Henry IV opens with a country on the brink of political turmoil. The order of things has been completely disrupted by the death of Richard II and it seems that all of England has been turned on its head. Class distinctions are blurred and we see characters cross over from courtly life into the lives of commoners.
Primarily, we see a question of what makes a ruler legitimate. Certainly King Henry is not a legitimate ruler, he overthrew Richard II and took his place as King. Now, in the wake of this violent upset of the norm, we are introduced to new characters who are planning yet another overthrow. The thing is though, the norm has already been disrupted, things have already begun to change, and as a result, we see marked examples of increasing disregard of traditional conduct and behavior.
In a way, not unlike his father, Prince Harry has a knack for interacting with the common people. He likes to be out amongst them. He too may tip "his bonnet to an oyster-wench." But unlike his father, Harry has a penchant for frequenting taverns and engaging in other more unscrupulous acts unfitting of a future king. We see Prince Harry speak, in Act I Scene III, of making amends for his undignified behavior whenever he chooses.
"And like bright metal on a sullen ground, my reformation, glitt'ring o'er my fault. Shall show more goodly and attract more eyes than that which hath no foil to set it off. I'll so offend to make offense a skill, redeeming time when men think least I will."
Perhaps Harry is overly confident in his ability to win people over, in his ability to control a situation. Or perhaps he is on to something. Unlike his father, Harry truly does win the trust of both commoners and noblemen alike. He has the unique ability to understand the way people communicate with one another and adopt his mannerisms accordingly. He can speak passionately and emphatically before a King, while still being able to banter with a bartender in the local dialects. Harry is more of a man of the people than his father ever could have been. And while his father's "right" to the throne is questionable, and his place was certainly not got through ethical means, we can't help but question whether or not Harry might have a viable and rightful place on the throne simply because he can relate to the people with greater ease and understanding than any who have gone before him.
3 comments:
I'm inclined to see something negative in Hal's adaptive personality--the word shapeshifting comes to mind--but your conclusion that he is a potentially empathetic ruler is intriguing. You talk about what makes a ruler legitimate, especially during a time of such disorder, and I wonder if someone who can make their "reformation [glitter] over their fault" really is the person to follow.
I might be making a cliched commentary here, but I think this way of analyzing the play is really relevant to the current presidential race. In a democracy, so much time, energy, and money, is spent finding the most legitimate leader. I wonder what kind of campaign Hal would devise if he were running for president against Lord Mortimer.
Being confident in one's ability to win people over is the first step in actually winning them over. Harry is a people person and he certainly knows how to adjust his behavior to win over the commoners as well as teh nobility, which is an admirable characteristic to have, especially in a potential ruler.
This also seems as though he is trying to please everyone at once, including himself. Such intentions make good goals, but rarely do they work out the way in which one plans for them to.
I like your point that Bolingbroke's legacy with the common people is further amplified by Hal's connection to tavern. Although a borderline degenerate, Hal represents an seemingly ideal for Shakespeare's audience, a conglomeration of both the lower class and the elite. After Prince Harry proves himself on the battlefield and redeems his royal title, we're left viewing him as a groomed underdog. But in the context of Shakespeare's times, i wonder if any royals were offended by the fact that his bawdy beginnings gave him a leg up in his quest to power. Is Hal's rise to power a 20th century ideal or a timeless paragon?
Post a Comment