Before I re-read Henry V, I decided I needed to visit the Henry IV plays. I had only read part 1 in the past. Let's see if this time I can get through all the Henry IV plays.
I can see how this play is relevant for our day as it shows that those that are rebelling against the king tend to be just as dishonest within their group. Near the end of the play one of the leaders withhold correct information because they don't want peace. This leads me to wonder why they didn't want peace. In this case it was because they (the older leaders) would have a short life if peace were made and were determined that the king would find a way to dispose of them. Since Henry IV disposed of his brother Richard II that seems to be a reasonable assumption.
This play also shares a lot of information on Prince Hal (Henry V). He, like is father, seems to treat people poorly. He plays practical jokes on Flagstaff leaving him in trouble with the law and sees no problem with it. Prince Hal says much of his behavior is just an act but is it really?
Are King Henry and Prince Hal similar in the idea that they treat people badly? I believe so. Part of the reason that some of his leaders were rebelling was because of their treatment by the King. I feel that this play is a good example of how we can pretend to be good people but in the end something this shows alerting others to the truth of who we are. How we treat people is critical in establishing our character and our leadership. Pretending may work for a short time but then the truth always slips in. Hopefully we can learn this lesson without needing personal experience, but I am afraid that is not the case for many. We don't know how to determine if our leaders are good people because they are so far away so they can trick us into thinking they are good leaders. Shakespeare provides us a platform to discuss what a good leader should look like if we take the time to learn his language and discuss his work.
I can see how this play is relevant for our day as it shows that those that are rebelling against the king tend to be just as dishonest within their group. Near the end of the play one of the leaders withhold correct information because they don't want peace. This leads me to wonder why they didn't want peace. In this case it was because they (the older leaders) would have a short life if peace were made and were determined that the king would find a way to dispose of them. Since Henry IV disposed of his brother Richard II that seems to be a reasonable assumption.
This play also shares a lot of information on Prince Hal (Henry V). He, like is father, seems to treat people poorly. He plays practical jokes on Flagstaff leaving him in trouble with the law and sees no problem with it. Prince Hal says much of his behavior is just an act but is it really?
Are King Henry and Prince Hal similar in the idea that they treat people badly? I believe so. Part of the reason that some of his leaders were rebelling was because of their treatment by the King. I feel that this play is a good example of how we can pretend to be good people but in the end something this shows alerting others to the truth of who we are. How we treat people is critical in establishing our character and our leadership. Pretending may work for a short time but then the truth always slips in. Hopefully we can learn this lesson without needing personal experience, but I am afraid that is not the case for many. We don't know how to determine if our leaders are good people because they are so far away so they can trick us into thinking they are good leaders. Shakespeare provides us a platform to discuss what a good leader should look like if we take the time to learn his language and discuss his work.
RSS Feed