Shakespeare’s King Henry V Episode As A “Normal Man”

In Marilyn L. Williamson’s essay on Act 4 scene 1 she touches on the scene or what she calls episode where King Henry V disguises himself as a commoner or a regular soldier the night before the battle. She had some solid points backing up the idea that Henry V as king is more complex than Shakespeare’s portrait of a hero. He is also a young, freshly new King with flaws and as she mentions, he has some unpredictable behavior and a pattern of “masquerading” himself. As I read her first few paragraphs, I came to the conclusion that the thesis of Williamson’s essay is: “It is ironic that Henry's subjects know something he cannot seem to face: that the king is not just another man, that you do not trust his word in the same way, that he has privileges you do not have. How accurate they are we find out as a result of the quarrel. If we look back to Shakespeare's portrait of Henry in the other plays of the tetralogy, we see that as Prince Hal he enjoyed just such a double role as he is assuming here”. I believe Williamson is saying that Henry does not want to face the fact that even though he wanted to be King so badly, he does not want to the responsibilities that follow. He is perhaps disguising himself as a common soldier to not only relate to the other commoner soldiers but to be seen as a normal man, which he is not.

In Williamson’s essay, she uses the relationship between Fallstaff and then in Henry IV to promote her argument of Hal wanting himself and others to see him as a man and royalty: “Indeed, Falstaff reminds us constantly of Hal as both Prince and man: Prince. I say 'tis copper. Darest thou be as good as thy word now? Falstaff: Why, Hal, thou knowest, as thou art but a man, I dare; but as thou art Prince, I fear thee as I fear the roaring of the lion's whelp”. Here, Williamson is using Falstaff as an example of how Henry V seems to view himself as a “man” like anyone else because Falstaff is person in his life who encourages this theory. The words “I fear of the roaring of the lion’s whelp” seem to foreshadow to when Prince Hal becomes King and turns on Falstaff, this argument becomes contradictory since his powers are now in effect and these are privileges no ordinary man can control. Looking back on the reading in this “episode”, I found a few ways that Williamson’s argument was valid in that the new king is facing the contradiction of two lives. Starting on line 109 when Bates is speaking: “Bates: He may show what outward courage he will, but I believe as cold a night as ‘tis, he could wish himself in Thames up to the neck. And so I would he were, and I by him, by all adventures, so we were quit here. King: By my troth, I will speak my conscience of the King. I think he would not wish himself anywhere but where he is”. Here, Henry is in disguise but also quick to defend himself as King. This could be seen in Williamson’s view of how hard it is to live this contradictory double life the king is trying to live on that he has lived in his past. It’s also understandable to see it from Bates’ perspective since the English army is not well equipped to defeat the French army, he feels like he and his fellow commoner soldiers have been put in a disadvantage. This can also be a telling sign that Henry is young and that perhaps the decision he made to fight this battle was brash and a sign of his temper taking the best of him.

In Lawrence Oliver’s film portraying Shakespeare’s Henry V, the portrayal of Henry is weary, yet calm. He argues in a calm manner his opinion of himself by using the same argument Williamson uses when he explains the king as: “For I think the King is but a man as I am. The violet smells to him as it doth to me”. He is trying to express to the men indirectly that he is not a bad man and his intentions are not ill. However, by doing this, he is also justifying any argument against him by simply humanizing himself and his position. He is defending his case in a rather calm, yet still defensive manner. By using metaphors like the fact that he smells the beauty of a violet the same as any man would only backs up his need and desire to feel and relate himself to and as any other man. However, as the film clip goes on, Henry’s voice starts to raise and become more frantic and defensive. When the soldier express fear of the battle ahead and disappointment in their king he responds in a rather agitated tone when he says: “The king is not bound to answer for the particular endings of his soldiers”. This also goes towards the argument in Williamson’s argument that Henry needs to understand his responsibilities as king instead of leading his double life as a normal man and king. The King must take responsibility for his actions. Watching this scene again with the reference of Williamson’s argument makes me realize that he is not willingly accepting letting go of himself as a normal man and accepting himself as king. His attitude and quickness to defend himself in such a way shows this.

I enjoyed Williamson’s essay and the argument she uses. It gave me another point of view in terms of Henry and how he is portrayed in Shakespeare. I agreed with her argument on how Henry is longing to cling to his “double life” but he is not yet ready to face the reality of being king. When I first watched the film, I got a sense that Henry was simply trying to connect with his fellow people on a personal level. However, after reading the argument as well as re-watching the film I got a new sense that Henry is not just a hero but a King who has flaws.