Henry IV

Rating:
Summary: The better part of valor
Review: In Part One of Shakespeare's "Henry IV," the titular king tries to defend his throne from a rebel army led by the hotheaded Hotspur, who has a long list of grievances about the king's treatment of his family, the Percys. Hotspur has allied himself with several principal figures including his uncle the Earl of Worcester, his brother-in-law Mortimer the Earl of March, Lord Douglas the Scot, and Owen Glendower, a Welsh chieftain with a vivid mystical imagination -- he is so egotistical that he insists an earthquake that occurred the day of his birth was a divine proclamation of his importance -- and a desire to usurp all of Wales from the king.

While he is preparing for war against the rebels, Henry IV laments that his own son Henry (Hal), the Prince of Wales, is a shameful libertine living the high life in London and consorting with a gang of scurrilous miscreants. Indeed, Prince Hal's idea of fun is robbing people, and his best friend and accomplice in this activity is Sir John Falstaff, who turns out to be not Hal's peer but a middle-aged man. In a character transformation of an abruptness that can only be described as magical, Hal becomes a serious young man determined loyally to defend his father's kingship from Hotspur's assault after he receives an earnest lecture from his father about the dangers of acting irresponsibly as a public figure.

Not enough can be said about Falstaff, who is undoubtedly one of the most richly realized characters in literature. He is fat, lazy, cowardly, yet boastful, but not in the same way Owen Glendower is -- Owen really believes what he says; Falstaff is just trying to make himself look better than he actually is, but fools nobody because he prevaricates and embellishes without bothering to remember his previous lies for the sake of consistency. You probably know somebody like this in real life -- especially if you're ten years old. Falstaff's piquancy, in fact, so outweighs the stature of the other characters that his absence is sorely felt in the scenes in which he does not appear.

Most of all, Part One of "Henry IV" is a play of contrasts personified by Prince Hal and Hotspur, who incidentally is also named Henry. In their confrontation on the battlefield, it seems unlikely that Hal, who wasted many of his best days living as a rake, could conquer a seasoned warrior like Hotspur in a swordfight. But there wouldn't be much of a tale to tell if not to show Hal triumphing after his resolution to change his weak habits, and the play ends with the conviction that, despite his past mistakes, he would make a noble king himself.

Rating:
Summary: Hilarious Comedy and Moving Drama
Review: My only complaint about "2 Henry IV" is that Shakespeare draws the scenes with Falstaff out too much (in my opinion). Falstaff is funnier than ever. King Henry IV's younger son Lancaster is a very striking figure. While his father is ill, he commands the forces against his father's enemies. 3.1 where King Henry IV contemplates the consequences of the crown he usurped from Richard II is quite moving. The scene where Lancaster crushes the last of his father's opposition is quite chilling. I can not overestimate Shakespeare's genious in how he handles Henry IV in this play. In "Richard II" his ambition and cruelty for the most part never ceased. In "1 Henry IV," he showed himself to be a competent (and even likeable) king. In this play, he clearly regrets and suffers for his actions against Richard II. (Even if we remember his cruelty in "Richard II," it is hard not to feel sorry for him at this point.) The scene where King Henry IV has his final talk with the eventual Henry V is one of the most moving passages in literature. King Henry V's complete reform is not only well drawn, but it helps prepare us for the next play, "Henry V." But if you want to see more of Falstaff, remember he has the lead role in the later play "The Merry Wives of Windsor."

Rating:
Summary: Among the best!
Review: Of all Shakespeare's histories, Henry IV, part I is the best. It is the first of three plays that examines the ascension of the great King Henry V. Here, we see a young Prince Hal as a troublemaker and a "royal pain" (pun intended), who hangs out in taverns with drunkards and derelicts. But we also see a young man who realizes his destiny and knows that the time will come when he will have to be a strong king for England's sake. The play is more than just one person's rise. It examines English society in atime of great instability and civil strife. It examines the role of family (fathers and sons, brothers, and uncles and nephews). This play is a reflection of Shakespeare at his finest and everyone should read at least this play, whether or not they love Shakespeare or not. It is worth the read. (and it is a rather simple read, too.)

Rating:
Summary: Henry IV, Part I: Civil and Domestic Drama
Review: Shakespeare's "Henry IV Part I" shows King Henry IV dealing with complex problems: England is in the midst of civil unrest, as the Percy family, angered by their treatment after unwittingly helping Henry IV ascend to the throne, threatens to depose the monarch. At home, Henry IV is despairing over the development of his son, Henry, Prince of Wales, heir to the throne. Prince Henry consorts with thieves, rogues, and scoundrels - his scandalous personal relationships seem to threaten the King's peace of mind more than the state of his kingdom.

Aside from these larger concerns that frame the play, "Henry IV Part I" deals more with Prince Henry than it does with the monarch of the title. Throughout the play, Prince Henry is seen more amongst the rabble commoners than attending to matters of state. He is guided in his licentiousness by the enormously funny (pun intended) Sir John Falstaff, whose schemes and drunkenness are more innocent and endearing in Part I than they become in Part II.

Falstaff's reckless and conceited behaviour casts a shadow over the entire play, symbolic as it is of Prince Henry's moral dilemma and of the precarious state of the nation. Falstaff instantly calls to mind Kenneth Grahame's magnificent Mr. Toad from "The Wind in the Willows," and is Toad's direct literary forefather. Falstaff is the most interesting and dynamic figure in "Henry IV Part I" and certainly the most memorable character in the play.

Prince Henry discovers that his responsibilities outweigh his fondness for Spanish wine, and is called to lead the King's army against that of the arrogant 'Hotspur' Percy, himself a rising political force. Their confrontation, brilliantly scripted and enacted, is central to Shakespeare's entire Lancaster-York saga, and should be read closely and with special attention.

Of the two parts of "Henry IV," Part I is by far the best and most flawlessly executed. The King's problems provide an adequate backdrop for the development of Prince Henry; 'Hotspur' is an excellent antagonist (with the whole Percy family offering a great contrast with that of the King); and Falstaff performs his role without dominating the play, as he tends to in Part II. Shakespeare does not need my praise or endorsement, but his "Henry IV Part I" blows me away. It is absolutely fantastic.

Rating:
Summary: The Making of a King
Review: Shakespeare's "Henry IV Part II" concerns the triumphant decline of King Henry IV, and the ascension of his son, Henry, Prince of Wales, to the throne as King Henry V. As in "Henry IV Part I," Part II's main action concerns the attempts of the King to suppress civil strife, which is manifested once again in threatened rebellion. In "Henry IV Part II," the rebels are led by Scroop, the Archbishop of York, the most powerful religious figure in England. The Archbishop's involvement "turns insurrection to religion," thereby hoping to gain popular support and enlistment in the army against Henry IV.

Henry, Prince of Wales, as the next in line to the throne, is expected to take a hard line against these threats, and lead the charge against the rebel forces. However, as in Part I, Prince Henry is nervous, as a young man will be, about accepting responsibility for himself, much less for an entire nation. A frivolous youth, he associates with the common folk in bars and taverns, led in his debaucheries by the notoriously comic Sir John Falstaff. The dichotomy between Prince Henry's father figures, the frail, but courageous King Henry IV and the robust, but cowardly Falstaff sets up the scope of the choice Prince Henry must make. His choice, he comes to realize, will affect the course of his country.

The forces mount as the play moves forward - the King's army is ordered, well-equipped, and led by formidable generals - the Archbishop's army is made up largely of untrained citizens. The meeting of the armies' leaders in the Gaultree Forest of Yorkshire is the emotional and tactical climax of the play, and handled with dramatic precision by Shakespeare.

The growth of Prince Henry, the shaping of his mind, his relationships with his noble father and brothers, as well as those with his low, vulgar drinking buddies, forms the focus of "Henry IV Part II." Through five deceptively simple acts, Shakespeare illustrates the birth of a man and a king, and points the way to domestic peace. This is a play I enjoyed very much indeed, and would recommend reading alongside "Henry IV Part I" for maximum effect.

Rating:
Summary: Some people forget that Shakespeare wrote historical plays
Review: Shakespeare's play King Henry includes comedy, history, and passion. You may find yourself to side with the rebels and cheer on Lord Percy. The only downside to reading Henry IV part one, is that you might have to do your homework to understand what is going on in this era. After reading this play, go see it in the theater if you can!

Rating:
Summary: Henry IV, Part 1 - A Struggle for a Kingdom
Review: The lengthy title for the 1598 printing was "The History of Henrie the Fourth, With the Battell at Shrewsburie, between the King and Lord Henry Percy, surnamed Henrie Hotspur of the North, with the humorous conceits of Sir John Falstaffe".

Surprisingly, Hal, Prince of Wales, (later Henry V) was not even mentioned in this verbose title although many would consider him to be the central character. This play is clearly the dramatization of a struggle for a kingdom, but it is equally the story of Hal's wild and reckless youthful adventures with Falstaff and other disreputable companions.

Shakespeare did not write his plays about English kings in chronological order, but these plays do have a historical unity. It is helpful (but not essential) to read the tetralogy Richard II, Henry IV Part 1 and 2, and Henry V in chronological order. Whatever route you take, I highly recommend buying a companion copy of Peter Saccio's "Shakespeare's English Kings", an engaging look at how Shakespeare revised history to achieve dramatic effect.

A wide selection of Henry IV editions are available, including older editions in used bookstores. I am familiar with a few and have personal favorites:

The New Folger Library Shakespeare is my first choice among the inexpensive editions of Henry IV. "New" replaces the prior version in use for 35 years. It uses "facing page" format with scene summaries, explanations for rare and archaic words and expressions, and Elizabethan drawings located on the left page; the Henry IV text is on the right. I particularly liked the section on "Reading Shakespeare's Language in Henry IV" and Alexander Legget's literary analysis (save this until you have read the play). The fascinating article "Historical Background: Sir John Falstaff and Sir John Oldcastle" adds a religious dimension to the play that I had not previously noted.

The Bedford Shakespeare Series provides an excellent study text (edited by Barbara Hodgdon) titled "The First Part of King Henry the Fourth". It is a little more expensive, is about 400 pages, and provides a broad range of source and context documentation. It would be excellent for an upper level course in Shakespeare. The context documentation is fascinating and informative; it ranges from the Holinshed Chronicles to Elizabethan writing on Civic Order to detailed cultural studies of London's diverse populous. Other chapters address the OldCastle controversy and the "Education of a Prince".

I also like the Norton Critical edition (edited by James Sanderson), "Henry the Fourth, Part 1", particularly for its extensive collection of literary criticism. The essays are divided into two parts: 1) the theme, characters, structure, and style of the play and 2) a wide variety of interpretation directed toward that roguish character, Sir John Falstaff.

Rating:
Summary: Henry IV, Part 1 - A Struggle for a Kingdom
Review: The lengthy title for the 1598 printing was "The History of Henrie the Fourth, With the Battell at Shrewsburie, between the King and Lord Henry Percy, surnamed Henrie Hotspur of the North, with the humorous conceits of Sir John Falstaffe".

Surprisingly, Hal, Prince of Wales, (later Henry V) was not even mentioned in this verbose title although many would consider him to be the central character. This play is clearly the dramatization of a struggle for a kingdom, but it is equally the story of Hal's wild and reckless youthful adventures with Falstaff and other disreputable companions.

Shakespeare did not write his plays about English kings in chronological order, but these plays do have a historical unity. It is helpful (but not essential) to read the tetralogy Richard II, Henry IV Part 1 and 2, and Henry V in chronological order. Whatever route you take, I highly recommend buying a companion copy of Peter Saccio's "Shakespeare's English Kings", an engaging look at how Shakespeare revised history to achieve dramatic effect.

A wide selection of Henry IV editions are available, including older editions in used bookstores. I am familiar with a few and have personal favorites:

The New Folger Library Shakespeare is my first choice among the inexpensive editions of Henry IV. "New" replaces the prior version in use for 35 years. It uses "facing page" format with scene summaries, explanations for rare and archaic words and expressions, and Elizabethan drawings located on the left page; the Henry IV text is on the right. I particularly liked the section on "Reading Shakespeare's Language in Henry IV" and Alexander Legget's literary analysis (save this until you have read the play). The fascinating article "Historical Background: Sir John Falstaff and Sir John Oldcastle" adds a religious dimension to the play that I had not previously noted.

The Bedford Shakespeare Series provides an excellent study text (edited by Barbara Hodgdon) titled "The First Part of King Henry the Fourth". It is a little more expensive, is about 400 pages, and provides a broad range of source and context documentation. It would be excellent for an upper level course in Shakespeare. The context documentation is fascinating and informative; it ranges from the Holinshed Chronicles to Elizabethan writing on Civic Order to detailed cultural studies of London's diverse populous. Other chapters address the OldCastle controversy and the "Education of a Prince".

I also like the Norton Critical edition (edited by James Sanderson), "Henry the Fourth, Part 1", particularly for its extensive collection of literary criticism. The essays are divided into two parts: 1) the theme, characters, structure, and style of the play and 2) a wide variety of interpretation directed toward that roguish character, Sir John Falstaff.

Rating:
Summary: henry iv part 2
Review: the story of prince hal and his 'buddy' falstaff, continues in the second part of 'henry iv'. the last of the rebels are subdued and peace finally comes to england. but the king is very ill, and his death opens the way for hal to ascend the throne. this he does with class, but in so doing he has to forswear his errant youthful ways, including his drinking buddy, falstaff. this play is really the story of hal's acent, and falstaff's parallel descent. the two paths meet at the end in a poignant scene. a worthy sequel to 'henry iv part 1'. the only drawback is the relative dearth of intrigue or battle-related scenes. shakespeare had juggled some of the historical events in part 1 and lumped two separate rebellions into one, putting both before the battle of shrewsberry, when they actually occurred separately before and after. what part 1 gained in heightened drama, part 2 lost in lessened interest. if it's a consolation, there's more falstaff in part 2!

a comment about the reviewer who wrote that prince hal acted dishonorably by abandoning his drinking buddies. hal had no choice but to abandon his old dissolute ways if he was to be a king people respected and followed. if abandoning his old ways meant abandoning his old buddies, then so be it. everyone has to grow up, and hal had too big a role to play and too great responsibilities and duties to continue fooling around. also, he didn't completely abandon falstaff. he specifically said that if and when the fat fool mended his ways he was welcomed to return to see the king who would willingly bestow whatever accolades he deserved.

falstaff, on the other hand, was a knave from beginning to end. he bad-mouthed the prince behind his back. he ransomed off the soldiers in his charge who were commissioned to fight for the king and prince for personal profit. he was a coward, and a braggard. yes, he was funny, but only because we laughed AT him, not with him.

king henry v did what he had to do. and, if you've seen this play enacted, you'll know that he did it with a heavy heart, not callously. look at his reaction to the news of bardolf's execution in 'henry v' for further confirmation. hal did what all good leaders do: he put the good of his country before his personal feelings. it takes great courage and honor to do this. henry v was a brave and honorable man (at least, the hal of shakespeare's plays).

and as for the charge that hal stole his father's crown, the play makes it clear that hal mistook his father for being already dead when he snathed the royal headdress. and he was duly shocked and contrite when he discovered his father was still alive. so, i don't see how this shows hal's 'dishonor'. also, historians doubt the event ever happened. this is the kind of anecdote that begins as rumor in henry's time, and is passed down through generations so it becomes the stuff of legend. but there's no historical evidence that hal ever did such a thing.

Rating:
Summary: So-So
Review: This is one of the harder Shakespearean reads but if you do understand it, it is an interesting adventure with memorable characters and great quotes. Harder than Julius Caesar and Romeo and Juliet, this is still a good book.