1 Henry
IV is in many ways a study of contrasting characters, including
Harry, Hotspur, Falstaff, and King Henry. Does the play have a single
protagonist or many characters of equal importance? Why is the play
named after King Henry?
The simplest answer is that the play is named
after King Henry because he is the king; all of Shakespeare’s history
plays are named after the person sitting on the throne during the
time that they take place. Moreover, the play is concerned with
detailing, in broad strokes, the reign of King Henry IV. Henry,
however, is not the main character, and his actions are generally
secondary to the plot.
1 Henry IV does
not really revolve around a particular protagonist but instead makes
its thematic arguments by exploring the contrasts between its four
major and many minor characters. If a single major character must
be chosen, the likeliest candidate is Harry, whose mind is most
nearly at the center of the play’s focus. Given, too, that Harry
emerges in the next two plays as the heroic King Henry V, the most
glorified figure in all of Shakespeare’s histories, it is probably feasible
to read
1 Henry IV, at least
in part, as a kind of prelude to Harry’s more mature adventures.
2. 1 Henry IV
explores the qualities of a king and how a king ought to bear himself
in relation to other people. Consider the various candidates for
kingship in the play (King Henry IV himself, Prince Harry, Hotspur)
and discuss what qualities the main contenders would bring to bear
on kingship. Do these qualities help the eventual winners defeat
the losers, or is it merely a question of luck?
King Henry possesses a certain regal grace.
He believes that by remaining strong and keeping himself aloof from
the common people, he will command respect and authority. By contrast,
Prince Harry has spent a great deal of his time fraternizing with
commoners, both to lower the expectations he must face and to get
to know the mind of England’s people for the time when he is their
ruler. Both Henry and Harry are intelligent and patient and able
to detach themselves from a situation in order to think a plan through.
By contrast, Hotspur is rash, crude, impatient, and violent. His
main qualities as a king would be his capacity for swift and decisive
action and his commitment to personal honor. Shakespeare certainly
disqualifies Hotspur from being a viable candidate for the throne
by portraying his inability to exercise diplomacy and his frequent thoughtless
mistakes and blunders. Henry and Harry, however, both make impressive
leaders—especially Harry, who later becomes the greatest ruler in
all of Shakespeare’s histories.
The play contains
many instances of symmetry, in which scenes or even people seem
to be slightly altered reflections of other scenes or people. Look
for scenes where you think that a previous event is being repeated or
transformed or for characters who are explicitly contrasted or compared.
Which scenes or characters are these? Why might Shakespeare use
this technique?
There are innumerable instances of symmetry
in the play, including Hotspur’s and his uncle’s similar complaints
about Henry IV in Act IV, scene iii and Act V, scene i, respectively;
the contrast between Harry and Hotspur, who act as son figures to
Henry IV; the contrast between Henry and Falstaff, who act as father
figures to Harry; the set of high noblemen at the top of the play’s
social hierarchy and the set of low commoners at the bottom of it;
and so on. Shakespeare uses this technique largely as an instrument
of contrast, whereby a single thematic idea can be explored from
two opposed perspectives, such as Harry and Hotspur’s contrasting
ideas of honor.
1 Henry
IV mixes prose and poetry to an extraordinary degree. Consider the
places in which the two modes occur in the play. Why did Shakespeare
choose to write his play this way? Do you think that some of the characters
“demand” to speak in prose or in poetry? How would the character
of Falstaff, for instance, be different if he spoke in iambic pentameter
or that of King Henry if he always spoke in prose? Can you see Harry’s
shifts from poetry to prose and back again as an indication of changes
in his frame of mind, his environment, or his ambitions over the
course of the play?
The multiplicity and variety of the English
language used throughout
1 Henry
IV is one of its most interesting motifs, and the prose/poetry
contrast is generally used as a technique to help Shakespeare capture
the broad range of dialogic style he has incorporated into his play.
In general, the play’s fast-paced, rough-hewn prose is the language
of commoners, while its elegant, courtly poetry is the language
of the nobility. If Falstaff spoke in iambic pentameter, he would
lose the sense of freewheeling vulgarity that clings to him, and
if the king were to speak in prose, he would lose his sense of regal
stateliness. Generally, Harry speaks in prose around his common
friends and uses poetry increasingly as he makes the transition into
the regal prince of the play’s conclusion.
