King Henry IV Part 1 Speech PDF

Preview

Summary

20/20 for speech about King Henry IV Part 1...

Description

31624088 A war stricken bloodied monarch makes for a thought-provoking drama, and that’s why Act 3 Scene 2 of King Henry IV Part 1 enhances my understanding that leaders must not only possess divine certification to rule, but also political acumen. And so, Shakespeare explores the various nuances of leadership and brings to light the necessity for a balanced Machiavellian leader as demonstrated through Hal.

King Henry’s description of Hal as a divine retribution from God in Act 3 Scene 2, “For some displeasing service. He’ll breed revengement and a scourge for me”; reinforces our understanding that despite possessing honourable characteristics, unlawful deposition of an anointed king will result in social instability. The civil unrest plaguing King Henry’s reign is reflective upon the Elizabethan notion that the dissolution of kingship as a divine right, will lead to perpetual chaos. Shakespeare immediately establishes the national disorder through Henry’s monologue: “daub her lips with her own children’s blood”, anthropomorphising England as a mother violated by civil division. And in my work on the left, the sepia tinted cloak enveloping the King, reflects the brutality and bloodshed elicited under the rule of King Henry as an unlawful usurper.

And so, Hotspur alludes to this deposition of King Richard II in “Put down Richard that sweet loving rose and plant this thorn, this canker Bolingbroke” where the juxtaposition of Richard as a “loving rose” to Henry as a “thorn” simply characterises the King as a dishonourable fraud. And so of course, the microcosm of the Rochester yard, displays how Henry’s unscrupulous actions has permeated to irreversibly corrupt all levels of society: “We steal as in a castle…we have the receipt of fern-seed, we walk invisible”. Fern-seeds as a widely regarded conjecture to grant invisibility, exposes that under corrupt leaders, society will dissolve into chaos fostering an environment that allows criminals to thrive.

Similarly, my visual on the left, the black contrast and demanding gaze of the advisor is representative of the corruption that pervades all levels of society also alluding to the chauvinistic Hotspur who is to betray Henry. Despite this, Henry also displays aspects of honourable kingship; “Good Worcester, we love our people well…will they take the offer of our grace”, as his accommodating tone towards a peace offering exemplifies his commitment to protecting his subjects from violence. In spite of this, his victory at Shrewsbury still resolves with allusions to future conflict and disorder: “Let us not leave til all our own are won”. Ultimately, even the King’s emphatic statement expresses his discontent and guilt in realising the nature of his divisive rule; which critic Bandana Singh summarises: “[Henry’s] dissolution of divine rights leads to a vacuum in which there is no governing system of kingship.”

And finally in my work, the very premise of my visual regarding the tapered armour leggings, represents the King’s need to be perpetually prepared for war as he sits on his throne.

31624088 So now you may ask, how are leaders supposed to effectively rule?

Well, the King’s assertion that “By being seldom seen, I could not stir... But like a comet I was wondered at” in Act 3 Scene 2, exemplifies to some extent that deception is required to maintain power. However, this notion of pragmatic leadership clashes with the traditional ideas of honour and chivalry, and thus Shakespeare presents the need for a fine balance. Hal embodies the coldly objective, politicised model of leadership conveyed in Machiavelli’s The Prince; stating that leaders may have an obligation to perform acts of dishonesty to preserve the State. Hal’s Machiavellian approach towards leadership is clearly expressed through the extended metaphor of a rising sun, “Yet herein, will I imitate the sun..” a stark contrast to the “base contagious clouds” symbolising Hal’s dignified deceptive ambitions in tolerating commoners to enhance the admiration of his people. Similarly in my visual, the black vector lines that split the composition mirrors Hal’s manipulation of the public to ensure his rise to the throne. The coined side alludes to the deceptive façade created from associating with the avaricious Falstaff, whilst his shining left face represents his princely qualities that will be revealed. And so, Hal’s high modality vow to finally undertake his princely roles; “When I will wear a garment all of blood, which wash'd away, shall scour my shame with it”, offers us as the audience another perspective of a king who is capable of resolving conflict motivated by the desire to restore civil order.

However, Shakespeare also introduces Hal’s antithesis; Hotspur, who embodies the epitome of a onedimensional knight, driven by honour and duty. These knightly qualities are however, undermined by his impulsiveness and hot-tempered nature. By forging ahead with the battle of Shrewsbury without his father and Glendower; “No more no more… Let them come!”, Hotspur’s exclamation encapsulates the recklessness that comes with impulsiveness. Consequently, Vernon’s scathing comment upon Hotspur’s reckless bravery in defence of his honour, “That you foresee not what impediments drag back our expedition” affirms the unsuitability of a man “governed by his spleen” to rule effectively.

In contrast, whilst Hal embodies all the desirable qualities of Hotspur, he has the difference of encompassing the ability to remain pragmatic. And so upon Hal’s release of Sir Douglas “Deliver him up to his pleasure, to be ransomless and free” it is Hal’s pragmatic foresight in maintaining amicable relationships with his subjects, that furthers his suitability as a leader. Therefore, Shakespeare utilises Hal as the ideal Machiavellian leader, who not only meets all facets of leadership, but does so with deception. From Act 3 Scene 2 of King Henry IV Part 1 I have come to understand Shakespeare’s construct of characters to explore the various facets of leadership, ultimately coming to the conclusion that leaders must not only be sanctified to prevent disorder, but be well-tempered and pragmatic to rule effectively. Despite all of this, I think we can all agree on one thing, King Henry IV is a bloody good drama.

31624088...