Honor in Henry IV, Part One
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 differentiating characters, yet, ultimately the reader ponders what place can honor have in a world in which subjects rebel against a usurper king whom they placed in office, the prince plays at robbery with a dissolute knight, and the contending parties in government seem guided by "policy" rather than "principle"? (Prior 14). The reader is invited to think about the concept of honor in a variety of contexts as it pertains to the different views of Falstaff and Hotspur. The pursuit of honor is Hotspur’s chief motivation and goal, yet his obsessive commitment becomes dangerous as the quest for honor blinds him from all else. Falstaff’s concept of honor directly contrasts that of Hotspur: to Falstaff, honor is rejected due to its limitations of life and seen as empty and valueless. To Hotspur, honor is more important than life itself, and his blind pursuit of honor ultimately drives him to his death. While he stands for images and ideals, Falstaff hacks at the meaning of honor until he has stripped it to almo...
... middle of paper ...
...wed as the first satirist, poking fun at not only commoners and rebels, but also the institution of monarchy. Shakespeare’s fascination with the various idiosyncracies of Hotspur and Falstaff allows him to portray diversity concerning the perception of honor.
Works Cited
Bloom, Harold. Henry IV, Part One: Bloom’s Notes. New York: Chelsea House, 1996.
Cruttwell,Patrick. Hernry IV. Shakespeare For Students, Vol. II. Detroit: Gale Publishing, 1999.
Kantor, Andrea. Henry IV, Part One. London: Baron’s Education Series, Inc, 1984.
Princiss, G.M. Henry IV Criticism. Shakespeare For Students, Vol.II. Detroit: Gale Publishing, 1999.
Prior, Moody E. The Drama of Power: Study in Shakespeare’s History Plays. Shakespeare For Students, Vol. II. Detroit: Gale Publishing, 1999.
Wells, Stanley. Shakespeare: Life in Drama. New York: Norton & Company, 1995.
Falstaff’s blatantly honest soliloquy has provided the audience with a direct insight into his mind, and contrasts well with Hal and Hotspur’s speeches, in which their moral order and regard for honour is evident. Falstaff helps to show the change in Hal to the audience. Falstaff himself is no different to the Falstaff of Act 1, unlike Hal who has obviously undergone a great deal of change. Falstaff’s speech is highly typical of the tavern world’s way of thinking: straightforward, sometimes humorous, spoken in prose, and only the values of the tavern world taken into consideration, with no regard for such insubstantial, un-physical concepts as honour. In this way, and spoken directly to the audience, Falstaff effectively expresses his unashamed resolution not to submit to moral order.
The first influence that Shakespeare illustrates over Prince Hal is that of Falstaff, a fat old man who seems to spend his life in seedy taverns accruing massive amounts of debt. From his devious scheme to rob unknowing travelers at the beginning of the story to his diatribe on what honor is not, it is clear that Falstaff has a very distinct notion of his own personal honor, and he seems to be trying to project that same notion onto Hal; however, as Hal becomes closer to his father, Falstaff's honor becomes less appealing. Falstaff treats Hal and King Henry IV to his own personal code of honor-or lack thereof:
The author of Mexican Lives, Judith Adler Hellman, grapples with the United States’ economic relationship with their neighbors to the south, Mexico. It also considers, through many interviews, the affairs of one nation. It is a work held to high esteem by many critics, who view this work as an essential part in truly understanding and capturing Mexico’s history. In Mexican Lives, Hellman presents us with a cast from all walks of life. This enables a reader to get more than one perspective, which tends to be bias. It also gives a more inclusive view of the nation of Mexico as a whole. Dealing with rebel activity, free trade, assassinations and their transition into the modern age, it justly captures a Mexico in its true light.
Mr. Allen also speaks in depth of the farmers. The Farmer’s Holiday occurred when Milo Reno organized Iowan farmers and got them to “refuse to bring food into Sioux City for thirty days, ‘or until the cost of production had been obtained” (86).
Shakespeare, William. Tragedy of Macbeth . Ed. Barbara Mowat and Paul Warstine. New York: Washington Press, 1992.
He is accepted for his faults and further appreciated for his humor. Once receptive to Falstaff’s follies, an underlying wisdom can be found. Shakespeare offers Falstaff as a guide to living beyond the confines of convention, out of all the order. Disguised in banter, Falstaff calls into question values of morality and nobility. His manner is harmless in both words and actions. Of all the loyalty and disloyalty that incites political turbulence in the play, Falstaff remains inert. He does not enact any cruel aggression in effort to achieve power. Nevertheless, Falstaff commits slight though significant transgressions against Prince Hal and aristocratic values. These transgressions begin in conversation and eventually result in Falstaff’s action on the
At the start of the play, the reader sees that Prince Hal has been acting in a manner which has disappointed his father. The King compares Hotspur to Hal, saying that Hotspur is ìA son who is the theme of honour's tongue,î and that ìriot and dishonour stain the brow of [Hal] (I.i.3).î He even wishes that the two were switched: ìThen would I have his Harry, and he mine (I.i.3).î The King obviously does not approve of Hal's actions, and believes that, if Hal does not change his ways, he will be a poor successor to the throne.
The character Sir John Falstaff played a crucial part in Shakespeare's Henry IV. Falstaff portrayed a side of life that was both brutal and harsh. This was important because, as Falstaff was, all the other main characters in the play were Nobles. Unlike Falstaff, the other nobles in the play acted as nobles. Falstaff, on the other hand acted more like the lower class people. In doing this he portrayed the thoughts and feelings of the lower class people. As he portrayed the lower class people, Falstaff brought the reader to think about the difference between a noble and lower class people. This was because Falstaff contrasted well with the nobles and brought out new aspects of the themes that Shakespeare experienced during his life. Some of these views brought out be Falstaff were quite harsh, in comparison to the accepted views of the time. To help balance the harshness of his views, Falstaff was very good natured and invoked laughter in the reader.
In act one, Shakespeare introduces the idea that Prince Henry is an inadequate heir to the throne. The play opens with King Henry IV, Prince Henry’s father, speaking to his council of a war with Scotland. Quickly the subject of the discussion turns to Prince Henry, or Harry’s, indifference to the affairs of war. The King then compares Harry to Hotspur, son of the Duke of Northumberland in his dialogue:
In the beginning of his reign, Diaz was almost ideal and had great intentions for Mexico. He created a more stable government and got rid of crime. The quality of life was improved. The government was made stronger by dispatching governors to the various areas of Mexico. The army was also made stronger by professionializing it. The police force readily enforced Diaz’s laws. Diaz also relied on a group of aristocrats as advisors. As Mexico grew, structurally and economically, foreign films invested in the area. The money from the films helped Diaz to build highways, railroads, telegraph lines, oil fields, and rejuvenate the mining industry. New industries were also created and in fifty years Mexico had transformed itself from a third world country to the ideal model of a developing country (Summary 3-4).
Bradley, A.C.. Shakespearean Tragedy: Lectures on Hamlet, Othello, King Lear and Macbeth. New York: Penguin Books, 1991.
Cohen, Walter, J.E. Howard, K. Eisaman Maus. The Norton Shakespeare. Vol. 2 Stephen Greenblatt, General Editor. New York, London. 2008. ISBN 978-0-393-92991-1
Fish protein has been a mainstay for the human diet for centuries. However, aquaculture, which is the practice of raising fish such as salmon in controlled conditions, as opposed to the commercial fishing industry, which is procurement of wild fish from their natural environment, made its debut in the United States as a commercial enterprise in the late 1970’s according to the Eco - Justice Marketplace Project.(n.d.). This mode of salmon procurement began to develop in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century, as a response to the declining populations of native wild fish such as salmon and trout.
Christopher Columbus has a mixed legacy, many know the man to be a ruthless tenacious explorer and master navigator who was the first to discover the new world of Americano, and paved the way for European exploration yet his travels had a multi-century trickle-down effect. A single life that will change history forever by persistence and the will of motivation to explore outside the safe comfort of the banks along Spain. New boundaries were breached and the world will be melodramatically different from actions of a single indusial.
This questioning of what is actually important, physical needs or conceptual ideals, was relevant in Shakespeare’s time, and still is today. Living under Elizabeth I, the product of major religious upheaval, Shakespeare may have been disillusioned with the worlds of kings and queens of which he wrote. The belief in the importance of honor and reputation was still very popular during this time period, and in a play in which the entire plot revolved around these ideals Falstaff’s speech sticks out. This may have been a subtle critique of these values held so dearly by Shakespeare’s