![]() Upon hearing of Hotspur's successes in battle, Henry IV compares Hotspur to his son. The King aligns himself with Hotspur, whom he would prefer to have as a son instead of Prince Henry. In the first scene of Henry IV, Part I, King Henry immediately sets up a binary opposition between the Prince and Hotspur. The King puts forth a sense that Hotspur will act as Bolingbrook did in Richard II, by challenging the Prince's right to the throne he feels that Bolingbrook's rivalry with Richard is reflected in Hotspur's position as Hal's challenger. However, the King associates himself with Hotspur, who, as his name suggests, is a relentless warrior. Therefore, as opposed to Hotspur's becoming the Bolingbrook persona, it is the drunken and disorderly Falstaff who becomes the character most parallel to the King. Falstaff significantly complicates the Hotspur-is-to-Bolingbrook-as-Hal-is-to-Richard II assumption because Falstaff has so much in common with the King. Absent from Richard II, Falstaff is introduced in Henry IV to create intricacy and ambiguity regarding likenesses among these characters. A major reason why these character parallels do not perfectly hold up is because of the marvelous character of Falstaff. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |