Go back to the Shakespeare page for more texts and other resources.

Henry the 4 port 1 - Does Hal undergo real change, or is it marely for political purposes

an analysis of Hal figure and the comparison to Hutspur and Falstaff


The change of a young man or a politician?s orchestrated change?
The change in Prince Hal?s character


Hal?s soliloquy suggests a sharp awareness. Hal knows the nature of his true character, though it may seem different, in the light of his actions. Till the soliloquy Hal seemed to be a prince that ignores his status, and disobeys to act in the courtly manner, and moreover, shows it iin public. His behavior during the scene is far from being the proper behavior for a prince. Th e soliloquy presents the awareness Hal has for himself and the environment. The fact he is aware of his true self since the beginning emphasizes the maturity and the strength of his moral code. In spite the knowledge Hal has about himself, only a change of circumstances actually causes the his character change. Therefore, Hal undergoes a transformation during the play.

At first, in spite of his awareness, he drinks in a tavern that belongs to ?Mrs. Quickly? ? a very rude name for a 16th century female innkeeper. The tavern is a place that hosts the thieves and the ?bad guys? of the commoners. Prince Hal explains the audience the reason for spending time with the tavern people. His awareness to his motives, as well as his awareness to the implications and consequences of his actions shows the mature nature of Hal. He makes it impossible for the audience to judge his character as an immature careless young man ? ?the angry teenager?, but rather an aware responsible adult. Yet, he acts the same as his thieves? companion.

In his soliloquy Hal uses 3 metaphors ? a sun hidden beneath dark clouds, repetitive holidays in oppose to rare days of celebration, a precious metal covered with soil. In all the three, Hal compares himself to the good element: ?I imitate the sun?(1.2.L-201) or ?rare accident? (1.2.L-211), or ?bright metal? (1.2.L-216). His companions are compared to ?contagious clouds? (1.2.L-202) or ?foul and ugly mists?(1.2.L-206), ?sullen ground?(1.2.L-216). These comparisons demonstrate Hal?s awareness to his nature and status and of his companions and strengthen the understanding of Hal?s maturity

Therefore, in his soliloquy Hal already demonstrates the two concepts of change ? the real, internal change and the aware, pubic image, external change, which occur simultaneously. Despite his awareness of his true virtues, Hal joins his friends in their lies and thefts. One could claim Hal does that out of subtle political thought, but an analysis such as that would conflict with the honorable nature of his actions later on.

The reasons for Hal?s choice of friends and company can be related to public image, as well as can relate to other psychological reasons, involving his father and the courtly life. During the play, Hal unmasks part of the psychological reasons for his poor behavior. The relationship between Hal and his father stays problematic till Hal and his father meet at the battlefield, and King Henry comments that he was wrong to ever doubt his son (act 5.4.). For example, in his enactment of his father with Falstaff he attacks Falstaff (pretending to be Hal) for his acquaintance with Falstaff and his friends (2.5.L-413). From that enactment, we can see what Hal thinks his father thinks of him.

Another example is in the first scene of the play. Henry 4th wishes his son would have been as courageous as Hotspur is, and suggests they might have been switched at birth. These incidents show Henry 4th?s attitude towards his son.
This attitude could be a part of the reason Hal chooses his friends out of the thieves. These friends make Hal look good later on ? as the sun comes out of the clouds.

Also, the political-courtly relationships are very peaceful on the surface but contains many back-stabbing underneath. Within the thieves, the back-stabbing is on the surface, without any pretends. The heir to the throne who grew into the world of hypocrisy, the honesty between the thieves (in which you know your enemy?s identity), provides a certain security and confidence.

The first sign for Hal?s change is when Henry summons him. After a long lecture about the suffering he underwent to seize the throne, King Henry ends up weeping that he loves his son even though Hal seems unfit for the throne. Than Prince Hal replies, saying, "I shall hereafter, my thrice-gracious lord, / Be more myself" (3.2.92).

Later on Hal joins his father in the fight against the rebels, and henry grants him with the responsibility for King Henry?s troops. When Henry 4th attempts to end the rebellion without any bloodshed, Hal offers Hotspur a one-on-one fight. Even though this fight doesn?t take place, Hal was willing to risk his own life to protect his country and the lives of the other soldiers (from both sides). This offer clearly shows Hal?s deep loyalty to his country, and his true honor.

This strong moral code is highly emphasized by the comparison between Hotspur (the heir of Wales), Falstaff (the ?prince? of thieves) and Hal (the Prince of Wales). Hotspur is a mighty warrior, relentless, but also hot headed and unarticulated that fights for his own glory, and not out of loyalty or true honor. Falstaff is completely self-centered and only cares his own benefit. He gathers up an army of ex-prisoners for his own profit. Hal represents the true code of morals and honor ? he is loyal to his country, king and father, and his friends. Hotspur represents the wrong idea of heroism and honor. Hal is the true hero, Hotspur is the brave warrior, although mistaken, and Falstaff is the true antihero, with no morals, but his own benefit.

Hal has true honor and a right moral code. Therefore, the cynical use of friends for the sake of public image seems to be unsuitable, for a man who was willing to fight solely to save bloodshed. Hal needed the time in the tavern to reassure his moral code and self-confidence to become a better leader. Henry 4th needed to believe the false hero in order to realize his son is the right heir for the throne. It was the circumstances of the rebellion, Hal?s regained self-confidence and the false-hero?s (Hotspur) betrayal, which created the scene for Hal?s revelation as the true protagonist. However, it is a likely possibility that in Shakespeare?s time the interpretation was different. The soliloquy was an evidence for Hal?s knowledge of politics, and that the change he underwent is, in fact, a result of public image enacting.






Authors | Quotes | Digests | Submit | Interact | Store

Copyright © Classics Network. Contact Us