A playwright uses many techniques to convey an idea through handling of the story. These techniques (such as parallel scenes, use of foil characters and thematic use of imagery) are called plotting.
Plotting 1: Parallel Scenes
Plotting 2: Juxtaposition of Scenes
Plotting 3: Organic Unity
Return to Menu for Henry IV, Part One
Return to SHG Table of Contents
At times, Shakespeare's plays show two scenes that seem to clearly call out to be compared. For example, in Henry IV, Part One, we see the comic confrontation of Falstaff and Hal after the robbers are robbed. There is no need in the story for the "rehearsal" of what Hal will say to his father when he chides his son for his behavior. Yet, in a busy scene, we get another comic confrontation--in fact two of them when we see the conversation of Henry IV and Hal with two casts:
These two segments of the scene in 2.4 are played off against each other. But an audience must also consider how they compare to the actual meeting of the King and Prince Hal in 3.2, when the prince promises to reform and win honor on the field of battle.
Question: Compare and contrast these three "plays" of a scolding father and a prodigal son by answering one or more of the following questions:
a. What is Falstaff's intent in playing as he does? Does he really love the prince or is he trying to insure that his influence with him continues?
b. The audience has heard Hal's soliloquy in 1.1 in which he states that he will throw off his "loose behavior" with Falstaff and company. And we have heard Hal's speech attacking Falstaff and promising to dump him in 2.4. So we know more than Henry IV when he talks to his son in 3.2. Do you believe Hal's promise to his father? Why do you think that Henry IV (with less evidence than the audience has) decides to put trust in his son?
Plotting 2: Judging from Juxtaposed
Scenes and Repeated Terms
The Battle of Shrewsbury is the testing ground not only for Prince Hal, but for all the role models he is attracted to: Hotspur, Falstaff and King Henry IV himself. To keep the battle scenes from being boring--one fight after another--the scenes that the play sets before us give multiple "takes" on the question of the worth of honor. Is honor real? What is it worth?
Hotspur has talked about honor as his goal--to "wear/ Without corrival all her [Honor's] dignities"(1.3.204-205). And he exhorts his troops by saying that, though life is short, "To spend that shortness basely were too long"(5.2.82).
Falstaff has rejected honor as a goal:
honour pricks me on. Yea, but how if honour
prick me off when I come on? how then? Can honour set to a leg? No. Or an
arm? No. Or take away the grief of a wound? No. Honour hath no skill in surgery
then? No. What is honour? A word. What is that word honour? Air. A trim
reckoning! Who hath it? He that died o' Wednesday. Doth he feel it? No. Doth
he hear it? No. Is it insensible then? Yea, to the dead. But will it not
live with the living? No. Why? Detraction will not suffer it. Therefore I'll
none of it. Honour is a mere scutcheon; and so ends my catechism.
(5.1.129-41)
In Welles' Chimes at Midnight, Hal is shown between Falstaff's view of honor and Hotspur's. Falstaff says his "catechism" TO Hal, almost like the Vice in Medieval drama. But Hal looks towards the field of battle, and the next cut shows the rebel knights being lowered to their horses and a speech by Hotspur, eager for battle.
Now we see the whole question raised by the
juxtaposition
of three parts of Act 5, scene 4:
'S blood! 't was time to counterfeit,or
that hot termagant Scot had paid me scot and lot too. Counterfeit? I lie,
I am no counterfeit: to die is to be a counterfeit; for he is but the counterfeit
of a man, who hath not the life of a man; but to counterfeit dying, when
a man thereby liveth, is to be no counterfeit, but the true and perfect image
of life indeed. The better part of valour is discretion; in the which better
part I have saved my life. (5.3.112-20)
Question: What impression do these juxtaposed fights make on you, and how do they help you judge these characters and the value of honor?
If a play has "organic unity," that means that every scene and character contribute to the overall interpretation of the work. In Henry IV, Part One, we see scenes of tavern life and public life, domestic scenes between husband and wife and battle scenes of war and strife.
Question: Does Henry IV, Part One have "organic unity"? Argue for the answer "yes," the answer "no" or the answer "yes and no" by considering some of the following questions:
1. What does the subplot about the Gadshill robbery add to the play?
2. What does the scene in which Poins and Hal tease Francis the waiter add to the play?
3. What does the scene between Hotspur and his wife Kate (at their home in 2.3) add to the play?
Return to Menu for Henry IV, Part One
Return to SHG Table of Contents
URL: http://www.iupui.edu/~elit/shakes/1h4/1h4plo.html