In Act 2, Scene 4 Falstaff boasts about his battle with an ever growing number of combatants, clearly making false claims left and right about his fighting prowess. The number of defeated combatants expands from two to eleven as ever more fanciful details and impossibilites are related, including his claim that he knew that he fought "three misbegotten knaves in Kendal Green" even though it "was so dark . . . that one couldst not see thy hand."(2.4.230-3) At one point he responds to the skepticism of Prince Hal and the others gathered to hear his tale with "Is not the truth the truth?"(2.4.38-9)
Falstaff is not alone as other figures tell tales to justify themselves and their action, sometimes with bias, exaggeration and even outright lies. Hotspur tells the tale of the messenger who is the cause of his not sending the king his hostages. Glendower tells how the earth shook upon his birth. Many of the characters relate the story of how Henry Bolingbroke became King Henry IV. What is the play telling us about truth and fiction? Why do people embellish the truth or even lie? What is the play telling us about the role of storytelling? Is the truth always the truth -- or something more -- or something less?
In the play "Henry IV, Part 1," Shakespeare uses interactions between his characters to illustrate that the truth, typically revered as a holy boon, does not always equate to the common notion of good. For instance, when Falstaff and Hal act out a play, with Hal playing the role of the king and Falstaff acting as Hal in jest, Sir Jack enters a heartfelt monologue: “[if] to be fat be to be hated, then Pharoah’s [lean] kine are to be loved. No, my good lord… sweet Jack Falstaff, kind Jack Falstaff, true Jack Falstaff, valiant Jack Falstaff… banish not him thy Harry’s company…. Banish plump Jack, and banish all the world” (Henry IV, Part 1 2.4.490-498). In response, Hal coldly replies, “I do, I will” (1H4 2.4.499). In this case, the truth is far more harmful (and hurtful) than good on both sides. Falstaff uses the truth in a disingenuous manner: while he admits a few of his faults, such as his grotesquely rotund figure, he also greatly embellishes his strengths, hand-picking choice words like “sweet” and “valiant,” language that would describe an actual knight, not the Falstaff of the leaping-house and the tavern (1H4 2.4.490-498). Though these qualities may be evident through his loyalty later on in the play, Falstaff is presently a bad influence on Hal, and his misuse of the truth in order to stay in Harry’s company furthers the unintended damage to the Prince’s reputation and viability as the heir apparent. In contrast to Falstaff’s rousing speech, Hal’s abuse of the truth is epitomized by his short, stinging, and brutally honest remark to Falstaff’s pleading, demonstrating how the Prince already acknowledges subconsciously that he needs to “man up,” callously abandoning his well-meaning and kind-hearted, albeit sinful, friends in favor of the reality that he may soon need to assume the responsibilities of being a king.
ReplyDelete- Matthew Chang
In the Shakespearean play "Henry IV, Part 1," we see how stories evolves and how the line between truth and fiction is blurred at best. When justifying his deceit in terms of the fights he had Falstaff says the following, "Is not the truth the truth?"(2.4.38-9). The truth when it comes down to storytelling is told by those who actually get to tell the story. Stories always will evolve and change overtime, no matter how accurate you think you are someone, or something has changed the story. The Prince whilst in the bar with Falstaff listening to his tale remarks, "O monstrous! Eleven buckram men grown out of two!" (2.4.28-9) In this we see a much more condensed version of what happens in stories. There's a saying about how all stories have some grain of truth into them. Someone originally tells a story, usually relatively accurately. Then someone else picks up the story and repeats it, they can't remember everything so the story changes a bit, and on, and on, and on. This until the story is completely butchered. At this point what is the truth, and what's a lie? An argument over the story commences and demonstrates my point, "Do so, for it is worth the listening to... These...nine in buckram that I told thee of—....So, two more already...Their points being broken..." Stories can never stay the same, and will always change no matter how accurate people think they are.
ReplyDeleteI'm Caleb
DeleteNice username. Don't put Descartes before DeHorse.
Delete