| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE KING HENRY IV": |
|
|
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."
| |
|
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."
| |
|
"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."
| |
|
"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."
| |
|
William Shakespeare's "Henry IV: Part I", 1994.
This paper discusses the use of conceptions of time to define characters, their relationships and attitudes toward life and nature in William Shakespeare in "Henry IV: Part I".
1,575 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 1 source, $ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
" William Shakespeare in "Henry IV: Part I" tells the story of part of the history of England, when Henry IV as king is surrounded by enemies, facing civil war in England, and unable to fulfill his earlier promise to lead a force to the Holy Land on a crusade. The plot of the play covers the time when the Percies are in rebellion. The story concerns not only these historical events but also the concern of a father for his apparently lazy son. henry's son Hal spends his time in the company of low-lifes, notably one John Falstaff, at the local tavern. The absence of his son forces Henry to depend more and more on young Hotspur. Shakespeare uses conceptions of time to define the characters, their attitudes toward the world, and the nature of the events of which they are a part. an examination of the nature of time with reference to Hal, Hotspur, and Falstaff will show .. "
| |
|
"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."
| |
|
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.
| |
|
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."
| |
|
Shakespeare's "Titus Andronicus" and "Henry IV", 2006.
A look at how Shakespeare was influenced by medieval dramaturgy when he wrote "Titus Andronicus" and "Henry IV".
2,250 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 4 sources, $ 89.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines two plays by William Shakespeare, "Titus Andronicus" and "Henry IV", and details how each is indebted to medieval dramaturgy. To begin with the paper starts by reviewing the pyramidal construction of Shakespeare's "Titus Andronicus" and how this organization of the plot owes much to earlier medieval plays. Among other things the paper suggests that the play arrangement and sequence serves not only to heighten audience interest in the stage play but also serves to stoke the desire of theater goers to vicariously participate in the final denouement through a desire to see the wrong doers punished.
From the Paper
"The following paper examines two plays by William Shakespeare - Titus Andronicus and Henry IV - and details how each is indebted to medieval dramaturgy. To begin with, the paper starts by reviewing the "pyramidal construction" of Shakespeare's Titus Andronicus and how this organization of the plot owes much to earlier medieval plays. Among other things, the paper will suggest that the play's arrangement and sequence serves not only to heighten audience interest in the stage play but also serves to stoke the desire of theater-goers to vicariously participate in the final denouement (through a desire to see the wrong-doers punished). Beyond that, the play's pyramidal organization allows Shakespeare to also express in more subtle fashion his own classical sensibilities. Proceeding onward, the second part of the paper will be devoted to exploring Henry IV and how the "stock..."
| |
|
Shakespeare's "Henry IV" an "Twelfth Night"., 2002.
This paper explores Shakespeare's notion of romantic love, as illustrated by two of his plays.
1,220 words (approx. 4.9 pages), 0 sources, MLA, $ 41.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper shows how Shakespeare links romantic love with power, greed and politics. It starts with an analysis of ?Twelfth Night?, discussing how the entire plot focuses on the love interests of the characters. It looks at Shakespeare?s suggestion that love - only if politically feasible ? is permitted. It looks at the character of Viola and the power issues raised by the fact that she is disguised as a man. The economic compatibility in the final twist of the plot is explored, as are Sebastian?s unromantic motivations for marriage. The paper concludes by looking briefly at the theme of love motivated by politics in ?Henry V?.
From the Paper
"Ah love. It appears to be a rather simple emotion ? at first glance. You find someone you are attracted to physically, then the attraction grows into affection, and the affection grows into love. The two of you marry, and live happily ever after. Right? It would seem that dear Shakespeare couldn?t quite grasp the simpler aspects of love, and marriage, for most of his plays dealing with love are littered with unromantic things like politics, and economic gain. One obvious play is ?Twelfth Night?, and one less obvious play is ?Henry V?; however both show Shakespeare?s tendency to link romantic love with less romantic power, politics and greed."
| |
|
Shakespeare's Kings, 2006.
A comparison between William Shakespeare's characters of Richard II and King Henry IV.
1,600 words (approx. 6.4 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 52.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines two of Shakespeare's historical kings: Richard II and King Henry IV. The paper argues that Richard II was a king by divine right, whereas Henry IV was a Machiavellian king. The paper first assesses Richard's rule: he was not loved by his people or by those who served him; he did not earn his kingship, did not respect it and did not do anything in order to keep it. The paper contrasts this to King Henry IV, who was completely aware of his kingship and what he had to do to keep it; he acted aggressive, decisive and proactive. The paper then demonstrates how the characterization of these two kings demonstrates Shakespeare's unique ability to capture the diversity of humanity and create believable characters. The paper concludes that Shakespeare proves that kings are just like the rest of us--some of them capable and some of them negligent beyond belief. The paper quotes from both plays in order to supports its theses.
From the Paper
"Richard II was a king by the divine right of kings and we only need to look at his actions to determine this fact. He would have never earned his kingship had it not been something that was given to him by right of his birth. In short, Richard is a bad king with no real vision. He never takes time to learn what it means to be king and, as a result, does not care about the responsibilities that come along with the title of being king. To make matters worse, he breaks laws and traditions that are essential to his own kingship and his bad behavior forces those under him to feel helpless, hopeless, and without direction. He does not care for the people and while he may have been an intelligent man, he was not strong in the way that a king needs to be strong. Undoubtedly, King Richard's strongest and best characteristic was his eloquence."
| |
|
"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", 2002.
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 as well as exploring 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.?
| |
|
A Clown In King Henry's Court, 2004.
Falstaff and his role in Shakespeare's "King Henry IV", Parts 1 and 2.
1,200 words (approx. 4.8 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 41.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper is a brief analysis of how Shakespeare uses Falstaff for comedic relief. It analyzes the character of the clown and his role as related to the rest play's characters.
From the Paper
"It is often assumed that royal kingdoms have their own jesters to provide entertainment for the royal family. Part of this assumption stems from such things as literary works. In Shakespeare?s King Henry IV Part 1 and King Henry IV Part 2, there also exists such a jester, a clown if you will, that is one of Shakespeare?s most enduring comic creations. So enduring is this character that Shakespeare even brought him back from death in another play simply for his comic relief. John Falstaff is a stand-up comic, and like any comic, he depends on his writer to achieve their wanted effect. Shakespeare, as Falstaff?s writer, achieves his comic relief through his subject, who then imparts it upon his royal friends."
|
|
|
