Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Analysis of Henry v and saint joan's perspective
Analysis of Henry v and saint joan's perspective
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Analysis of Henry v and saint joan's perspective
The plays Henry V by William Shakespeare and Saint Joan by George Bernard Shaw take place in Europe during the Hundred Years War. They illustrate the opposing sides of the war. Henry V paints a picture of the English’s journey through the war, while Saint Joan displays the strong desire of the French to beat the English. Both plays are told from the hero’s point of view. Henry V is told from King Henry V’s point of view and Saint Joan is told from Joan of Arc’s point of view. King Henry and Joan won pivotal battles for their countries in the war, earning them much respect. Although King Henry V and Joan of Arc are both heros, their success and influence differed due to their class.
King Henry V motivated his army throughout the play with passion and power. He used his knowledge of being a leader to instill a desire to achieve greatness in each of his men. In many of Henry’s speeches he expresses extreme amounts of passion. An example of this comes from the speech Henry gave before the battle of Agincourt, “We few, we happy few, we band of brothers; For he to-day that sheds his blood with me Shall be my brother,” (Shakespeare 4.3. 60-62). At this point in Henry’s speech he is appealing to the emotion of his
…show more content…
Henry has a large advantage over Joan because he comes from a royal, wealthy background, while Joan comes from a poor, uneducated background. Due to his authority, Henry garners a lot of respect from his country and army. With this respect he is able to get his point across easily and earn support. Unfortunately for Joan, being a peasant decreases her chances of receiving respect and support. Joan must work harder to achieve as much success as Henry. If Joan were a noble or royalty she would be able to share her thoughts as easily as Henry. And, if Henry were a peasant he would have to work much harder to get his point across as well as he can as a
For hundreds of years, those who have read Henry V, or have seen the play performed, have admired Henry V's skills and decisions as a leader. Some assert that Henry V should be glorified and seen as an "ideal Christian king". Rejecting that idea completely, I would like to argue that Henry V should not be seen as the "ideal Christian king", but rather as a classic example of a Machiavellian ruler. If looking at the play superficially, Henry V may seem to be a religious, moral, and merciful ruler; however it was Niccolo Machiavelli himself that stated in his book, The Prince, that a ruler must "appear all mercy, all faith, all honesty, all humanity, [and] all religion" in order to keep control over his subjects (70). In the second act of the play, Henry V very convincingly acts as if he has no clue as to what the conspirators are planning behind his back, only to seconds later reveal he knew about their treacherous plans all along. If he can act as though he knows nothing of the conspirators' plans, what is to say that he acting elsewhere in the play, and only appearing to be a certain way? By delving deeper into the characteristics and behaviors of Henry V, I hope to reveal him to be a true Machiavellian ruler, rather than an "ideal king".
Henry excites fear by stating he is passionately ready to sacrifice for his country. This play towards pathos, or appealing to the audience’s emotions, is an effective way of trying to convince the House to go to war against Britain. This pathos, combined with the logic of Henry’s speech, makes for a convincing argument. Logically taking the House step by step from stating that because he has an outlook on their situation, he should express it to them, to stating his argument before the House, to saying that lacking freedom is worse than death, then taking it full circle pronouncing he would prefer to be “give[n] death” then to have his freedom taken away by the British.
Rather than a sense of patriotism, it is clear to the reader that Henry's goals seem a little different, he wants praise and adulation. "On the way to Washington, the regiment was fed and caressed for station after station until the youth beloved that he must be a hero."
In Shakespeare’s “The Life of King Henry V,” set in England in the early fifteenth century, with the famous and heroic English King, Henry V, claiming his “rights” to the French throne. This claim caused complications and the declaration of war on both English and French soil. This political war, then turn into a route of complicated negotiations, after King Henry’s terrifying forces had successfully defeated French forces. As the result of the war, a peace treaty was made, and part of that agreement was the marriage between King Henry V and the daughter of the King of France, Katherine of Valois. An analysis of the both King Henry’s and Katherine’s relationship reveals that both had conflicting perspectives of one another, which resulted as a marriage in political unions of two powerful nations rather than a union of two lovers.
middle of paper ... ... to royalty. Additionally the relationship between Henry and his nobles are friendly and caring. The last persuasive technique Henry exploits is the word 'man hood,' deliberately to suggest manliness could only be earned by achieving honour in battle.
The Hundred Years’ War (1337-1453) consisted of numerous small raids between local armies in which the French suffered many losses. Two of these losses included the battles at Crecy and Poitiers. However, over time, the French rebounded after the victory at the battle in Orleans in 1429, which was led by 17-year old French peasant, Joan of Arc. Before going into battle, Joan sent a letter to the English demanding that they leave France. Joan’s letter to the king of England in 1429 and her role in the battle at Orleans played a symbolic role and affected the French’s success in the Hundred Years’ War by increasing French spirits and showing the weakness of the English.
On the eve of the Battle of Agincourt, he disguises himself and walks amongst his men in order to gauge the sentiment amongst them. To Pistol, he insults ‘the King’, but to Williams and Bates, he praises ‘the King’ and justifies the war (4.1). Depending on the men’s pre-existing opinions, Henry changes his attitude to convince his men of the validity of the war as well as the range of his responsibility. When he speaks to Katharine to woo her, he becomes the perfect suitor, full of sweet words and clumsy enough to be charming as he attempts to speak French. He tells Katharine before this attempt that the language “…will surely hang upon [his] tongue like a newly-married wife upon her husband’s neck…”, but it is more likely that as the King of England Henry is fluent in French and is lying. In front of the nobility of his court, Henry is fully and completely a strong leader. This can be seen from the second scene of the play, where he calls the bishops into the throne room and asks him “May I with right and conscience make this claim [to France]?” (H5. 1.2. 96-97) He gets the bishops, who have their own motivations, to proclaim in front of the whole court that he does, in fact, have a solid claim to the French throne. The bishops’ lengthy and rambling explanations contrasted by Henry’s pinpoint questioning and conclusion highlight his assertive and commanding nature. He changes for each situation, sometimes drastically, becoming an
In the play Henry V written by Shakespeare. Henry was presented as the ideal Christian king. His mercy, wisdom, and other characteristics demonstrated the behavior of a Christian king. Yet at the same time he is shown to be man like any other. The way he behaves in his past is just like an ordinary man. But in Henry’s own mind he describes himself as “the mirror of all Christian kings” and also a “true lover of the holly church.
The play Henry V by William Shakespeare is about the history story of the young king Henry V and how did he win the war. The mean characters in this play are Duke of Gloucester, Henry V, Duke of Bedford, King’s bother, Princess Katharine, etc.
I side with Loades on this as despite resentment from the nobles, after the Perkin Warbeck imposture there were no more serious uprisings which strongly support the success of Henry’s policies. Whilst most nobles would see his methods as unjust (especially the wide of use bonds and recognisances) Henry succeeded in increasing the crown’s standing at the expense of the nobility, securing his position whilst weakening the nobles. Through most of his policies Henry was successful in limiting the powers of nobility. Henry sought to restrict the noble’s power and yet at the same time needed them to keep order and represent him at local levels, therefore Henry sought not to destroy the nobles but to weaken them enough that they did not pose a threat, he needed a balance of control over the nobles and strong nobility.
Joan was born into the hundred year war, but her father didn’t fight in the war. He was a farmer with his wife and daughter and was very church oriented. This gives insight as to who her father was. This background formed Joan of Arc’s life. For example, reading and writing was not allowed for the women, but Joan didn’t listen. She learned anyways. “She was born to a tenant farmer Jacques d’Arc” (“Joan of Arc”). Joan of Arc was the only female to read and write, and she was teaching others girls to also read and write. She was a Catholic church girl who didn't go to school. She then learned to read from her father’s books, and he taught her to write. Her father was a farmer and her mother, Isabelle Romee, wasn't really known in Joan’s life's story, but she was still present in Joan’s life she also taught her to be pious.Joan of Arc’s
... version of Henry's court and Henry's camp, the dramatic effect constituted, in its way, a reasonably accurate depiction of Henry's achievement in England." (Pilkington 1-2) I believe that Shakespeare's Henry V contains more charm and less fanaticism than the true Henry V. Shakespeare has created a fairly accurate depiction of life in this time period, altering only what he saw fit for his own lifetime.
In Shakespeare’s “The Life Of King Henry V,” the setting of England in its early fifteenth century, with a famous heroic English King, claiming his “rights” to the French throne, which causes complications and the declaration of war between both England’s and France’s soil. This political war, then turn into a route of complicated dealings, after the fact that King Henry had successfully defeated France’s forces, and one of them was the marriage between King Henry and the daughter of the King of France, Katherine. An analysis of the both King Henry’s and Katherine’s relationship reveals that both had conflicting perspectives on one another, which results of their marriage as a political union of two powerful nations rather than a union of two lovers.
For the simple fact that when Henry VI was younger and not allowed to take an active role in leading England, he did not really care about running the country. Henry was such a spiritually deep man that he lacked the worldly wisdom necessary to allow him to rule effectively (Wikipedia). Henry was more of an indecisive pushover.
Saint Joan by Bernard Shaw illustrates the story of Saint Joan; a young woman who took charge of the French Armies during the Hundred Years' War. Joan is set on this course through voices that she believes come from a heavenly source. Although Joan is guided to victory, she is ultimately burned at the stake because many religious and secu-lar officials are threatened by the power Joan holds. The officials try to legitimize her death by reasoning that Joan disregarded many of the beliefs and customs of The Church, therefore making her a heretic. However, Joan was not only burned for being a supposed heretic, but also for political reasons tied to The Church and feudal hierarchy.