What makes writers such as Shakespeare so renowned? An interesting thing to consider what did Shakespeare actually do with his writing as established him as the best writer of the English language. Clearly must have been a prodigy similar to Beethoven or Mozart, but what was so special about his writing? Simply put his structure in his plays is extraordinary.Structure is one of the most important aspects of literature. Poor or distasteful structure can completely ruin a well written piece of literature no matter how good the ideas within the piece are without good structure it's almost impossible to create anything great. Yet, what makes Shakespeare's structure so appealing and well-written? If one examines his play Henry the Fifth or any of …show more content…
From the start of the play we hear of Henry's wild past however, as the play develops it becomes clear that Henry the 5th is not the delinquent that he used to be. He later makes it very clear that he will not tolerate any sort of foolishness, on the way to France there's an assassination conspiracy uncovered and it turns out an old friend of his is involved. They plead for mercy when brought before the king, yet the king shows no mercy and makes it clear he's not to be trifled with. They're all executed for treason. Later two more of his friends from his troubled past that failed to grow up are caught looting, he has them hung. This displays that Henry has matured greatly since his adolescence, he won't tolerate his men being a bunch of crooks and doing as they please. He has shown that he became the very system he had been robbing only a handful of years ago. It display a very impressive amount of growth in Henry, many people never grow up and become responsible individuals out of a restless adolescence ,yet Henry does so in a handful of years. A very interesting idea presented in Henry the Fifth is that Shakespeare seems to suggest that a ruthless Machiavellian style leader may be the best. The king claims a throne through a technicality that would remove him if it applied to him in England. Additionally, he ruthlessly dispatches any traitors or men within his ranks that can't follow procedure. Additionally, Henry disguises himself amongst his soldiers later in the play to find out what they thought of the situation. This also proves that he's willing to deceive anyone to help him in his goal. The entire invasion of France is an end justifies the means situation. His people have been torn by war for years now, but he drags them into another war to fuel his
In the first battle Henry thinks he has overcome his fear and he fights valiantly. Henry and his fellow soldiers engage in battle. Henry faces the enemy and fires repeatedly, and the enemy leaves. I would say Henry feels accomplished. He has overcome a portion of his fears and gains confidence as he works with the other soldiers of his regiment to hold the line. Along with his fellow soldiers, Henry stands his ground and makes some movements toward confidence and maturity.
Finally, Laura and Henry were having a conversation, during which Laura mentioned that she though OUTOCAR deserved to win the competition. during a conversation between Henry and Laura, she mentioned that OUTOCAR should win the competition. Upon hearing this, Henry tried to influence her to change her decision to GUIDEME for his personal interests.
As a king, Henry becomes known for being a man of resilience, strategy, and combat. These traits, according to Machiavelli, are necessary to become the “ideal king.” As stated by Machiavelli, “…a prince ought to have no other aim or thought, nor select anything else for his study, than war and its rules and discipline; for this is the sole art that belongs to him who rules.” (Machiavelli) This can be seen when the Dauphin presents Henry with a gift of tennis balls and an insulting speech practically telling him to stay out of grown men’s affairs. This gives Henry the leverage he needs to start a war with France without looking like the instigator. He can now put the blame of war on the Dauphin and the many lives of whom will be killed. Henry uses this to move toward his strength and show his full potential.
In Henry V, Shakespeare clearly shows that powerful speech and eloquent rhetoric is more effective in times of war than threat of sharp swords and numerous soldiers. King Henry V - the young and bright king of England - establishes himself as a devout leader to his country and his people. Throughout the story he demonstrates his ability to articulate in order to manipulate his audience, whether it be commoners, enemies, or friends. After an argument with the Dauphin of France over land claims, Henry gathers an army to invade French territory. Following a surprising march through the country against all odds, the king and his soldiers find themselves in a five to one battle, destined to fall defeated. The character of King Henry is exemplified
Born the second son of a royal family, Henry Tudor lived a very interesting life. His future was intended to be the head of the Roman Catholic Church and that fate ended with the death of his brother, Prince Arthur. Henry’s majestic life was full of sports, women, and faith. The young King acceded his father to the throne, married six women, and began the English Reformation when he broke away from the Roman Catholic Church and created his own religion.
In the film Regarding Henry, Henry Turner depicts a more complex Id and Superego, that is capable of having positive and negative qualities on each side. Through complex character development throughout the film, Turner creates a two sided Id and Superego. After seemingly changing personality traits, due to a freak accident, Turner’s views on life are changed after a complete memory loss.
Patrick Henry Patrick Henry was a great patriot. He never used his fists or guns to fight
“Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated…” (Henry).
Shakespeare’s Henry V presents a man transformed from rowdy teenager to righteous king. With the death of Henry’s father, Henry’s “wildness…/Seemed to die too” (1.1.26-27). While Henry has seemingly transformed into a powerful man awarded praise, his actions at times seem morally questionable and disingenuous as he continually deflects blame on others and contradicts his notions for peace. Throughout the play, Henry’s speeches persuade and manipulate audiences as he effectively uses the power of rhetoric to achieve his goals. He has the power to intimidate his enemies, uplift his soldiers, and mold himself into whoever he needs to be. With the change of Henry’s character came a greater title and the responsibility for an entire nation, causing him to abandon his outwardly destructive behavior and dissemble. Shakespeare thus contends that there is a difference between being a good person and a successful leader; national heroism and effective kingship is not necessarily attained through moral actions, but rather through the art of powerful rhetoric and the ability to seem moral and virtuous rather than to be moral and virtuous, thereby mimicking some characteristics of how a successful ruler should appear, as suggested in Machiavelli’s The Prince. While Henry is certainly ruthless at times, his ability to assume the roles necessary for successful leadership is what makes him a great king.
What makes a king an effective king? Is it how long they rule? No, it is actually the way in which they interact with their subjects. The way they are able to separate the personal from the political, not allowing personal feelings to interfere with his ruling. King Henry the 5th is a perfect example of this. He is able to rule his kingdom according to the kingdom's laws and doesn't let his personal relationships with his subjects to change
Shakespeare’s ‘King Henry IV Part I’ centres on a core theme of the conflict between order and disorder. Such conflict is brought to light by the use of many vehicles, including Hal’s inner conflict, the country’s political and social conflict, the conflict between the court world and the tavern world, and the conflicting moral values of characters from each of these worlds. This juxtaposition of certain values exists on many levels, and so is both a strikingly present and an underlying theme throughout the play. Through characterization Shakespeare explores moral conflict, and passage three is a prime example of Falstaff’s enduring moral disorder. By this stage in the play Hal has
King Henry V, is one of the only successful monarchs in Shakespeare’s plays. He displays great strength and intelligence. King Henry V is capable of uniting all of his people in his St. Crispin’s Day speech as they prepare to go to battle. The troops were greatly outnumbered and believed they had no chance at winning. But King Henry makes them feel like they are part of something important, and by doing this he motivates them to fight their hardest.
supposed to be engaged to Nym at some point in time, but ran off with
Henry V is a wise and loyal king, changing from a wild youth to a mature king. He is described to be an intelligent, thoughtful and an efficient statesman. He thinks carefully whether to invade France or not which represents his responsible character. King Henry gives a very strong speech which gave courage and confidence to his army that they could win the battle. This character describes him to be a king of great ability to fight and having good administrative skills. Throughout the play Henry’s nature is religious, merciful and compassionate.
Henry V was not what I was expecting. I thought it was going to be all war and no fun. From the beginning I feel like King Henry was underestimated in his ability to lead his people by some of the French. But he quickly showed us that was not true. We see that he knows that his status as King isn’t a joke and shouldn’t be taken lightly. Many of the characters speak about how he was when he younger and not the King. But when it became time for him to step up and be King he took on that duty in a serious manner. King Henry even knew when to show mercy and cruelty. With the drunk man he knew that he would learn from his action by being locked up for a while and so he showed him mercy. But the exact opposite happened with the traitors. He couldn’t show mercy with them because he as King felt that it would put him and his people in danger.