Who Is Authentic In Shakespeare's Second Neutralogy

One of most drawn out themes underlying Shakespeare’s second tetralogy is the idea of authenticity; who is authentic, who is not, what is means to be authentic. On the flip side is the opposite notion—the idea of a counterfeit, an inauthentic imitation, sometimes able to fool, sometimes not. However, Shakespeare’s second tetralogy seems to blur this supposed line between what is authentic and what is counterfeit, and in doing so reveals not simply what makes an “authentic” king, but also how authenticity functions and whether or not it means anything.
Richard’s reign as a king is certainly authentic; he has the power, appearance, and air of a true king. Richard has no problem going through the ceremonial motions and exercising his Divine Rite over his subjects. Though used haphazardly, Richard’s power is undeniable—he can cease …show more content…
However, that is not the case with his authenticity as king by virtue of his character. Because Prince Hal has a party-boy past, he is not at first taken seriously as king. In his correspondences with France, he does not deal with the King himself, but rather the Dauphin his son, through an ambassador. Moreover, he receives message that the Dauphin isn’t even taking Hal seriously; he “says that [Hal savors] too much of [his] youth” (1.2 251) and consequently sends tennis balls in “lieu” (1.2 256) of an authentic gift. However, Hal turns the insult around with cutting wordplay and remarks that the dauphin “comes o’er us with our wilder days, / Not measuring what use we made of them” (1.2 268-9). In many ways, Hal’s biting response mirrors his own character arc; Hal turns this inauthentic gesture around on the Dauphin, much like he takes what he learns from his “wilder days” to become perhaps the greatest king of all. While a lack authenticity serves as justification for rebellion in the earlier plays, here Hal uses it as a tool to further himself and