While Henry IV Part I (Henry IV) may seem only a quintessential medieval tale of revelry and victory in battle, as we delve deeper into Shakespeare’s representation of the motivations and actions of its characters we begin to appreciate the latent political messages at play. The story of Henry IV Part I is fundamentally driven by a quest for legitimacy and an examination of what is required of a political leader. These personal and political ideas are similarly present in Peter Jackson’s film adaptation of The Return of the King, and Vladimir Putin’s New York Times opinion piece, A Plea for Caution From Russia (11/9/2013). The explorations of political philosophy in both/all three texts have been used effectively by each author in their representations
…show more content…
Jackson’s adaptation of the fantasy epic explores a notion of legitimacy based on birthright, in keeping with the traditionalist notions of its source material. The text deals with the power struggles that engulf its invented world. Of great importance to this tense political climate is the ascension of Aragorn to his rightful place on the throne of Gondor. Consequently, the film goes to great lengths to represent the illegitimate authorities of Middle-Earth in a negative light, namely Denethor, the steward of Gondor.
Denethor’s adverse qualities are accentuated by his continuous eating, as his feasting is seen to continue even through matters of utmost political importance. As a cardinal sin, Denethor’s gluttony suggests that he lacks the divine authority possessed by Shakespeare’s Prince Hal. Moreover, it also conveys of his lack of connection with his subjects, who are facing imminent annihilation. By combining this symbolism with religious allusion, Jackson implies that leadership is inexorably linked with one’s place in the medieval natural …show more content…
Hal’s own father is repeatedly deemed a “usurper”, though Shakespeare is content to write the play from the royal perspective. Moreover, Hal’s stated aim to have his “reformation glitt[er] o’er [his] fault” suggests that his friendships with the frequenters of the boars-head tavern are superficial. The metaphor implies that his “unyoked” behavior is upheld purely to emphasize his own transformation as a tool of political popularity. These elements of political intrigue suggest Shakespeare’s openness to the practice of political expediency, even if it somewhat contravenes the natural order. In contrast, Jackson portrays these actions as megalomania, with Gandalf laying the blame of Gondor’s disrepair upon “childless lords [sitting] in aged halls musing on heraldry”. Hence, while Shakespeare sees political ploys as a natural aspect of the enterprise, Jackson’s film represents Machiavellianism as a rejection of one’s political
Jackson’s adaptation of the fantasy epic explores a notion of legitimacy based on birthright, in keeping with the traditionalist notions of its source material. The text deals with the power struggles that engulf its invented world. Of great importance to this tense political climate is the ascension of Aragorn to his rightful place on the throne of Gondor. Consequently, the film goes to great lengths to represent the illegitimate authorities of Middle-Earth in a negative light, namely Denethor, the steward of Gondor.
Denethor’s adverse qualities are accentuated by his continuous eating, as his feasting is seen to continue even through matters of utmost political importance. As a cardinal sin, Denethor’s gluttony suggests that he lacks the divine authority possessed by Shakespeare’s Prince Hal. Moreover, it also conveys of his lack of connection with his subjects, who are facing imminent annihilation. By combining this symbolism with religious allusion, Jackson implies that leadership is inexorably linked with one’s place in the medieval natural …show more content…
Hal’s own father is repeatedly deemed a “usurper”, though Shakespeare is content to write the play from the royal perspective. Moreover, Hal’s stated aim to have his “reformation glitt[er] o’er [his] fault” suggests that his friendships with the frequenters of the boars-head tavern are superficial. The metaphor implies that his “unyoked” behavior is upheld purely to emphasize his own transformation as a tool of political popularity. These elements of political intrigue suggest Shakespeare’s openness to the practice of political expediency, even if it somewhat contravenes the natural order. In contrast, Jackson portrays these actions as megalomania, with Gandalf laying the blame of Gondor’s disrepair upon “childless lords [sitting] in aged halls musing on heraldry”. Hence, while Shakespeare sees political ploys as a natural aspect of the enterprise, Jackson’s film represents Machiavellianism as a rejection of one’s political