| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "KING HENRY IV V": |
|
|
"King Henry IV" and "King Henry V", 2002.
Examines fraud, theatricality and politics in Shakespeare's "King Henry IV" (parts one and two) and "King Henry V".
3,930 words (approx. 15.7 pages), 18 sources, MLA, $ 107.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The falsification of the audience?s expectations and Hal?s miraculous emergence as a great English king, alongside the Hal-Falstaff relationship out of which the future king?s identity is gradually constructed, are the main critical puzzles in most studies of the William Shakespeare's "King Henry" series. The paper examines concepts of fraud and politics in parts one and two of "King Henry IV" and in "King Henry V". It discusses notions by literary critics such as Stephen who claim that Hal is one of Shakespeare?s most Machiavellian characters. The paper argues that Machiavelli?s Prince is not sufficiently cruel or sophisticated to be ranked with Prince Hal, despite the fact that Falstaff?s cry for help, voiced in his paradoxical accusation that the Prince has corrupted him, seldom succeeds in inverting the audience?s impression that Falstaff is Hal?s misleader.
From the Paper
"The concept of necessity, as it arises from the morality-patterned Phychomachia, reinforces providentialist notions, an idea first advanced by Tillyard but in a rather different context. Religious providentialism fuses the personal and political domains and Hal?s borrowing from the theatrical and diachronic anthropological deposit causes the interweaving of theatrical illusion with politics, thus displaying their common structural patterns. The fusion of religion, politics and theatre culminates in Hal?s gradual conversion to virtue, which is at once a milestone in Hal?s allegedly privileged relationship with God, a major political event, and a stock trick of Elizabethan drama."
| |
|
William Shakespeare's "King Henry the IV, Part I", 2008.
Looks at the treatment of women in William Shakespeare's "King Henry the IV, Part I".
920 words (approx. 3.7 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the apparent roles and functions of women in William Shakespeare's "King Henry the IV, Part I". Specifically, the paper looks at the impact of women upon other characters and whether or not their roles should have been different and, if so, how they should have been different. The paper contends that Shakespeare accurately captures the gender divisions of his age but fails to highlight the central contribution of Henry IV's first wife, Mary de Bohun, in the establishment of this man as a powerful king over a flourishing empire.
From the Paper
"One other thing that becomes evident is that much of the play is about men seeking power - about them accruing titles or lands, in short. As a result, by as early as Act 1, Scene 3, it is fairly clear, at least as we listen to Hotspur denounce the Prince of Wales and "Bolingbroke" (Henry IV), that power in fourteenth century England is a "man's thing" and that women are only referenced in these matters if they are bearing children who may become lineal descendants to a throne or baronetcy or if the behavior of one nobleman or another is so intemperate that he is described by his colleagues as a "woman" who cannot hold his tongue or think rationally."
| |
|
"King Henry IV", 2004.
An analysis of legitimacy as a theme in Shakespeare's "King Henry IV".
753 words (approx. 3.0 pages), 0 sources, $ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the use of legitimacy as a theme in the play, "King Henry IV," by William Shakespeare. The paper includes a discussion of the legitimacy of the king and his rule, as a well as a close look at Prince Hal. The paper contends that Henry's legitimacy becomes the center of all of the major crises in the play and, thus, is a major and binding theme.
From the Paper
"From the moment Shakespeare's play 1 King Henry IV opens, the legitimacy of King Henry's crown is a major theme throughout the play. Not only does it become the justification of the Percys and others violent revolts against Henry, but it can also be used to explain the disobedient acts carried out by Hal, King Henry's son and heir to the throne. King Henry's usurpation of the throne and act of regicide lead to consequences that will spoil his reign illegitimate."
| |
|
Nobility and Commoners in Shakespeare's "King Henry IV", 2004.
Character analysis of the main characters in "King Henry IV".
2,171 words (approx. 8.7 pages), 0 sources, MLA, $ 67.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents a character analysis of Henry and Hal, two of the main characters in Shakespeare's play, "King Henry IV", and shows how Shakespeare, by comparing and contrasting these two characters, was able to display the attitudes of both the nobility and the commoners and foreshadow Hal?s ability to become a stable, successful ruler.
From the Paper
"Hal?s feelings towards his father reflect the feelings of the commoners towards the king. Hal?s soliloquy, ?I know you all...? (I, ii 183-205) reveals Hal?s moral awareness and scorn towards the character he has used to disguise his true frustration with the standards that the king has disgraced. A noble and virtuous young man deliberately masquerading as a dissolute prodigal, Hal is not likely to overlook the deep moral blemishes in his father nor the hypocrisy of Henry IV?s assumption of rightful kingship. However, as the King?s subject and heir, Hal is denied all means of expressing his contempt for the dishonorable means by which Henry IV has maintained and stolen power. By showing contempt for the king, Hal would be following the example of Henry IV?s disloyal behavior towards Richard II, and siding with the rebels who now challenge Henry IV?s fitness to rule."
| |
|
Henry IV, Parts I and II and Henry V, 1994.
An exploration of the development of the king from a wastrel Machiavellian youth to a mature moral and political leader.
1,575 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 6 sources, $ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The three history plays by Shakespeare known as the Henriad are comprised of Henry IV: Part I, Henry IV: Part II, and Henry V. Richard III is actually the beginning of the historical sequence, but the three plays of the Henriad are concerned specifically with the development and ascension of Henry V (formerly Prince Hal) to the throne of England. In the course of the three plays, Prince Hal changes from a rather wastrel youth to a mature king, and in his development Henry becomes what would be considered a Christian rathe than a Machiavellian prince, dedicated to cetain principles rather than to the principle that how a king rules is in itself always right.
Throughout these plays, including Richard III, there is a search for national unity is found in Henry V:
The principal theme of Henry V, already approached in..."
| |
|
"Henry IV" and "King Lear" ( William Shakespeare ), 1999.
Examines and compares how two tragic kings are portrayed by the author and treated by the other characters.
2,475 words (approx. 9.9 pages), 8 sources, $ 87.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The purpose of this research is to examine how the two kings are treated in 1 Henry IV and King Lear and why they are treated as they are. The plan of the research will be to set forth the dramatic and historical context in which each play deals with the issue of monarchy and its proper treatment, and then to discuss lines of action in each play that demonstrate the source of the treatment that Henry and Lear receive.
In the film My Fair Lady, after the Cockney flower girl Miss Eliza Doolittle has been trained to speak and behave in a genteel English manner, she says to the mother of her trainer, Professor Higgins, that the difference between a flower girl and a lady is not how she acts but how she is treated: "I shall always be a lady to Colonel Pickering [Higgins's partner in the training] because he always treats me as a lady and always will. I shall ..."
| |
|
William Shakespeare's "Richard II" and "Henry IV", 2007.
This paper discuss the relationship between kingship and identity in William Shakespeare's plays "Richard II" and "Henry IV".
2,790 words (approx. 11.2 pages), 3 sources, APA, $ 83.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, in "Richard II" and "Henry IV", William Shakespeare explores the issue of kingship by depicting Richard II and Henry IV as polar opposites. The author points out that Richard II, whose claim to the throne is considered legitimate but whose ability to lead is poor, is regarded as the complacent and lyrical king; whereas, Henry IV, whose claim to the throne in terms of the laws of succession is unstable, has won the support of the people based on his merit. The paper stresses that the perspective of Hal benefits from the experience of both his predecessors in that he is the legal successor to his father. The paper includes several quotations.
From the Paper
"Shakespeare has an ambivalent attitude towards kingship. He does provide an argument in favor of rightful succession to Richard's throne and the maintenance of traditional values embodied in the crown and the state under its rule, in the voice of Carlisle, for example. Yet at the same time, he clearly illustrates the destructive nature of kingship on the individual behind the crown. There are moral questions raised which are never answered which in itself casts doubt on the values inherent in kingship. For example, we are never provided with a suitable moral explanation for, and are never really comfortable with, Hal's renouncement of Falstaff."
| |
|
The Struggle towards Unity in ?Henry IV?, 2004.
A look at how William Shakespeare, in his "Henry IV, Parts I and II", emphasizes the ideas of struggle and progress through his characterizations of Henry and Hal.
2,262 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 0 sources, MLA, $ 70.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines William Shakespeare's plays, "Henry IV, Parts I and II", and, in particular, looks at how Henry misjudges his son and cannot see that Hal, who is not guilty of usurpation and regicide, will be able to unite the now divided kingdom. It shows how Henry?s faults and strengths cause him to symbolically reflect the struggle for progress, represented by the bridge between the corruption of England during Richard II?s reign and the unity of Henry V?s kingdom. It also explores how, after the ?struggle? ceases and Henry IV dies, Prince Hal becomes King Henry V ,and the previously divided nation progresses by integration.
From the Paper
"Hal?s adoption of the commoners is best described by the Duke of Warwick when he says: ?The Prince but studies his companions, / Like a strange tongue? to gain the language?? (Pt. II, IV, iv, 76-78.) Hal is like a growing tree basking in the sun, Henry IV is the gardener who planted Hal?s seed, and the commoners form one of Hal?s developing branches. By growing into a man ?of all humors,? (Pt. I, II, iv, 89) Hal is becoming his entire nation in an individual form, which is symbolically what a king is. Hal has studied the commoners well and is able to both talk and think like them, as portrayed in Hal?s witty exchanges with Falstaff. Hal?s desire to adapt to the needs of the various peoples of his country foreshadows the harmony that will dominate England when he is king."
| |
|
"Henry IV", 2003.
An analysis of the father-son conflict in William Shakespeare's "Henry IV".
2,445 words (approx. 9.8 pages), 0 sources, MLA, $ 74.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how in "Henry IV", Shakespeare handles, among other human relationships, the disharmony that often arises between parent and child as the latter begins to grow up. It is a difficult time in any walk of life; but strained relationships between a reigning sovereign, of either sex and the heir to the throne seem almost Oedipal in nature. It examines how the attitude of Henry IV to his son is to some extent the result of the peculiar conditions of his own accession since he usurped the throne from Richard II, whom he subsequently murdered. It looks at how thus his reign and all his actions are overhung with the consciousness both of personal guilt and of insecurity of tenure and how he constantly misunderstands his son.
From the Paper
"The insurrection of the Percies causes the King to summon the Price of Wales, so that he can find out exactly where he stands and if he can be made use of in this crisis which threatens the newly established dynasty; and we are prepared by an interview, by Sir John Bracy?s summons, which interrupts the fun at the Boar?s head, and by Falstaff and Hal themselves, who rehearse the scene in comic anticipation. His Majesty begins with bitter chiding, as Falstaff prophesied he would. He hints at the affair with the Lord Chief Justice and speaks of the lost seat at the Council and the banishment from court. However, the King?s real complaint is that Hal has made himself look cheap in the eyes of men, which is the last thing the representative of a family with a doubtful title to the thrown should do."
| |
|
"Hamlet" and "Henry IV", 2002.
A look at father-son relationships in the Shakespearean plays, "Hamlet" and "Henry IV".
2,430 words (approx. 9.7 pages), 10 sources, MLA, $ 74.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This is a paper on father-son relationships in "Hamlet" and "Henry IV" part 1. The author analyzes this relationship in detail looking at the characters and how they impact the type of relationship that develops. The paper contends that while the relationship in "Hamlet" revolves around respect, in "Henry IV", the relationship is more about power.
From the Paper
?Hamlet, the young prince, so loved and venerated the memory of his dead father, almost amounting to idolatry, and had such a nice sense of honor and propriety, that he is taken aback when his mother, Gertrude, Queen of Denmark, marries his uncle, his father?s brother, within two month of the King?s death. All the more so because Claudius in no ways resembled the King in the qualities of either mind or appearance. He was as contemptible in outward appearance as he was base and unworthy in disposition.?
| |
|
Shakespeare's "Henry IV", 2000.
A discussion of the concept of honor in Shakespeare's play, "Henry IV".
1,836 words (approx. 7.3 pages), 4 sources, $ 58.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper takes a look at how Shakespeare shows his audience the noble and ignoble nature of honor and chivalry in the behavior of the play?s main characters Henry Percy, Henry Prince of Wales, Sir John Falstaff, and King Henry the Fourth. An examination of "Henry IV" shows how Shakespeare demonstrates these 16th century values of honor and justice to his audience.
| |
|
Luigi Pirandello?s "Henry IV", 2002.
A review of Luigi Pirandello?s play "Henry IV".
1,699 words (approx. 6.8 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines Luigi Pirandello?s "Henry IV", a powerful and complex play that challenges the dialectical oppositions of madness versus sanity and illusion versus reality. It analyzes how although the protagonist is supposed to be a madman, he is the one who possesses the profound insight into life and reality and in comparison. It shows how the "sane" characters are ridiculous and shallow in their perceptions. It evaluates how by elevating the "madman" above the sane characters and giving him the voice of reason, Pirandello questions the validity of the demarcations between madness and sanity. It looks at how Henry?s imaginary world is a microcosm of life that is equivalent to a grand masquerade consisting of sane people who also try to deceive themselves by playing the roles of their choice.
From the Paper
"The themes of madness and acting are inextricably interwoven together in this play. Henry?s madness is encapsulated in his illusion about being the real Henry IV. He is surrounded by people who also play roles in their attempt to simulate the period of Henry IV. Furthermore, as a mad person, Henry is an actor who transcends the limitations of time, space and sequence that affects human beings. However, he is not the only "madman" in this play. In his speech to Matilda in Act I, he illuminates her desperate attempt to defy the passage of time by constructing a mask of youth to suit her self-perception: "?my lady, don?t dye your hair to deceive the others, nor even yourself? I do it for a joke! You do it seriously! But I assure you that you too, Madam, are in masquerade, though it be in all seriousness" (Pirandello 170; 1). Although Matilda knows that she cannot win her battle against time, she still engages in her imaginary creation of her ideal youthful image. In the same way, she is as mad as Henry IV because she is also trapped into her illusion (Bassnett-McGuire 107). "
| |
|
"Henry IV", 2001.
The following paper examines Shakespeare?s "King Henry IV", focusing on Elizabethan stage scenery, Elizabethan period acting and the historical accuracy of the play.
1,940 words (approx. 7.8 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 61.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explores the history of the technical production of "Henry IV", Part I and examines some of the historical sources from which Shakespeare obtained his historical information.
From the Paper
"Most believe that the Elizabethan stage was rather bare by modern standards. It is a popular opinion that the actions and dialogue of the actors mainly dressed the stage. By modern technological standards this may be true. However records from the Revels Office indicate that scenery was quite elaborate at times and special attention was given to detail. We must draw our conclusions about staging and scenery in Elizabethan stage performances from descriptions written at the time. One of the earliest plays of which we have a description of the scenery is ?Edwardes tragedy.? It was produced in Whitehall in 1564."
| |
|
"Henry IV", 2004.
A discussion of the art of the drama in Shakespeare's "Henry IV" and "Hamlet, Prince of Denmark".
1,322 words (approx. 5.3 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper compares the characters of Prince Hal and Hamlet in William Shakespeare's plays "Henry IV" and "Hamlet, Prince of Denmark". The paper analyzes the dramatic aspects of each character. The paper illustrates the personas that each character creates for himself, in addition to their personality as defined by the author. The paper highlights the constant contrasts between Prince Hal and Hamlet.
From the Paper
"Shakespeare is of course a dramatist, that is, he was an author of plays with fictional characters in them, portrayed by real people known as actors. Yet quite often Shakespeare's fictional characters are themselves 'actors' in their own life stories, creating personas that they play in addition to acting out their true, 'real life' struggles of the plot as defined by the author. For instance, Prince Hal, of Henry IV, Part I and Hamlet are two such individuals-the first pretends to be a rouge, even though he is really a skillful prince and politician destined to be a king, the second is an avenging son who assumes madness as a truth-telling device, and also as protection for his eccentric actions and behavior in a fraught Danish court. "
| |
|
William Shakespeare?s "Henry IV", 2005.
This paper discusses the character of Falstaff in William Shakespeare's "Henry IV".
1,385 words (approx. 5.5 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 46.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that the character of Falstaff, in William Shakespeare's "Henry IV" is a completely independent organism; he is both a child, who needs nursing, and a mother, who gives nursing, which renders him emotionally self-sufficient. The author points out that Falstaff has no sense of history; he is devoid of the peripheral vision of past or future that tends to de-emphasize the present; thus, Falstaff lives like nature because he is not fiscally bound to dependence, conscious of himself or a partaker in history. The paper relates that Falstaff never fully believes in honor, but he does see practical value in wearing its mask, having a title, to the point that he will lie about killing Hotspur to have it.
From the Paper
"Nature is self-sufficient; it is a perfect organism that harbors everything it needs to prevail within itself. By contrast, civilization is dependent on the dismembering and itemization of nature, the trade of which is its foundation; civilization persists on supply and necessitates demand -- "nature falls into revolt / when gold becomes her object" (2.IV.v.65-6). Nature, in its undivided essence, cannot be self-conscious; it is boundless, and as such, has no foreign counter-point with which to ascertain itself. Nature is not conscious of itself because conscious auto-determinacy necessitates spatiotemporal terminus. Civilization, on the other hand, sanctions self-consciousness by forcing a divide within its subjects; paying heed to their individual limits, what they lack, humans are able to procure demand and develop supply."
|
|
|
