As I keep reading Shakespeare, I continue to try to make connections to the present day, and in the case of “Henry IV” I wonder what role the characters would play in today’s society. Would they be presidents, CEO’s, mobsters, or just part of the middle class struggling to make it. I think it is probable that the nobility would be in the upper class, but would they still be as ruthless as they are in the plays. If they were they would definitely be part of some mafia connections running some type of illegal trade or distribution. There are already hints of this type of behavior in the play, especially the means that King Henry went to in order to be king, and also not to mention the robbery that Falstaff commits. The corruption in these acts of violence and treason are indicative of an underworld of crime that most only hear about. With these ideas floating around, I wonder what role a character like Falstaff would occupy. Could anybody really rely on him to overtake any power, and would he be trusted to take hold of a situation that requires the utmost skill and accuracy? I feel that Falstaff is the antithesis of a trustworthy person, especially one I would use for any work that required even the slightest amount of attention. His laziness alone is enough to warrant the use of another person: “If I travel but four foot by the square further afoot, I shall break my wind” (2.2.13-14). He is unable to even walk without getting tired. With that trait of his, he definitely sets himself up for disaster. When I compare Falstaff to characters in modern books or shows, he seems to parallel the deadbeat/criminal cousin or in-law. Apparently the role of these characters has not changed because they always seem to provide most of the comic relief of the stories, such as Falstaff. Given all the bad things that can be said about Falstaff, I think it is safe to say that he is one of the most likeable and admirable characters. This is based solely on his demeanor and outlook on life. Everyone around him picks up on his wittiness and comical attitude. This is evident when Harry and Poins take away his horse:
Poins: I have removed Falstaff’s horse, and he frets like a gummed velvet. [exit Poins]
Prince Harry: Stand close!
Falstaff: Poins! Poins, and be hanged! Poins!
Prince Harry: Peace, ye fat-kidneyed rascal! What a brawling dost though keep! (2.2.1-7).
At any moment some sort of prank will be pulled and they always seem to surround Falstaff. It must be that his humor is contagious to those around him. The most appalling part of their humor is how they seem to jeopardize their friend’s life without even thinking twice. I think that Falstaff would be the most entertaining character to be around, but there is a flakiness about him and Poins that would hinder any relaxation around them.
New Paltz Students Blogging about Shakespeare
5 comments:
Falstaff actually reminds me a lot of Puc from A Midsummer's Night Dream. It seems that Falstaff is running around creating havoc wherever he goes. Puc does the same with the love square found in AMND. The only difference would be that in the end Puc sets straight his mistakes...will Falstaff??
I like the whole reimagining characters in a different age thing and always find it interesting whaen a writer attempts it.
Falstaff seems to fit the loveable coward character type, as he shamelessly avoids danger and even considers his ability to stay out of harms way a point of pride( "The better part of valor is discression," he says), yet the audience still loves him and does not think of him as a villian.
I really enjoyed your comparison of Falstaff to modern times, being the grubby cousin from a mafia-type family. While reading the movie "Deuces Wild" came into my head, and I thought of the guy who played Jimmy Pockets cousin (bad analogy, and bad movie, but it was my first thought). He's overweight and sleazy, trying to get what he can with little effort.
Very cool comparison, Cory! Your insight about Falstaff is particularly strong because there is a kind of "edge" to the humor of Falstaff and Harry. Yes, this is all for fun, at one level, but there is also a good deal of subversion in what they do. There is also a lack of regard for their fellows, at times, which I agree is a characteristic shared by contemporary representations of gangster cultures.
I love the comparison you made between the nobility in Henry IV and modern day mafia men! It made me think that I would love to see a production of this show done with this concept in mind. I think the story line lends itself extremely well to this kind of big bad Italian mentality, in which family and loyalty are of the utmost importance. Furthermore, betrayal, backstabbing, and fighting for power are all elements common in the interactions between mobsters. Don't ask me how I know that... or you'll be sleepin' with the fishes. ;)
Post a Comment