Shakespeare Fans discussion

Act 4...Henry IV here...

Scene 1

Messenger: These letters come from your father - .

Hotspur: Letter from him! Why comes he not himself?

In the previous act in scene 2 we had the father Henry IV most concerned about his son and afraid that he'd be letting him down. But Prince Hal we soon discover has come around and is ready to shoulder his royal responsibilities and embrace his destiny.

Now in scene 1 of the 4th act we have a son, Hotspur, much put out that his father has let him down. His father is 'grevous sick' and cannot help. This theme of fathers and sons, sons and fathers; is it to simply say that sons can let fathers down just as fathers can let sons down? Gotta be more. No?
The story moves on. The battle lines are drawn, we start to yawn, but lo, coming over the horizon scene 2, on a public road near Coventry, none other that Sir John Falstaff and his trusty
Bardolph to to get we the faithful audience back on the smile track again. Whew! 'Fill me a bottle of sack!"' A welcome respite wherein to momentarily forget about it all again - before the battle's lost and won.

Hi James, yes fathers obviously can let down their sons too, and at what a moment! On first reading, I had decided to be generous and allow that Northumberland was indeed seriously ill and perhaps close to death. And perhaps he was, but having a reread this morning in response to your post, I noticed this time how paltry his reasons are for not sending anyone else to support Hotspur:

‘And that his friends by deputation could not
So soon be drawn, nor did he think it meet
To lay so dangerous and dear a trust
On any soul removed but on his own’

Outrageous! And then he tells Hotspur that he’ll have to go to battle anyway, and that ‘there is no quailing now’ because the king ‘is certainly possessed of all our purposes’. Thanks Dad!

In reality Hotspur was age 39 at this time and his father was in his 60s. For Shakespeare's purposes Hotspur comes across as much younger. I wonder what Shakespeare is trying to do? I don't fathom it.

Well, this certainly appears to be the turning point in the story and though I love the poetry contained in 4.1, the spirit of the rebellion seems to have turned cold. Hotspur is rambunctious as ever, even in the face of an almost certain defeat with the failure of allied support (particularly, his father), but Shakespeare paints the picture of "Merrie England" (for which the play is famed) with ambiguous strokes. After all, it's the superior numbers of King Henry's force that fit that picture:

VERNON All furnished, all in arms,
All plumed like estridges that with the wind
Bated like eagles having lately bathed,
Glittering in golden coats like images,
As full of spirit as the month of May,
And gorgeous as the sun at midsummer,
Wanton as youthful goats, wild as young bulls.
I saw young Harry with his beaver on,
His cuisses on his thighs, gallantly armed,
Rise from the ground like feathered Mercury
And vaulted with such ease into his seat
As if an angel dropped down from the clouds,
To turn and wind a fiery Pegasus
And witch the world with noble horsemanship.
HOTSPUR
No more, no more! Worse than the sun in March
This praise doth nourish agues. Let them come.
4.1. 103-118

Nourishing agues, indeed. Shakespeare had to have known that, despite history, audiences almost by default, will root for the underdog, in this case - Hotspur and his forces. Yet he puts the following words into the mouths of the doomed leader:

My father and Glendower being both away,
The powers of us may serve so great a day.
Come, let us take a muster speedily.
Doomsday is near. Die all, die merrily.
4.1 139-142

Not exactly a rousing speech, though he knows what's coming. And Douglas' response is even more odd:

'Talk not of dying. I am out of fear
Of death or death’s hand for this one-half year.'

Hotspur's rally is undercut with that comment and almost seems peevish in light of the great armed conflict to follow. Why the 6-month reference?

Marlin wrote: "

Well, this certainly appears to be the turning point in the story and though I love the poetry contained in 4.1, the spirit of the rebellion seems to have turned cold. Hotspur is rambunctious as ..."

Hi Marlin. Good to see you back on board. As I understand it the 'half year' quote by Douglas refers to the length of time of the rebellion at this point. Douglas had been taken a prisoner by the Northumberlands in late 1402. They had expected to ransom him and other Scots fighters and were not allowed to by King Henry. Douglas it seems has joined ranks with the rebels as a way of getting his freedom and maybe some booty. At this point just before the battle of Shrewsbury the time frame is July 1403.
It would seem to me that the 'rebellion' is more of a spat between warlords over money.

JamesD wrote:"It would seem to me that the 'rebellion' is more of a spat between warlords over money."

Indeed! What IS the cause? Or what has the cause become? I did understand the context of the half-year reference but not its import. Why bring that up at the moment when a defeat seems imminent? It sort of reduces the moment of high drama to a time checklist. Perhaps it's Shakespeare's way of contrasting the leadership qualities of the two Harrys. Prince Hal always seems able to rally people to his side; a great calculating persuader (some might say manipulator, later), where Hal is simply too headstrong and even foolhardy in attitude to inspire a successful following. People seem to want to leave the room when Hotspur's raving. (It's rather like a Sonny vs. Michael Corleone style of leadership in The Godfather if you'll pardon the movie comparison.)

For all his hot-headedness Hotspur does lay out a damning history of King Henry, which makes taking sides that much more difficult for the audience:

HOTSPUR
The King is kind, and well we know the King
Knows at what time to promise, when to pay.
My father and my uncle and myself
Did give him that same royalty he wears,
And when he was not six-and-twenty strong,
Sick in the world’s regard, wretched and low,
A poor unminded outlaw sneaking home,
My father gave him welcome to the shore;
And when he heard him swear and vow to God
He came but to be Duke of Lancaster,
To sue his livery, and beg his peace
With tears of innocency and terms of zeal,
My father, in kind heart and pity moved,
Swore him assistance and performed it too.
Now when the lords and barons of the realm
Perceived Northumberland did lean to him,
The more and less came in with cap and knee,
Met him in boroughs, cities, villages,
Attended him on bridges, stood in lanes,
Laid gifts before him, proffered him their oaths,
Gave him their heirs as pages, followed him
Even at the heels in golden multitudes.
He presently, as greatness knows itself,
Steps me a little higher than his vow
Made to my father while his blood was poor
Upon the naked shore at Ravenspurgh,
And now forsooth takes on him to reform
Some certain edicts and some strait decrees
That lie too heavy on the commonwealth,
Cries out upon abuses, seems to weep
Over his country’s wrongs, and by this face,
This seeming brow of justice, did he win
The hearts of all that he did angle for,
Proceeded further—cut me off the heads
Of all the favorites that the absent king
In deputation left behind him here
When he was personal in the Irish war.
BLUNT
Tut, I came not to hear this.
HOTSPUR Then to the point.
In short time after, he deposed the King,
Soon after that deprived him of his life
And, in the neck of that, tasked the whole state.
To make that worse, suffered his kinsman March
(Who is, if every owner were well placed,
Indeed his king) to be engaged in Wales,
There without ransom to lie forfeited,
Disgraced me in my happy victories,
Sought to entrap me by intelligence,
Rated mine uncle from the council board,
In rage dismissed my father from the court,
Broke oath on oath, committed wrong on wrong,
And in conclusion drove us to seek out
This head of safety, and withal to pry
Into his title, the which we find
Too indirect for long continuance.
4.3 58-112

Early strains of the civil war that would follow in ensuing years are heard in Hotspur's grievances against Henry, particularly in regard to the "rightful" succession. These arguments which would have real influence and consequence wouldn't really end until the restoration of the monarchy in the 17th century with James II. But Hotspur proceeds (in beautiful blank verse) with a kind of moral logic which assumes that a king must administer his (or her) rule with a kind of even-handed justice, which is certainly not the way actual power is solidified and/or maintained. And if it concedes nothing but only appears to do so for the sake of appearing to be obliging to its subjects - as Hotspur points out - can he really expect Henry to relent to any demand?

This entire scene is cut from Orson Welles' film amalgamation of the Henry plays, Chimes at Midnight (my favorite of the lot), and in terms of pacing maybe rightly so. But it would have made a fine counter to King Henry's "Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown" speech in Part 2, which Welles does include, if only to show the other face of Henry's noble bearing and countenance.