Henry V
In each production of Henry V, the emphasis changes: Henry can appear to be "the mirror of all Christian Kings" or as a cynic who uses the, seemingly corrupt, church to justify his actions. The play is full of noble speeches, heroic battles, and valiant English underdogs fighting their way to victory against all odds. King Henry seems to be a perfect leader - brave, modest, and fiercely determined, but with a sense of humour. Although his intentions may be honourable, the motives for them may not. He may be acting upon a purse offered by the church, and only undertaking the campaign for his own financial gain.However, this question of Henry's morals is more difficult than it seems at first glance. Henry is a model of traditional "heroism", but his value system is confusing - after all, his patriotism (or land lust, depending on how you look at it) leads him to invade a non-aggressive country and to slaughter thousands. He sentences former friends and prisoners of war to death, while giving the impression that he will show mercy; he never acknowledges that he holds any responsibility for the bloodshed he has initiated. The brilliance of Henry's speeches, his oratory and his careful development of his image make him an effective a . . .
So, possibly the portrayal of Henry as a Benevolent King or Scheming Politician is irrelevant as it seems the play can be moulded to fit the events of the time and could serve both a positive and negative viewpoint depending on the interpretation, or the events of the time and the public reaction to them. As the church had an influence, the speakers of God, then he must be fighting with God on his side. Shakespeare's addition of Henry pardoning the drunkard shows mercy and possibly a concern and sense for his priorities, a petty crime is nothing compared to impending war against France. In the middle ages people had believed that God appointed kings and that the throne could only pass on by legitimate succession. But his morality is questionable; Shakespeare's original production seems to highlight both sides, and it can be argued, equally. From the previous part of th! e story of Henry, "Henry IV part 1", Prince Hal seems to have turned from his wild youth to being the responsible king. However, his aggression and slightly muddled value system draw significant amounts of criticism. 33- 38) hardly projects the image of a "gentler gamester. Interpreting the purpose of the play has been difficult over the years. Henry's "bad humours" towards him are to blame. It becomes apparent through the invented scene of Henry's soliloquy that he does care, or has come to care for his men and possibly regrets the decision to put so many people in danger, including him. The incident of Bardolph stealing from the French town raises certain points as to that value system; on the one hand he is punishing a soldier for stealing something when they have been told not to, but on the other he is punishing his friend. When Canterbury says "A thousand pounds by th' year. Henry V may have to appear benevolent to confirm Queen Elizabeth's empire expansion plans as being the right way to act.
Common topics in this essay:
King Henry, Shakespeare Chorus, Elizabeth Shakespeare's, Henry IV, Excess Falstaff, Scheming Politician, Governor Harfleur, Fluellen Pistol's, Bardolph Pistol, Canterbury Ely, henry iv, king henry, french town, value system, king shakespeare's, father henry iv, richard ii, successful king, exploits henry, shakespeare henry, henry's scheming, military exploits henry, elizabeth shakespeare's patron, |
Acceptance Essays
