridicules chivalry, honor, truth-telling, and bravery in battle? He is not to be taken seriously...he is a wholly comic character."
At first, Hal plays himself and Falstaff plays Henry. In this interpretation of the conversation, Falstaff is making jokes as well as complimenting himself, as he believes the King should. However, when the roles are reversed and Hal is playing the King and Falstaff is playing Hal, the interaction between the two becomes much more hostile. Hal, in quick succession, insults Falstaff without break. He refers to him as an old fat man, who resembles a devil. Hal relates him to animals, a sack of diseases, a drunk, and a bag full of guts. Hal claims that Falstaff is a man who is villainous and is worthy of nothing (2.4.397-409). After all of these insults, Falstaff, who is, arguably, still acting as Hal, defends himself. He claims that while it is true, he is in fact old, that is no reason for him to be seen as lesser. He says that if “sack and sugar be a fault, God help the wicked” and claims that being old and merry is to be hated, which Falstaff believes is wrong (2.4.416-428). He defends himself from the other insults that Hal has put on him. This interaction between the two further illustrates the hostile relationship between Hal and Falstaff. Falstaff’s attempt to dispel the criticisms that Hal has of Falstaff illustrates for readers that there is more to Falstaff than a comedic aspect. Falstaff is aware how people perceive him as he brings up his age in many of his conversations and makes jokes about himself drinking sac constantly. This scene in particular is open to multiple interpretations and many suggest that this interaction is a friendly one and the criticisms are all in good fun but the power dynamic between the two makes it impossible for them be on truly equal grounds. This power dynamic is taken further when Hal takes on the role of the king. By taking on the role of the king and insulting Falstaff, there is an even
What is this that assures us of the central goodness of Falstaff and Puck? Their sneakiness, vagrancy and hypocrisy are pardonable, in part, because of the speeches they make on their own behalves. They both swear to be nothing more than fun-loving free spirits, Falstaff in his famous tavern speech [II.iv.464ff] and Robin in his winking final monologue at the close of Act V. Falstaff reveals himself as merely an aging overweight drunkard, essentially harmless, who would be greatly hurt to find himself cast out of Hal's life. Robin instructs us to think of him only as a figment of our collective imagination, politely asks our applause, and requests that we refrain from reprehension of him and his roguish company. No true villain in history has begged forgiveness for his own villainy.