Scan barcode
poisonenvy's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
Is it wrong if I spent this entire play going "Wow, Prince Hal is giving me so many Nikolai-from-Grishaverse vibes?
Given the way my professor spoke of Falstaff, he had not at all what I expected. All the same, I had a lot of fun with this play.
Given the way my professor spoke of Falstaff, he had not at all what I expected. All the same, I had a lot of fun with this play.
writingtothevoid's review against another edition
2.5
read for English 221, fall semester sophomore year
zbmorgan's review against another edition
4.0
Not just a dry recounting of history, this play is a winner on all counts. Ever had a parent who thought you weren't good enough? Ever hung out with the wrong kind of crowd? Maybe you decided to grow up a bit, but a friend disappointed you and...did not? Love a little good hack-and-slash?
If you answered yes to any of the above, this is worth the read (or ideally, view, if you can see it live). But most importantly, it's the starting point of the character arc of prince Hal - an irresponsible wastrel of a guy who eventually becomes Henry V, heroic deliverer of the Battle of St. Crispin's Day speech. Throw in Falstaff, on of Shakespeare's most interesting sidekicks since Iago, and you have a winner.
If you answered yes to any of the above, this is worth the read (or ideally, view, if you can see it live). But most importantly, it's the starting point of the character arc of prince Hal - an irresponsible wastrel of a guy who eventually becomes Henry V, heroic deliverer of the Battle of St. Crispin's Day speech. Throw in Falstaff, on of Shakespeare's most interesting sidekicks since Iago, and you have a winner.
remjunior's review against another edition
5.0
Brilliant. This is one of the best Shakespeare plays that encompasses just about every theme you could imagine. I loved the interaction between Hal and Falstaff, and then again between Hal and his father, the king. The themes of honor and dishonor are very interesting as well. Overall, I just loved everything about this play.
lovelycass's review against another edition
challenging
funny
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
Read the edition published in 1983. Annotations annoyingly placed at end, not along with text
pandorasirens's review against another edition
medium-paced
- Strong character development? It's complicated
3.75
lucysnowy's review against another edition
4.0
now this was a surprise!
after reading henry v last year i was convinced that the histories weren't for me, but maybe i just hadn't read the right one!
i think that is arguably because this play is, on the whole, at least for me, a comedy. the falstaff and hal content was what entertained me, and kept me going. the war simply existed in the background.
at the end, though, i was very excited to know what happened next - i am actually motivated to read part 2 at some point! thrilling.
as usual the thing that holds me back from being in love with the histories is the lack of female characters, especially when shakespeare's comedies are the domain of the witty woman (and this felt like a comedy), so it does feel like a very masculine space. realistically, though, there is not much shakespeare can do about that when writing a history haha
after reading henry v last year i was convinced that the histories weren't for me, but maybe i just hadn't read the right one!
i think that is arguably because this play is, on the whole, at least for me, a comedy. the falstaff and hal content was what entertained me, and kept me going. the war simply existed in the background.
at the end, though, i was very excited to know what happened next - i am actually motivated to read part 2 at some point! thrilling.
as usual the thing that holds me back from being in love with the histories is the lack of female characters, especially when shakespeare's comedies are the domain of the witty woman (and this felt like a comedy), so it does feel like a very masculine space. realistically, though, there is not much shakespeare can do about that when writing a history haha
thaurisil's review against another edition
3.0
This is the second history play of Shakespeare's that I'm reading. It is the second of a metrology that also includes Richard II, Henry IV Part 2 and Henry V. It follows after Richard II, in which Henry Bolingbroke, with the support of the disgruntled populace, deposes Richard without much resistance and becomes King Henry IV. In this play, Henry IV now faces rebellion from a group led by Harry Percy and his father and uncle, who supported Henry in his journey to the crown but now feel that they have fallen out of favour with Henry. They are joined by the English nobleman Edmund Mortimer, his Welsh father-in-law Owen Glendower, and the Scottish Douglas. Henry's son, known here as Prince Hal, is Henry's shame, as he fraternises with friends in taverns, joins them in robberies and plays pranks on them. Ultimately, Hal makes it up to Henry, joins him in battle, and kills Harry Percy.
Henry is a different king from the ones who came before him. To be a king used to be thought of as a divine appointment, but when Henry deposed Richard, he opened a can of worms. Kingship is no longer a divine right, and kings are no longer safely enthroned. This was already hinted at in Richard II, and now Henry IV is insecure. His supporters feel it, and even when he does not openly antagonise them, they feel his eye of suspicion on them.
Prince Hal too is a different prince. He was not raised from young to expect royalty, and even now that he is royalty, he does not act like a prince or seem to respect his position. His antics with his friends, in particularly his banter with Falstaff about Falstaff’s fatness, create comedy that is unexpected in a play about kings and rebellions. Shakespeare bends history a little, creating Falstaff out of a real person named Oldcastle, and comparing Hal with Harry Percy when Percy was actually more similar to Henry IV’s age. But Hal, who eventually became the successful King Henry V, shows himself worthy of his title in his humility, devotion to his father, generous praise of Percy, and courage during the actual battle. And in fact, from the start, Hal is depicted as someone biding his time, joking with his friends while waiting for the time to prove himself. In a way, he shows himself a better politician than his father, being able to change his behaviour according to the situations he finds himself in.
Nobody is unambiguously good or bad in this play. The battle is not between good and evil, but between two political factions. Each side recognises the other’s virtues, and the real losers are not Percy and his team, but the civilians who are called unwillingly to battle and die undeservedly.
Henry is a different king from the ones who came before him. To be a king used to be thought of as a divine appointment, but when Henry deposed Richard, he opened a can of worms. Kingship is no longer a divine right, and kings are no longer safely enthroned. This was already hinted at in Richard II, and now Henry IV is insecure. His supporters feel it, and even when he does not openly antagonise them, they feel his eye of suspicion on them.
Prince Hal too is a different prince. He was not raised from young to expect royalty, and even now that he is royalty, he does not act like a prince or seem to respect his position. His antics with his friends, in particularly his banter with Falstaff about Falstaff’s fatness, create comedy that is unexpected in a play about kings and rebellions. Shakespeare bends history a little, creating Falstaff out of a real person named Oldcastle, and comparing Hal with Harry Percy when Percy was actually more similar to Henry IV’s age. But Hal, who eventually became the successful King Henry V, shows himself worthy of his title in his humility, devotion to his father, generous praise of Percy, and courage during the actual battle. And in fact, from the start, Hal is depicted as someone biding his time, joking with his friends while waiting for the time to prove himself. In a way, he shows himself a better politician than his father, being able to change his behaviour according to the situations he finds himself in.
Nobody is unambiguously good or bad in this play. The battle is not between good and evil, but between two political factions. Each side recognises the other’s virtues, and the real losers are not Percy and his team, but the civilians who are called unwillingly to battle and die undeservedly.