When Shakespeare wrote Henry IV, Part II, England faced issues of kingship, constitution, and rebellion. Shakespeare’s contemporaries, Elizabethans in the 1590s, undoubtedly had anxieties about the aging Queen Elizabeth I’s lack of an apparent heir, much like the anxieties surrounding Hal’s imminent succession to the throne. At the same time, Shakespeare presents to his audience a history play, dramatizes information, introduces fictional characters, and “mingling kings and clowns” on stage, and essentially tells a story about people growing into their destinies determined by God, the background force of the history plays. The themes, character arcs, and the contemporary anxieties finds best representation in Henry IV’s monologue in 4.5.95-140.
…show more content…
This results in the king’s inner conflict of guilt and desire to protect his position, especially as rebellions rise against him in the form of Hotspur and the Archbishop. Henry IV, Part I, where Falstaff and Hal’s relationship plays out extensively, provides concrete context for Henry IV, Part II 4.5.122-140. The play concludes with the battle where Hal saves his father’s life and becomes a hero. Despite this moment, Henry IV in Part II still sees his son as degenerate and delinquent, and still believes that his son’s disposition is divine punishment for his usurpation. Part I also contains a parallel scene to Henry IV’s mistaken death, where Hal presumes Falstaff, a father-like figure, dead. The father-son dynamic between Hal and Falstaff also plays out as they play-act interactions between the King of England and the Prince of Wales. Lastly, Part I includes a monologue by the prince detailing his intent on a dramatic reformation when the time comes for him to rule. With this context, Henry IV’s monologue includes dramatic irony as he fears a future he has no need to fear. In addition to dramatic irony, the monologue comprises of historical irony, given that every audience of the play knows the monologue does not describe the reign of Henry V, its real events dramatized in Shakespeare’s Henry …show more content…
The monologue expresses royal succession concerns of Elizabeth times, but also emits irony as the audience things work out for Henry V, and find comfort that the same could be thought of their futures. Not only a magnificent monologue for an actor to perform, as it completes the picture of Henry IV as a character, the monologue also sets up for Prince Hal as a character. Hal reacts and responds to Henry IV, and he ultimately wins his father’s love and blessing, a bittersweet reconciliation contrasted with Hal’s sour repudiation of his other father, Falstaff. By highlighting the immense amount of fears weighting on Henry IV’s mind, the king’s newly found peace becomes sweeter and welcome as Hal can now smoothly achieve fulfillment and take his rightful place, completing his transformation. This monologue makes such maneuvering
This results in the king’s inner conflict of guilt and desire to protect his position, especially as rebellions rise against him in the form of Hotspur and the Archbishop. Henry IV, Part I, where Falstaff and Hal’s relationship plays out extensively, provides concrete context for Henry IV, Part II 4.5.122-140. The play concludes with the battle where Hal saves his father’s life and becomes a hero. Despite this moment, Henry IV in Part II still sees his son as degenerate and delinquent, and still believes that his son’s disposition is divine punishment for his usurpation. Part I also contains a parallel scene to Henry IV’s mistaken death, where Hal presumes Falstaff, a father-like figure, dead. The father-son dynamic between Hal and Falstaff also plays out as they play-act interactions between the King of England and the Prince of Wales. Lastly, Part I includes a monologue by the prince detailing his intent on a dramatic reformation when the time comes for him to rule. With this context, Henry IV’s monologue includes dramatic irony as he fears a future he has no need to fear. In addition to dramatic irony, the monologue comprises of historical irony, given that every audience of the play knows the monologue does not describe the reign of Henry V, its real events dramatized in Shakespeare’s Henry …show more content…
The monologue expresses royal succession concerns of Elizabeth times, but also emits irony as the audience things work out for Henry V, and find comfort that the same could be thought of their futures. Not only a magnificent monologue for an actor to perform, as it completes the picture of Henry IV as a character, the monologue also sets up for Prince Hal as a character. Hal reacts and responds to Henry IV, and he ultimately wins his father’s love and blessing, a bittersweet reconciliation contrasted with Hal’s sour repudiation of his other father, Falstaff. By highlighting the immense amount of fears weighting on Henry IV’s mind, the king’s newly found peace becomes sweeter and welcome as Hal can now smoothly achieve fulfillment and take his rightful place, completing his transformation. This monologue makes such maneuvering