Uncategorized

The Ultimate Guide to King Henry IV Part 1

Friday, April 12, 2019Friday, April 12, 2019 admin

For the King it is his need to protect his realm, for Hotspur it is personal integrity, and for Hal it is duty. His dialogue speaks otherwise, but his actions, though a little bit stupid, felt rather devoted at points even if they were also self-serving.

I like to read the play once, go watch an adaption, and then read the play again. It just adds another level to it. I did quite like this play, but I much preferred Richard II. The language in that play was pure poetry, and I much prefer tragedy to comedy. View all 5 comments. Jul 20, J. Sutton rated it it was amazing.

The action picks up shortly after the conclusion of Richard II after Bolingbroke has deposed the now dead Richard and become King Henry. It still has a serious side, but this play subverts the legitimacy of the monarchy by the ways it uses language. It does this most effectively by its depiction of the heir to the throne, Prince Henry known as Hal and his debased and disgraced compatriot, Sir John Falstaff and the juxtaposition of their comic mocking with the serious business of state. Throughout the play, honor is associated with the morality of leadership. Prince Hal is capable of holding court over the debauched in the seedier sides of London, but is he capable of assuming his rightful place as the king of England?

Yes, I knew who he was. But until this year my exposure to Falstaff was mainly second-hand, through books that spoke of him. I hadn't touched any of Shakespeare's histories I'm not counting Julius Caesar, etc. There are plays where the character and the play are equally matched Othello, Hamlet, etc , but there are those plays where the character seems to float beyond the play. Henry IV, Part I seems like one of those. The play was great. But every time Falstaff arrived it seemed to jump up a level. It was certainly not a play where Falstaff played a central role. Obviously, Henry, Prince of Wales plays that part and he is fascinating himself but Falstaff just dervishes around the play making everything better.

Breathing color and dynamics into every scene he is a part of. And he doesn't do it through and other-worldliness. He does it through his humanity, his base motives, and his complicated affections. There is no doubt that Henry loves Falstaff and that Falstaff loves Henry, but it is also clear that they are both using each other and KNOW the other is using them.

Some of Shakespeare's great lines and great musings jump energetically from Falstaff's lips: Yea, but how if honour prick me off when I come on?

Can honour set-to a leg? Or take away the grief of a wound? Honour hath no skill in surgery, then? Doth he feel it? Doth he hear it? Yea, to the dead. But will it not live with the living? Detraction will not suffer it. Honour is a mere scutcheon. And so ends my catechism. View all 3 comments. The first part of Henry IV tells the events of the rebellion of the barons, following the lead of young Harry Percy, against the king they initially placed on the throne of England.

Simultaneously, it is also a captivating and cheeky chiaroscuro on the low-ranking people, the nobodies, living in a dodgy tavern, at the same time as the king and nobility.

King Henry IV, Part 1

It is, to my knowledge, the first time Shakespeare includes the commoners to such a large extent, into one of his history plays, and it is absolutely brilliant. It is probably the endearing relationship between Prince Hal and John Falstaff, at the start, that makes this one of my favourite plays of William Shakespeare.

It is difficult to explain in rational terms what makes this odd friendship and, especially, Falstaff — an inveterate liar, drunkard and thief —, one of the sweetest, most memorable, most human, most touching characters of all literature. Only a couple other friendships between two men come to mind as strongly and emotionally as these two: I even suspect that Falstaff directly inspired Haddock, both divine drunkards and hilarious insults mongers. The end of Act V, when Harry pays homage to his foe Hotspur, and wrongly believes his gargantuan friend dead on the battlefield — which was probably intended as a comical scene — always makes my eyes water.

However, things take a very different turn after the battle of Shrewsbury. Stay tuned, review to be continued in Henry IV, Part 2 … Mar 25, Bradley rated it it was amazing Shelves: Still one of my most favorite histories, or at least part one of perhaps three. In here, of course, we establish the lout with a sharp mind and careful cunning, dissembling for all to see but careful of the long game.

When his his father sore needs his son's aid, Hal comes to Still one of my most favorite histories, or at least part one of perhaps three. When his his father sore needs his son's aid, Hal comes to the rescue, throwing off all such base clouds, or as little as need be, to ensure both his father and the close court of his worthiness, and he does so with flying colors, killing the most worthy night in England, the poor Percy of the Hot Blood, and so restoring both his honor and his valor in both word and deed.

This, of course, is just the prelude. The stage upon such things as the Ides of March are set. Who knew that when Will Shook his Spear, he'd ever have so much to say? View all 6 comments. The second play about The Wars of the Roses and so massive in history, good ol' Will had to make two parts about this particular king!

Since then, he has not had a quiet reign. There are still those who want Richard back funny, considering how many supported Henry because they were unsatisfied with Richard's way of doing things. How did kings usually solve such a problem? Right, with a crusade, what else?! But he face The second play about The Wars of the Roses and so massive in history, good ol' Will had to make two parts about this particular king! But he faces such problems with Wales and Scotland that he can't go on the merry road-and-killing-trip. There is lots of intrigue from influential families such as the Percys and Henry's own son is giving him a headache or two as well since scandalous behaviour makes people question the worthiness to the throne.

The most charismatic person here definitely is Falstaff - as fat and drunk and corrupt as the old bloke may have been. That charisma is not just thrown at the audience but also at Henry's son. But soon, there is an outlet for all the pressure boiling up because the intrigues against King Henry IV result in a battle at Shrewsbury. Opposite the king's forces is one of the Percys, called "Hotspur" of all things one has to love the nicknames of the time.

Funnily enough literally because they are comic relief in my opinion , completing the trio is King Henry's son and his friends yes, including the fat and drunk Falstaff who is no longer charismatic in my opinion, but acts most shamefully. I must say, I didn't like Hal Henry's son very much. He was vile, thought himself oh-so-much-better, and made fun of his companions especially Falstaff in the worst ways.

However, he himself informs the audience that this time will be over soon and that he will proof himself worthy. Had I not known what king he was to become, I would have considered this announcement the greatest joke in the play. Nevertheless, the aforementioned battle at Shrewsbury gives Hal his chance after he somehow gets his father to give him command and he does proof himself worthy indeed. There is the inevitable climax in form of single combat between Hal and Hotspur and it was thrilling.

Related Articles.
Cartoon Rampage?
Smart Social Media - Your Guide To Becoming A Highly Paid Social Media Manager.
!
;
LIdiota: 73 (Classici) (Italian Edition).

In the end, even the dishonourable Falstaff wants to make amends for his behaviour and vows to change his ways. Thus, it can be said that apart from the overall theme of the Wars of the Roses, this play is also about sinful youths growing up to become men of honour. It definitely is the groundwork not only for part 2 but also for the next play about Henry V.

Seduced by the Boss 2: Spanking Miss Jones?
.
?
Amritsar Massacre, The: The Untold Story of One Fateful Day.
Appetite for Life: Inspiring Stories of Recovery from Anorexia, Bulimia, and Compulsive Overeating.
The Soul of Science: Christian Faith and Natural Philosophy (Turning Point Christian Worldview Series);
Communicable Diseases: A Global Perspective (Modular Texts).

I liked this play much better than the one about Richard II. Maybe I, too, fell for the comic relief and was blinded by fools becoming heroes. View all 25 comments. Taught this play many times in the 60's and 70's, when it was often the one Shakespeare play in a college Intro to Lit class: After my study with two prominent women Shakespeareans separate post-docs at Harvard and Breadloaf I moved, for the sake of my largely female community college students, to stronger women characters in the comedies and, say, Measure for Measure.

But I still offhandedly quote from 1H4, say "If reasons were as plentiful as blackberries…"Falst Taught this play many times in the 60's and 70's, when it was often the one Shakespeare play in a college Intro to Lit class: But I still offhandedly quote from 1H4, say "If reasons were as plentiful as blackberries…"Falstaff to Hal who's caught him running away.

I emphasized students aloudread for Tone of Voice, essential for lit, and especially for drama. This play teaches tone really well: Falstaff insults the Hostess, by calling her "You woman! Because of Falstaff's tone. Forgive I quote from memory here, last taught it two decades ago. Shakespeare shows his invention what we now call creativity, a different concept every time Falstaff speaks. For instance, Hal insults Fallstaff's overweight with common criticism more useful to oversized Americans now--"this bed-presser, this huge hill of flesh"--while Falstaff thinks up great anti-jogger insults, "you starveling, you eelskin, you dried neat's tongue, you bull's pizzle…you sheath, you bow case, you vile standing tuck….

Oh, for breath to utter what is like thee! Next Falstaff play-acts "in King Cambyses vein" playing Hal's father the King, saying about the Hostess, "For tears do stop the floodgates of her eyes.. Nov 20, Neil Walker rated it it was amazing. It may not be immediately obvious to people, when reading something like Drug Gang, but William Shakespeare has been a major and important influence on my writing.

As an author, I have taken on board a lot of lessons from Shakespeare in terms of structure, story and character arcs. Henry IV, Part 1 has always been my favourite work of Shakespeare. Primarily, this is because of the gradual transformation that Prince Hal goes through. Also, Falstaff is an amazing character, providing plenty of comi It may not be immediately obvious to people, when reading something like Drug Gang, but William Shakespeare has been a major and important influence on my writing.

Also, Falstaff is an amazing character, providing plenty of comic relief. The play manages to perfectly combine comedic elements, drama and an amazing story of a personal journey from wild and chaotic tearaway to triumphant hero. Apr 21, Becky rated it it was amazing Shelves: An absolutely brilliant and breathtaking work that is the perfect marriage of poetry, history, and wisdom.

See a Problem?

Falstaff may be one of the greatest creations of all literature, he is an astounding mix of hilarious wit, well-timed self-deprecation or should we instead say, full of valour in discretion? From what we really know about kni An absolutely brilliant and breathtaking work that is the perfect marriage of poetry, history, and wisdom. You cannot help but love the tavern scenes, where Hal lets forth one of the more poignant soliloquies about the sun and informs us that this is all part of his plan- a plan that will briefly allow him to breathe free away from court where he will be immured for the rest of his life, and will also let him come to know the true stock of his kingdom.

Even the basest man clings to some sort of honor, and what does Falstaff say honor is? You know why I really like Hal? He is much like Hector of Troy, he is confined by his duty to his family and country, he craves freedom but does what he must, and Hotspur is much like Achilles…and really, Achilles is the arrogant ass that always deserved to die. I should note that I read along after I watched the Hollow Crown series. Marvellous acting, truly wonderful A prince gone wild 22 February Thank God for Youtube.

As I have said before reading a Shakespearian play that I have not seen on either stage or screen can be a difficult task at best. In fact reading any play that I have not seen on stage or screen can be difficult, since they are generally not meant to be read but performed. The printed plays seem to supplement the performances rather than to take their place, so when I came to read this play I searched Youtube and discovered that the BBC A prince gone wild 22 February Thank God for Youtube.

The printed plays seem to supplement the performances rather than to take their place, so when I came to read this play I searched Youtube and discovered that the BBC versions of the history plays are available for viewing, so once I finished this play I ended up watching it and I must say that it really added to my appreciation of the play.

Remember, during this period of English history England was in the middle of the Hundred Years War with France, and historians consider Henry and Richard to be weak kings during their reigns the war in France was not persued. However, England controlled a lot of French land at this time and keeping the peace in this land was difficult at best. At the beginning of the play Henry calls off an pilgrimage to the Holy Land a crusade to deal with some rebellions in Scotland and Wales and I suspect that he never got to go on that pilgrimage. The problem wasn't that Henry had usurped the throne though his own inner guilt did have something to say in regards to this but that he had to deal with rebellions in Scotland and Wales.

His first decision ends up alienating his former friends because he decides not to seek the release of another Englishman namely because he had formed a marriage pact with Owen Gwendoler more on him in a bit. As such these former friends end up rebelling against his rule and going over to his enemies.

There are also family problems as well because his son, Henry who is to become Henry V has fallen in with the tavern crowd the Boars Head Tavern at Eastcheap which, unfortunately, is no longer there, though I do plan on going to Eastcheap when I am in London. I am not sure where Henry's castle is supposed to be, but if we know London, we know that Eastcheap is quite close to the Tower of London in those days it wasn't a prison. The tavern crowd is run by the infamous Falstaff, one of the characters that seems to have obtained a legendary status in English Literature.

While the plays in which he appears are not remembered, the character is. Falstaff is the fat, loud, cowardly, oaf that forms the comic relief of many a book and film as well as this play however he has a very important role here. While Owen Glendower has taken Henry's lords from him, Falstaff has taken is son, therefore Henry faces problems both in his position as a king and a rule as a father. The robbery scene is very important as, while it seems to be only a minor part at the beginning, it has a very significant impact. Robbery, particularly armed robbery, is a very serious offence, and while today you may only land up in gaol though I would not call that a particularly light sentence, especially since it can stain your character for life in those days you would be executed.

Basically the only reason Henry gets away with it is because he is the Prince of Wales. Even then there is a very serious father and son talk when he admits to his participation in the robbery and it also appears that he does not implicate Falstaff, who would have been executed for the deed. It begins with riotous merry making with Falstaff as the central figure, and ends with the sheriff coming in asking questions about the robbery.

While Hal manages to keep the Sheriff off of Falstaff's back and while the pickpocketing incident leads to a rather interesting result, with Falstaff claiming that bonds were stolen, only to realise that everybody knows they were simply records of what he owes Hal ends up confessing to his father, and his father's act of mercy has Hal turn around and become the Prince of Wales.

In the end he is on the battlefield, rebuking Falstaff for his tomfoolery, and becoming the hero by slaying Hotspur in single combat. Owen Glendower was a Welsh rebel who was at war with the English during this period. I actually saw a documentary on Glendower and their suggestion was that it was during this time that Wales was transformed from being a wild and savage place to becoming that quaint place that we all associate with Wales today. It is similar to Scotland, with the place going from the wild and savage land of Macbeth and the Highlander, to the bagpipe playing centre of learning that produced the likes of Adam Smith.

He his made to appear as a sorcerer in league with demonic forces, and that his victories against the English are not due to his skill as an insurgent but due to his dabbling in the occult. He only appears in a couple of scenes in the play, yet he the focus the part of the play that is not dominated by Falstaff.

Where Falstaff has stolen the King's son, Gwendower has stolen the King's knights. However, in the same way that Henry brings order back to his family, he brings order back into the kingdom during the Battle of Shrewsberry, after which the play suddenly ends obviously in anticipation for part 2. View all 9 comments. I also don't have it in me to go full snark on you, so let me just sum up this wonderful mess of a play: I never thought I would enjoy like I only know Targaryen. So much roasting, so many witty one-liners, all of the likeable characters who make stupid ass choices but you wouldn't expect anything less because it's fucking Shakespeare.

Honestly, the biggest mood in this entire ass play is Prince Hal being a huge disappointment to his father on purpose. His reasoning behind his lowly ways literally is the fact that he thinks that he can impress his father better if the latter has the worst opinion of his character I mean, he isn't wrong I still don't know if Hal really had to go all out hanging around with thieves and whores but go off, I guess, we all had some rough days in our teenage years.

We all know, Roman culture is stabbing yourself just to prove a point, so I think Hal's take on life is actually quite reasonable. Additionally, Henry IV, Part 1 is also quite the predictable play and not just because it's followed up by Henry V so you already know Hal's dad will bite the dust at some point, but because Shakespeare sets his character archetypes and plot points up in very obvious ways: It helped me a lot in my comprehension that this play was so foreseeable as I had enough on my hands with keeping all of those names apart why is literally every male named Henry or Richard???

The way he tried to bullshit himself through this war by basically dropping dead every five seconds without fighting at all, and then later claiming all the biggest wins for himself was so fucking relatable, my most used annotation was: I was rooting so much for Hal to finally prove his father wrong and make him proud in the end, whilst also feeling for Harry and his struggles to make a name for himself.

Shakespeare really did an amazing job at fleshing out all of these characters in a very short amount of time. Henry IV, Part 1 is definitely a play to remember and I cannot wait to finally finish its second part. Honestly I was a little worried Shakespeare's historical plays would be boring, but they most certainly are not. This must be one of Shakespeare's best historical dramas, although there's a lot that's invented for dramatic effect; the Bard can never be taken as very historically correct, for he's first and foremost a playwright.

The fairly simple plotline following the major points of the reign of the first Lancastrian king is enlivened by the inclusion of what should be Will's most comical character, Sir John Falstaff, bon vivant par excellence, who often steals stage from Prince Hal with his antics, rogu This must be one of Shakespeare's best historical dramas, although there's a lot that's invented for dramatic effect; the Bard can never be taken as very historically correct, for he's first and foremost a playwright.

I also liked the "Harry to Harry" point-and-counterpoint type of parallel narration for Henry Percy "Hotspur" and Henry of Monmouth "Hal" , which allowed Shakespeare to offer a comparative storyline for two young men with so much talent for warfare and leading men who, nonetheless, are underestimated and often chided by their fathers, the Earl of Northumberland and Henry IV respectively, and other elders of varied competence and vanity for two large flaws that colour the public perception of them: Hotspur has the shortest ever fuse in England, and his hot-headedness lands him in serious trouble as well as makes him vulnerable to manipulation by cunning older relatives, which culminates in a disastrous rebellion; and Hal is a hopeless carouser, whoremonger and reveller that's adding more gray hairs to his father's head with his licentious lifestyle and the bad company he keeps.

One of these young men will realise in time he needs to change course if he wants to walk far in life, but the other's path will end at a battlefield by Shrewsbury as a consequence. This would be the tragedy portion of the play, but even so it doesn't lack humour, with Falstaff's "cowardly lion" battle exploits that are worth a smile or two.

I would have objected to calling this Henry IV , though! I'd suspect Shakespeare doesn't like Bolingbroke a great deal, because even in Richard II , where he ironically had a larger role than in this play named after him, he seemed to me slightly more sympathetic to the deposed king than to the then Duke of Lancaster. Likewise, in this play, he's more enamoured of Prince Harry what's it with scandalous English princes called Harry? Hey, that sounds much cooler!

Henry IV, Part 1

Oct 18, Cindy Rollins rated it it was amazing Shelves: Having just watched The Hollow Crown, this play was much easier to listen to. The audio alone can be quite confusing, but a familiarity with the play helps. I love this whole cycle of plays. Shakespeare's ability to mix pathos and humor hits its stride in this cycle of plays.

The Arkangel recording is excellent, as expected. Apr 22, Dave Cullen rated it it was amazing. I love this play, and this edition. It's captivating and insightful, and I'm reading right after finishing "The Plantagenets," which I also recommend, and which teed it up nicely. One problem with reading the history of the English kings is their stories tend to blur together after while. I think I have this set of Henry's etched in my brain for another 20, too. I tried two other editions of Henry IV, before settling on this one Arden: The explanatory notes were very helpful, and I would have been very happy with this edition.

But I compared this with Arden reviewed here line by and Arden had far more historical information and insightful notes on the wordplay eg, biblical sources he was playing off. Also, the Oxford actually overdid it explaining some phrases I found obvious. Also, get historical info on all the major characters. This appears to be the best out there.

It costs a bit more: If money is really tight, I highly recommend the "Oxford School Series," and note that's different than just "Oxford," which is also out there. I started act 5 today, and still loving it. Racing through it, on my scale. I could do without Falstaff, but loving Hal and Hotspur and the other rebels and even the king sometimes. Wrapped up in a frenzy. View all 7 comments. Feb 28, Liam rated it liked it. This was pretty good!!

The story was well developed and I felt like the characters all had a level of depth to them that you quite often don't see in Shakespeare so that was really nice to see! The fact I enjoy the history behind the story makes it even more enjoyable! Prince Hal keeps surprising me.

Now I'm ready to watch Tom Hiddleston amaze me in the role!! This is a story of 2 3 4 people. I really am out of my element analyzing this because it is a complete play about half of a story. I will give my best summary of events so far. This play again is a story of relationships in an ever shrinking geometric shape. We begin with the title character one would do good to remember Richard II and Henry IV last enc " Two stars keep not their motion in one sphere.

We begin with the title character one would do good to remember Richard II and Henry IV last encounter with him from that play, it informs Henry's thoughts here and we quickly meet three other characters that make our relationship almost-rectangle that starts this play off. On the other hand King Henry has adopt [Henry] Percy as a surrogate son because he shows all the qualities that he wishes Hal, the future Henry V , had.

This quickly breaks apart as Percy goes against the King over an unimportant matter and joins a rebellion a very important matter it is only now with this love relationship triangle that the real drama of this story is exposed. This and the next play are a story of men making choices that effect them. I have a hard time deciding if it is a story of three men or two so I will decide that after I go through part 2 but for now I will layout perspectives and in particular I will focus on Hal for now.

If he chooses one he will have to reject the other for good. You have his dower, guilt-ridden, serious, cold, father on one end and jolly, fun-loving, warm, hardly-serious, fat I will let him finish," We are foreshadowed at Act II scene 4 at what choice Hal makes and I don't think it is much of a spoiler since again there is a play called Henry V.

Falstaff was a very interesting character that I almost liked I'm still on the fence at how I feel towards him. He can carry a scene like no other in this play but his character personality-wise does not make him desirable to emulate. He was on thin ice with Hal and it seemed Hal did what he could to warn him and try to encourage him to take him more seriously but Falstaff's shameful, cowardly behavior at the climatic battle seals his fate in Hal's eyes and it is only a matter of time before he is cast out of Hal's circle permanently. We do get, surprisingly, Falstaff doing a very deep soliloquy on the nature of honor in the face of war and possible death [and why he refuses to risk his life]: Yea, but how if Honour prick me off when I come on?

Can Honour set to a leg?

Henry IV, Part 1 by William Shakespeare | www.newyorkethnicfood.com: Books

Honour hath no skill in surgery then? What is that word, Honour? He that died o' Wednesday. Is it sensible then? Yes, to the dead. Detraction will not suffer it: Honour is a mere 'scutcheon, and so ends my catechism. In the end Hal's bravery in the battle, not to mention his triumph over Percy, restores him in his father's-and the country's-eyes. I would speculate on more but I will pick up when I review part 2. Thou see'st I have more flesh than another man; and therefore more frailty. Dec 01, Roy Lotz rated it really liked it Shelves: But this play is the equal of many of its better-known brethren.

The more I read Shakespeare, the more curious I am about what kind of man he was in the flesh. How does this "Hal" respond? Is this really Falstaff playing Hal responding, or is it Falstaff himself responding? How does this "Hal" defend Falstaff? Do we accept or reject his arguments in favor of Falstaff? See especially lines What are "Pharaoh's lean kine" and why are they relevant to Falstaff's argument?

Look them up in Genesis What is Hal's conclusion 2. Is this Hal speaking as his father or is he speaking as himself? Is he joking, or is he serious? In the confusion of the knocking, does Falstaff necessarily hear this line? Does Hal want Falstaff to hear it, or is this something Hal is actually only thinking? In the next part of the scene 2. What is Falstaff afraid of, and how does Hal respond? What does Hal tell the sheriff, and what does he promise?

What has happened to Falstaff, and what do Hal and Peto do to him 2. You may get the joke a little better if you know that there are 12 pence "d"--don't ask why! There are 20 shillings in a pound. In lines , how does the main plot of the play now enter the tavern plot? What does Hal promise to do for Falstaff? Given what we saw of Falstaff on foot in the robbery scene How would you describe the relationship between Hal and Falstaff? What does each one get from the relationship? Do Hal and Falstaff see the relationship in the same way?

There's lots to think about here. Now we have the rebels together, especially Glendower and Hotspur. How do Hotspur and Glendower react to each other in 3. How effective do you expect this collaboration to be? What is going on in lines ? How have the rebels arranged to divide their spoils? Does this seem to be a good idea? What does Hotspur object to, and how do the others respond to his idea? What are the military plans 3. You might find it helpful to look at a map of Britain to understand what the portions look like.

What does Hotspur think of music 3. And notice how the play's emphasis on language is being echoed here. Remember "I can drink with any tinker in his own language during my life" 2. What happens when the wives join the men at line ? What is the problem with Mortimer's marriage to Glendower's daughter? Why does the play only give us stage directions like " The Lady speaks in Welsh " at line instead of giving her words to speak?

And notice that here is another example of the idea of language in the play. How would you compare Hotspur and Kate to Mortimer and his wife? Is Kate's behavior here what you would expect based on her previous appearance in 2. Here is the meeting between Hal and his father that was anticipated in 2.

Read this meeting, lines , carefully. What complaints does the King have? How does Hal respond to those complaints? Are we surprised that a father talks to his son in terms of "When I was your age"? What, according to the King, did the King do right that Hal is doing wrong 3. Whom does the King say Hal is acting like? To whom does the King compare himself in the past? Is the King's interpretation of Hal's behavior correct? What do we know that the King doesn't know? Remember "I know you all," 1. What promise does Hal make to his father? What is Hal's plan? And note the echo in line of "Redeeming time when men think least I will 1.

Is the King pleased with Hal's response? What do you think of Hal at this point? Do you like him or not? Do you think he will be able to do what he promises to do? How different is he really from his father? What concern seems to be on Falstaff's mind in his talk with Bardolph 3. What is he saying about Bardolph's nose? What does Falstaff accuse the Hostess of 3.

What do we know about what was actually in Falstaff's pocket? What does the Hostess accuse Falstaff of? How does Falstaff respond to her accusation? How does Hal resolve these arguments when he arrives 3. How does Falstaff justify himself 3. How does this echo Falstaff's language in 3. What is the news at court 3. How has Hal handled the results of the robbery? What has he obtained for Falstaff in the war, and how does Falstaff respond 3. What is Falstaff to do tomorrow 3. It will be Falstaff's responsibility to obtain his own soldiers by impressing them, a certain number from each community, according to English law.

We'll get a report of how he does that 4. In Part 2 we actually get to see Falstaff impressing a group of soldiers 2H4 3. What information does Hotspur get from his father Northumberland, and how does Hotspur respond to it 4.

Given the reactions of Douglas and Worcester, is Hotspur's response a realistic one? What is the first bit of news that Vernon brings to Hotspur 4. What does Hotspur think of Hal, and how does Vernon try to correct his impression 4. Does this change Hotspur's impression of Hal 4. What is the second bit of news that Vernon brings, and how do Hotspur and the others respond to it 4.

What does Falstaff tell us about his soldiers and how he got them 4. How has Falstaff made money off of this adventure? There are at least two ways. What does he think his soldiers are good for 4. Does this cause you to change your opinion about Falstaff? Is this any way to run an army? But would any intelligent army is there such a thing? What are Hotspur, Worcester, Douglas, and Vernon arguing about at the beginning of the scene 4.

What complaints does Hotspur articulate 4. Why do the rebels feel that the King has not dealt honestly with them? What we hear from Hotspur is his interpretation of key events that Shakespeare portrayed in Richard II. What is the Archbishop of York doing? What does he expect to happen in the battle? Why does he feel the need to make plans?

How much faith does he have that Hotspur can defeat the King? Remember that the Archbishop of York was mentioned at 1. Shakespeare is setting things up for Part 2. How does the King greet Worcester 5. In the following exchange 5. Does it change the tone of the scene? As you read the scene, consider the effect of having Falstaff on stage the entire time. How does Worcester justify the rebellion 5. Is this essentially the same version of events we heard in 4. What is the effect of repeating it here?

How does the King respond 5. How is this reaction to a "story" similar to his reaction at 1. How good a king is Henry IV based on what we've seen? What does Hal propose 5. Why does the King reject Hal's proposal 5. What might the King expect to happen? What offer does the King make to Worcester and the rebels 5. Is this a wise move? What is the nature of the brief exchange between Hal and Falstaff 5.

How does Falstaff respond to the mention of "debt" 5. Read Falstaff's famous discussion of honor carefully 5. What is Falstaff's understanding of honor? Is this just a coward's version of something he doesn't understand? Is there some truth to what he says? Does that mean that honor is always a bad thing? Remember that we've heard Hotspur talk a lot about honor, especially at 1.

Why won't Worcester tell Hotspur about the King's offer 5. What is Worcester saying about his motive in lines ? What does this do to your estimation of Worcester? What is the effect of having this exchange take place immediately after Falstaff's speech on honor? What does Worcester actually tell Hotspur, and how does Hotspur respond 5. How does Hotspur respond to Hal's challenge to single combat 5.

Again Vernon praises Hal 5. What is the effect of these descriptions of Hal? How does Hotspur respond 5. What does Hotspur mean in line 77? What is the effect of having Hotspur not read the letters brought by the Messenger at line 79? What might be in those letters? What has been in the letters we've already seen Hotspur receive in 2. Why does Douglas attack Sir Walter Blunt, and what happens in that fight 5. What does Hotspur then tell Douglas, and how does Douglas respond 5.

What happens when Falstaff finds Blunt's body 5. What has happened to Falstaff's soldiers 5. What happens when Hal asks to borrow Falstaff's sword 5. How does Hal respond to Falstaff now? Does this suggest a new Hal? How does Falstaff respond 5. How do you feel about Falstaff and what he says now?

Is Falstaff wrong when he says "Give me life" line 58? What happens when Douglas fights the King 5. How do the King and Hal respond 5. Finally Hal and Hotspur meet, an encounter both of them have wanted 5. Make sure you look closely at the stage direction after Falstaff's short speech at 5. How does Hotspur respond to his wound, and how does Hal treat the dead Hotspur 5.

Hal has now done what he promised to his father at 3. What is the effect of having Hal complete Hotspur's last sentence? How does Hal respond when he sees Falstaff apparently dead 5. Is this a fitting epitaph given the relationship between Hal and Falstaff that we've seen? Again, treat this scene as if you were watching it--all you saw was Douglas attack Falstaff and Falstaff fall. That makes Falstaff's rise at line all the more surprising. It's almost as if Falstaff here is some sort of life force that cannot be killed. What do you think an audience's reaction would be when he gets up?

What specifically does Falstaff respond to when he gets up?