Kings and Fools

Paper Summary:

This paper attempts to show how William Shakespeare perceived the contemporary monarchy as well as the monarchy of the past through a careful textural analysis of selected scenes in "Henry IV, Part I" and "King Lear". It looks at how both plays deal with the monarchy as central roles and, thus, are ideal for a study of Shakespeare's insights on the ruling elite. It attempts to weave together both texts to show the Bard's opinion on being ruled by a central authority figure.

From the Paper:

"The question of honor is time and time again brought up in the play. It is an odd question being that none of the main characters seems to be inclined any great deal with it. The prince is noble, but acts with a complete disregard of honor. Hotspur, while brave and vigilant in battle, is seen as fanatic and unyielding to authority, as well as self-absorbed. The king conspires against his own nobles and trusts few in turn. Of all the places to look for honor, it might serve best to look at the character of Falstaff. Falstaff is the last place one would think to look for a notion such as honor, but it is a fascinating read of his character. Consider that of all the characters, Falstaff alone is completely open and trusting with his character."

More papers on Kings and Fools:

• Comparison Essay # 94089 : "Puck and Fool - A Comparison"
• Analytical Essay # 38982 : "King Lear and the Fool"
• Analytical Essay # 31382 : "Madness in "King Lear" and "Twelfth Night"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: