Ideologies concerning the manipulation of political power may be uncertain and diverse as political leaders seek to ensure their political ascendancy. What is certain, however, is that influence is always the ultimate goal in the dangerous game of politics. Composer’s views of these events, political ideas and situations are significantly shaped by the context that they find themselves in. This is reflected in William Shakespeare’s history play, ‘King Henry IV Part 1’ (1597), shaped by the complex political issues during the end of the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, which explores differentiating ideologies concerning the power of politics, as leaders needed to be multifaceted in terms of adapting to enemies powers and providing a moral compass. …show more content…
Pearson has crafted one of the most influential political speeches of all time, exploring the political life of Gough Whitlam, a controversial Australian Prime Minister, as his term in office was turbulent and his position never certain, who introduced a number of policy measures and social reforms. Pearson explores this as though his time in government was transitory Whitlam was adamant in establishing a political solution to the problem of disunity within Australia, similar to King Henry and his desire to unite England, highlighted through use of an idiom, “devil-may-care attitude to management as opposed to reform is unlikely to be seen again by government priorities to retain power.” This further highlights the uncertainty of political power as Pearson’s underlines through juxtaposition that though loved by many he was also castigated. The repetition of the intertextual rhetorical question, “and what did the romans ever do for us anyways?’ followed by Parson’s listing of Whitlam's achievements contradicts the jurisdiction that people are ill minded towards his time in power. This hypophora proving to the audience that Whitlam’s political power caused great change as he uses anthropomorphism to state that, ‘cosmopolitan Australia emerged like a Technicolor butterfly’. This declaration proving Gough led with a strong moral compass differentiating himself from the King who was motivated by considerations of Realpolitik. Henceforth, Pearson’s delivery and composition of the speech highlights the uncertainty of political
Shakespeare’s ‘King Henry IV Part I’ centres on a core theme of the conflict between order and disorder. Such conflict is brought to light by the use of many vehicles, including Hal’s inner conflict, the country’s political and social conflict, the conflict between the court world and the tavern world, and the conflicting moral values of characters from each of these worlds. This juxtaposition of certain values exists on many levels, and so is both a strikingly present and an underlying theme throughout the play. Through characterization Shakespeare explores moral conflict, and passage three is a prime example of Falstaff’s enduring moral disorder. By this stage in the play Hal has ‘reformed’, moved away from his former mentor Falstaff and become a good and honourable prince.
After many failed attempts to obtain a divorce from his first wife Catherine of Aragon, King Henry VIII took momentous steps that led to "The Reformation," a significant occurrence in the history of religion. Prior to the reformation, all of England's inhabitants including King Henry VIII prescribed to Catholicism. In fact, King Henry VIII was such a strong supporter that he was given the title "Defender of the Faith" by the pope for his efforts in protecting Catholicism against the Protestants. However, all these changed upon the pope's denial of Henry's request for a divorce.
Prince Hal is initially portrayed as being incapable of princely responsibilities in light of his drinking, robbery and trickery. Yet, Shakespeare reveals that Hal is in fact only constructing this false impression for the purpose of deceit. Prince Hal’s manipulative nature is evident in his first soliloquy, when he professes his intention to “imitate the sun” and “break through the foul and ugly mists”. The ‘sun’ Prince Hal seeks to ‘imitate’ can in this case be understood as his true capacity, as opposed to the false impression of his incapacity, which is symbolised by the ‘foul and ugly mists’. The differentiation of Hal’s capacity into two categories of that which is false and that which is true reveals the duplicity of his character. Moreover, Hal is further shown to be manipulative in the same soliloquy by explaining his tactic of using the “foil” of a lowly reputation against his true capacity to “attract more eyes” and “show more goodly”. The diction of “eyes” symbolically represents public deception, concluding political actions are based on strategy. It is through representation and textual form that we obtain insight into this
The given documents are examples of the monarch’s ability to assert their authority through word. The different proclamations illustrate the problems of the time, and how the assumed power of the monarch addressed it. It is assumed that their power goes to include power over the church and all papal authority, ultimate power over Parliament, power over other lands, and it goes as far as suggesting that their power has been bestowed upon them by God. The assumed nature and extent of the Tudors’ power alters over time, each king reacting to a different situation. King Henry VII establishes a strong and clear claim to the crown for the Tudors when there were doubts about his claim. King Henry VIII extends the power of the monarch by annexing the
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.
his coronation. He was a young man coming up to the age of 18. He was
When Australia’s 21st Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam, was swept into power in December 1972 there was huge anticipation for dramatic and swift change. Australia had been under the control of a conservative liberal government for 23 consecutive years, and Whitlam’s promises if social change were eagerly anticipated. Whitlam, despite his failings as a negotiator, managed to implement a huge array of reforms and changes, many of which shaped Australia into the country it is today. However is that enough to say he succeeded? Even Whitlam today admits that he regrets doing “too much too soon”, and perhaps Whitlam’s government was a government that was too socially progressive for its time, which could perchance have been a foreshadowing of things to come for the most recent labor government of Julia Gillard which has been labeled by some as the most incompetent government since Whitlam. Gough Whitlam has had the most books written and published about him than any other Australian Prime Minister to Date. This essay will argue that Whitlam was a successful leader of the Australian Labor Party (ALP), who had the ability and charisma to lead Australia in an era of prosperity; he did however succumbed to a few grave errors of judgment that ultimately led to his downfall, however his ultimate goal was to transform Australia which he achieved. Whitlam’s’ errors were seen as being due to his inability take advice from senior figures on how to turn his amateur government into a competent one and his inflexible approach to dealing with the hostile senate that the Australian public gave him, and often led to his government being labeled the worst in Australian history and as a failure.
King Henry VIII is considerable the most controversial monarch Great Britain has ever had. He is commonly known for his ill-advised decisions, six wives, and splitting Great Britain from the Catholic Church to create the Church of England. King Henry VIII of England’s determination to guarantee his family line’s continuation in the throne caused many problems, such as religious tensions, economic hardships, and political adversaries that continued one long after his death.
A political debate derived from 1990’s that held the British colonists culpable for the beginning of the ‘history wars’ that many protagonists became involved in. ‘History wars’ is divided into two views, one being a conservative view that considered the European settlement to be an achievement of taming hostile land. The progressive view on the other hand, perceives the history to be a reminder of the invasion of their land, frontier violence and dispossession of Indigenous owners. John Howard who represented the liberal party was one of the main protagonists within this controversy, representing the conservative view. Paul Keating, the labor party representative became a legacy, a Keating legacy that began reconciliation evolving in practical and symbolic ways (Ke...
The elements of staging in Shakespeare's Hentry IV, Part 1 are critically important to the action, theme, and quality of the performance. Elements such as costume, blocking, casting, and even the physical attributes of the stage are, of course, important considerations in the production of a play. But other, less apparent factors contribute to the success of the production as well. For instance, an underlying theme(rebellion, in the case of Henry IV, Part 1) must be, whenever possible, incorporated into the scene. Also the number and complexity of props must also be considered with regard to the financial success of the production. These elements as well as others, such as delivery and movement, must be addressed and accounted for effectively. All of these factors will be considered in this analysis of staging for Henry IV, Part 1, act II, scene iv, lines 394- 476. Since this scene transpires in a tavern it is necessary to maintain the simulacrum while still leaving room on stage for the 'play extempore'. To do this efficaciously it would be wise to keep the props to a minimum so that nothing is in competition with Hal and Falstaff for the true audiences attention, as well as for financial considerations. To create the appearance of a tavern one simply needs four tables, each accompanied by three or four chairs; at least ten or eleven are necessary for this scene. One of these chairs will later serve as a prop for Hal and Falstaff when they use it as a throne. Three of the tables should be approximately four or five feet in diameter and one table slightly larger, perhaps six feet in diameter. This will be the table at which Hal and Falstaff converse in the beginning of th...
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.
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.
Every cold case has a suspect or perpetrator who is thought to have committed the crime. Even a crime that happened 500 yeas ago has several suspects in mind. The murder and disappearance of the two princes in the tower, Edward V and Prince Richard, Duke of York, is a case that has never been solved. The two main suspects are Richard III and Henry VII. Although there is not enough evidence to convict either Richard III or Henry VII, based on the evidence I think Richard III murdered his nephews, Edward V and Prince Richard. Richard III is guilty because he had several opportunities to murder the two princes, Tyrell’s confession, Henry VII’s Bill of Attainder, and the pre-contract.
From different contextual standpoints, both William Shakespeare’s King henry IV part 1(1597) and Barry Levinson Man of the year (2006) both represent a unique similarity in discussing power rather than truth. Shakespeare invokes an appreciation of strategic manipulation for both King Henry IV and prince Hal. King Henry struggles of breaking divine lineage whilst Prince Hal appearance vs reality allows Shakespeare to explore the political strategies upheld by politicians within the Elizabethan era. Similarly, in Man of the year, Tom Dobbs use of short and verbose colloquial language exhibit his demagoguery approach to candidacy epitomizing political succession within the 21st century.
One of the most famous scenes in Henry IV: Part I is the scene in which Prince Hal and Falstaff put on a play extempore. This is often cited as the most famous scene because it is Hal’s turning point in the play. However, the scene is much more than that. The play extempore is a moment of prophecy, not epiphany because is cues the reader in to the play’s major themes, and allows readers to explore the possibilities of the play’s continuance.