Political Drama in Henry IV and Henry V
The contention that Shakespeare’s histories are in fact political drama appears to fall uneasily on the ears of modern readers. One reason for this could be the fact that we, as a society, have blurred the connotation of politics to the vaguest of notions – narrow at times, yet far too inclusive. A young reader is likely to view politics as election and debate, a sort of ongoing candidacy. Indeed, this may be a valid modern definition, if somewhat limited. For our purposes, however, this definition is not sufficient to establish a starting point from which to examine Shakespeare’s presentation of political drama.
If we define politics as the acquisition and exercise of the power of the state, we can see that each play in the Great Tetralogy is inherently political. In terms of plot, the action of each play revolves around the concept of succession, the passing of political power from one king to the next. Henry IV wrests the crown from Richard II, then is forced to defend it against enemies who would in turn take it from him. Prince Hal inherits the throne from his father, becoming Henry V, then goes on to seize the throne of France for himself. At the end of Henry V, we are told that yet another Henry will be “in infant bands crowned King” (epilogue 9).
But while the histories’ plots are largely concerned with the acquisition of political power, their themes can be said to focus more on the exercise of such power. At its heart, the Great Tetralogy is a discourse on the qualities of the ideal ruler. A comparison of Richard II and Henry V, and the way each wields political power, will serve to illuminate this point. Ultimately, Henry V is an effective king bec...
... middle of paper ...
...ion, elaborate speeches with minimal stage direction. One acts; the other is only an actor.
Works Cited
Bevington, David, ed. The Complete Works of Shakespeare. 4th ed. New York: Longman-Addison Wesley Longman, 1997.
Hollister, C. Warren. The Making of England. 7th ed. A History of England. Ed. Lacey Baldwin Smith. Vol. 1. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath, 1996.
McDonald, Russ. The Bedford Companion to Shakespeare. Boston: Bedford-St. Martin’s, 1999.
Rosenblum, Joseph. A Reader’s Guide to Shakespeare. New York: Salem Press-Barnes & Noble, 1999.
Shakespeare, William. The First Part of King Henry the Fourth. Bevington 763-803.
---. The Life of King Henry the Fifth. Bevington 849-92.
---. The Second Part of King Henry the Fourth. Bevington 804-48.
---. The Tragedy of King Richard the Second. Bevington 721-62.
Socrates also brings up a key distinction between true opinion and knowledge, relating to the paradox, which will too be examined. Socrates then gives basis for more argument regarding the paradox, and why he does this will also be examined. The initial argument takes place when Socrates challenges Meno to define virtue. Meno does not realize here what he has started. Meno has before inquired whether virtue is a quality that can be taught or if it is a natural trait, that men are born with.
Plato registered the world around him as two separate realities, the visible world and the intelligible world. The essential difference in these worlds is in that the visible world is changing whereas the intelligible world is unchanging and eternal. The visible world consists of physical objects in their images, shadows, and reflections. Physical objects are in a constant state of flux, they are transient
Warren, Roger. Shakespeare Survey 30. N.p.: n.p., 1977. Pp. 177-78. Rpt. in Shakespeare in the Theatre: An Anthology of Criticism. Stanley Wells, ed. England: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Plato believes the conversation to search for what virtue really is should continue despite achieving no success in their first efforts to form a satisfactory definition. Meno becomes very aggravated with Plato and proposes a valid argument to him. Meno exclaims,
Henry V, like most characters created by Shakespeare, is very complex, and cannot by defined in black and white or as good or bad. However, he is the sum of his actions, and his actions and decisions during the campaign during the campaign in France lead him to be classified as a war criminal. A politician who works for his own good and through that, the good of his country, Henry’s decisions are often cold and calculated, designed to manipulate those around him.
...der to maintain success. King Henry showed that he is restricted to one language which resulted him to not gain the lower class power and it then lead him to focus on his political status. On the other hand, Hal presented himself to the viewers as a friendly character, yet he sustained to manipulate and lie to others to achieve his goals. Henry IV n, Part 1 presents the idea of political power and the different characteristics leaders follow. The lesson for audiences, then, is to develop relationships with different people who will expand one’s area of inspiration and the ability to advance success. One can learn from the mistakes of King Henry and remember to be visible and properly positioned, so society can see one’s strengths and talents.
To understand Plato’s claim that democracy is nothing but a stopgap on the way to tyranny one must first understand Plato’s viewpoint. Plato is credited with developing a school of thought called Platonic Idealism. Platonic Idealism is based upon the assumption that the essence of the qualities you predicate to things is eternal. Examples of that are ideas such as justice, piety or equality. While we may not be able to readily define them we all know what they are and can identify them when seen. Plato contends that only through philosophy can we express those essences in language.
He argues that non-physical forms or ideas represent the most accurate reality. There exists a fundamental opposition between in the world like the object as a concrete, sensible object and the idea or concept of the objects. Forms are typically universal concepts. The world of appearance corresponds to the body. The world of truth corresponds with the soul. According to Plato, for any conceivable thing or property there is a corresponding Form, a perfect example of that or property is a tree, house, mountain, man, woman, Table and Chair, would all be examples of existing abstract perfect Ideas. Plato says that true and reliable knowledge rests only with those who can comprehend the true reality behind the world of everyday experience. In order to perceive the world of the Forms, individuals must undergo a difficult
he attempts to outline a way of governing that would be ideal for an actual
Richard’s political ambition is revealed through his strategic calculations based on the order of birth in his York family which puts him third away from the throne. Ahead of him is his elder brother, George Clarence, a barrier which will have to eradicate. His brother, King Edward, is another political barrier, by simply being alive, in power and equally by being the father of the two young princes . Richard’s creates a political mistrust between his two brothers without directly implicating himself to clear his way to power.
Henry V is not a simple one as it has many aspects. By looking into
The understanding of Plato's regime is one that involves both the self and the regime. Aristotle on the other hand shows that development of state can be achieved without being the most wise. He also looks upon the regime with a positive regard rather that the pessimistic view of Plato, that things will always get worse. Aristotle understands that the coming together of people with common interest will always yield a city, and then onto a regime. Plato takes the planned out way, making sure that everything is in order before the regime or city can be formed. Both ideals of a regime are ones that would yield strong frivolous and successful places of habitation, yet we have never had a chance to see them in today's world. If only now we could see how virtuous they could be?
Plato’s view on existence can be understood by discussing his theory of Forms. The theory of Forms or Ideas is about the existence of ideas in higher form of reality, the existence of a reality inhabited by forms of all things and concepts. Plato used example of objects such as table and rock and concepts like Beauty and Justice to illustrate the notion of Forms. Plato further describes Forms as a being possessed by concepts. For example, Virtue has different characters; but they all have a common nature which makes them virtuous.
Aristotle and Plato were both great thinkers but their views on realty were different. Plato viewed realty as taking place in the mind but Aristotle viewed realty is tangible. Even though Aristotle termed reality as concrete, he stated that reality does not make sense or exist until the mind process it. Therefore truth is dependent upon a person’s mind and external factors.
According to Plato, his Theory of Forms states perfection only lives in the realm of thought. There only exists one of every ideal and the rest is just a copy. This one creation is called a form, the most flawless representation of an idea. In the physical world everything is a copy of these forms and all copies are imperfect. Plato believed in two worlds; the intelligible world and the illusionistic world. The intelligible world is where everything is unchanging and eternal. We can only grasp the intelligible world with our mind. It is the world of ideas and not senses. A place where there are perfect forms of the things we know on Earth. According to Plato everything in the world we live in is an illusion. All objects are only shadows of their true forms. His theory further states every group of objects that have the same defying properties must have an ideal form. For example, in the class of wine glasses there must be one in particular that is the ideal wine glass. All others would fall under this ideal form.