Throughout the entirety of Henry IV Part 1, by William Shakespeare, there is an emphasis on father-son relationships. The main protagonist, Hal, and the main antagonist, Hotspur, are both young men and as such they are still learning from their respective father figures. In Hal’s case, both Falstaff and his biological father King Henry IV, and for Hotspur, Northumberland. Each relationship has its merits and faults, and its own intricacies not seen in any of the other bonds. Though the the plot centers mainly around Hal and the king, each out these links are integral to understanding what happened and why.
Firstly, Henry IV’s main father-son bond: Hal and his father King Henry IV. These two have an extremely tenuous link in the beginning of …show more content…
He yells at and berates Hal for his rebellious conduct and even bemoans that Hal is his son. He even states: “Yea, there thou mak’st me sad, and mak’st me sin / In envy that my Lord Northumberland / Should be the father to so blest a son,” (1.1.77–79). Towards the end, Hal atones for his shameful behavior due to his part in the battle against the seditious Hotspur and his cohorts. This leads the reader to believe that the king is finally proud of his eldest and that their relationship will improve. The king and Hal’s relationship is extremely flawed, especially in the beginning. King Henry shows his disapproval in a way that severely alienates Hal, and in turn, Hal starts avoiding his father. This results in him spending more time with those the king regards as deplorables. He clearly displays his fury at their familiarity with his son here: “Such barren pleasures, rude society / As thou art matched withal, and grafted to, / Accompany the greatness of thy blood, / And hold their level with thy princely heart?”(3.2.14–17). This basically encompasses his grievances with Hal’s friendship with Falstaff and those at the bar. These bar dwellers are too familiar …show more content…
Between the two, they talk out the main issues Hal has with his dad, and Falstaff imparts some wisdom. The two are clearly very close, so close in fact that Hal takes cowardly Falstaff out to fight the insurrectionists. This move is not a tactical one. However, there are a few problems with the dynamic between the two that make it a problem. For one, Falstaff is of a much lower class than Hal. While this may seem minute, it plays a large role in how it is appropriate to treat one another, no matter how much Hal tries to act like he is not a prince. On top of that, Falstaff is a coward. He is a fat coward, a point oft repeated throughout the play. He even makes note of it himself, and beyond that, he pretends to be dead in order to live. Then, he has the audacity to ask Hal if he can claim to have killed Hotspur so he can earn a higher social class from King Henry IV. The man is incorrigible. He is corrupt, and part of that is what drove Hal from his father in the first place. Usually, it looks as though Hal takes better care of Falstaff than the other way around. Between in 3.3 when Hal repays Falstaff’s debts and in 5.4 lines 152–153, “For my part, if a lie may do thee grace, / I’ll gild it with the happiest terms I have.” Aside from Falstaff’s ineptitude when it comes to being remotely heroic, the two are close, and that is admirable given the vast
Firstly, Henry IV’s main father-son bond: Hal and his father King Henry IV. These two have an extremely tenuous link in the beginning of …show more content…
He yells at and berates Hal for his rebellious conduct and even bemoans that Hal is his son. He even states: “Yea, there thou mak’st me sad, and mak’st me sin / In envy that my Lord Northumberland / Should be the father to so blest a son,” (1.1.77–79). Towards the end, Hal atones for his shameful behavior due to his part in the battle against the seditious Hotspur and his cohorts. This leads the reader to believe that the king is finally proud of his eldest and that their relationship will improve. The king and Hal’s relationship is extremely flawed, especially in the beginning. King Henry shows his disapproval in a way that severely alienates Hal, and in turn, Hal starts avoiding his father. This results in him spending more time with those the king regards as deplorables. He clearly displays his fury at their familiarity with his son here: “Such barren pleasures, rude society / As thou art matched withal, and grafted to, / Accompany the greatness of thy blood, / And hold their level with thy princely heart?”(3.2.14–17). This basically encompasses his grievances with Hal’s friendship with Falstaff and those at the bar. These bar dwellers are too familiar …show more content…
Between the two, they talk out the main issues Hal has with his dad, and Falstaff imparts some wisdom. The two are clearly very close, so close in fact that Hal takes cowardly Falstaff out to fight the insurrectionists. This move is not a tactical one. However, there are a few problems with the dynamic between the two that make it a problem. For one, Falstaff is of a much lower class than Hal. While this may seem minute, it plays a large role in how it is appropriate to treat one another, no matter how much Hal tries to act like he is not a prince. On top of that, Falstaff is a coward. He is a fat coward, a point oft repeated throughout the play. He even makes note of it himself, and beyond that, he pretends to be dead in order to live. Then, he has the audacity to ask Hal if he can claim to have killed Hotspur so he can earn a higher social class from King Henry IV. The man is incorrigible. He is corrupt, and part of that is what drove Hal from his father in the first place. Usually, it looks as though Hal takes better care of Falstaff than the other way around. Between in 3.3 when Hal repays Falstaff’s debts and in 5.4 lines 152–153, “For my part, if a lie may do thee grace, / I’ll gild it with the happiest terms I have.” Aside from Falstaff’s ineptitude when it comes to being remotely heroic, the two are close, and that is admirable given the vast