Henry IV, Act III, scene 3
Please post your comments for Scene 3 of Act 3 of Henry IV, Part 1 here. (See instructions under the post for "Scene 1, lines 1-197.")
posted by Cheryl Makovsky at 12:46 PM
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Previous Posts
- Henry IV, Act II, scene 3
- Henry IV, Act II, scene 4, beginning-line 337.
- Henry IV, Act II, scene 4, line 338-end
- Henry IV, Act I scene 1
- Henry IV, Act I scene 2
- Henry IV, Act I scene 3
- Most Compelling Question
- Class Notes
- Literary Essay 1--Thesis Statement
- Summer Reading and Thoughts about A.P. Lit.
5 Comments:
#8/3. At the beginning of the scene, there is a lot of light and fire imagery. It is contrasted to darkness occassionally. Examples are when Falstaff calls Bardolph, "the Knight of the Burning Lamp," and Falstaff also mentions things like, "light in thy face, the son of utter darkness," "ball of wildfire," "bonfire-light," "torches," "hell-fire," and "burning." I wasn't really sure what it is symbolizing or why it's significant. I just found it interesting it was used so often at the very beginning, but trails off and isn't used a lot in the rest of the scene.
6. I think the relationship between Falstaff and Hal is significant in this scene. You hear the familier friendly and light-hearted banter between them but it is obvious that Hal is not the same person he was before talking to his father. He newly expresses his concern for his country when he assigns each of his comrades a task and says, "The land is burning, Percy stands on high,/ And either we or they must lower lie" (3.3.209).
This is important because Hal is changing and maturing and accepting his rightful place as king whereas Falstaff is his same old self. Obviously if someone becomes a different person they can't keep their old friends so this is a key foreshawdowing of Falstaff's (and the pub-crawlers) and Hal's relationship.
2. This scene is significant in that Shakespeare demonstrates Falstaff's amusing qualities by building Falstaff's immaturity through his lies and yet giving him charge of a foot soldier unit in the military.
Much of this scene is devoted to building up to a change in action that the reader can sense. Hal is about to go off to war and start accepting responsibility. Falstaff continues his deceitful ways and yet has responsibility thrust upon him. Whether or not Hal and Falstaff stand true to their responsibilities remains to be seen, but a decisive checkpoint is set for both characters in this scene.
9. This scene starts with the usual banter and insults that are so natural to Falstaff. He has not changed throughout the entire play, and right after he talks to Bardolph about going back to church to repent, he turns around and starts mocking Mistress Quickly and lying again. Falstaff knows nothing but deception and wickedness, and his old age has not given him wisdom or maturity either. The Hal walks into the tavern as a changed man. He has just spoken with his father, and either had a quick change of attitude or finally grew up. Hal only deals with Falstaff for a few moments, and them puts him into his place, rebuking him for blaming Mistress Quickly for pick-pocketing him and calling her such disrespectful names. He also admits to being the pick-pocketer, but in doing so, it is his way of repenting. Then he gets right down to business telling the others that their debts were paid and he made up with his father and is free to do anything. They tell him to steal again, and he doesn't even tolerate their nonsense but goes right into telling Jack "I have procured thee, Jack, a charge of foot" (166). Hal is no longer concerned with the rebellion of his youth, but is now trying to fight for the honor of his father and his country. Hal's character really shines through in this scene and the reader begins to see his plan of becoming a king that everyone loves start working.
Response to Betsy H.:
I noticed this same concept while reading through this scene, however I took a little different stance on the meaning of that concept. I agree that Falstaff was acting incredibly sexist toward Mistress Quickly, however that was a reality of the time period this play is set in. I really do not see any deep ideas flowing out of his sexist remarks, however I do see importance in the idea that Falstaff is portraying here. Falstaff is showing the reader that he is not a person who trusts other’s easily. He states “you lie, hostess” (3.3.63) directly at her, ignoring any argument that she puts forth, simply because he does not trust. This also reveals a great irony in Falstaff in that he is able to quickly denounce the mistress, and many others, yet immediately trust Hal, as evidenced in that he “fear[s] thee as [he] fear[s] the roaring of the lion’s whelp” (3.3.155-156). Why?
I do not think Hal’s meeting with his father abruptly changed his mindset nor did he grow up rapidly, but I think that these ideas had been brewing in his mind for some time. That can be seen in his plan to be immoral for a little longer, then change, creating a better image for himself. If Hal was planning this for his future and understood the importance of this action, then he most certainly should be capable of planning the moment when he was going to change. The meeting with his father just happened to be that point.
Well, I am really not sure of Hal’s purpose in commissioning Falstaff. The purpose seems to be to give him a chance to be the person that he should be, to be the person that is not secretive, deceptive, or hold any of Falstaff’s previous characteristics. But, I think that Hal is too smart to realize that Falstaff will actually change, but he is honorable to give it a try anyway.
Post a Comment
<< Home