Tuesday, September 19, 2006

King Henry -- 3.1.1-197 and Instructions

Please post your comments for Scene 1, lines 1-197 of Act 3 of Henry IV, Part 1 here.

Instructions for Act 3 comments:

Rebels:
Comment on the last half of Scene 1 (lines 198-276) or Scene 2.
Comment on Scene 3.

Court:
Comment on the first half of Scene 1 (lines 1-197).
Comment on Scene 3.

Pub Crawlers:
Comment on the first half of Scene 1 (lines 1-197).
Comment on the last half of Scene 1 (lines 198-276) or Scene 2.

Please complete your first 2 comments by Friday, September 22.

All Groups:Put your third comment on Mrs. Makovsky”s class blog:

http://makovsky3.blogspot.com

You will be responding to one of her students’ comments. Please complete your third comment by Tuesday, September 26.

Blog comment prompts:
1. Summarize the action of the scene.
2. Comment in one sentence on what you think is the significance of this scene. What would the play be like without it?
3. Ask questions about the scene. Has anything in the scene caused you confusion? Ask one of the characters in the scene a question—or ask me a question.
4. Quote lines from the scene that you enjoyed and comment on them.
5. Describe your reactions to a character, action, or idea you confronted in the scene.
6. Talk about the relationships characters have to one another, quoting specific words or phrases to give evidence for your opinion.
7. Pretend you are an actor playing one of the characters in the scene. Get inside that character’s mind. Tell how the character feels about herself, about other characters, about the situation of the scene.
8. Trace a set of images. Do you notice certain images—like night or moon or food or fat—coming up time and time again? Produce a list of citations—every time that your word appears. Then look for patterns. Are the images associated with certain people or places or events? Discuss the impact of your image on the play.
9. Discuss the motifs of robbery and rebellion, or honor and courage, or wholeness (both individual and national) in each “world” of the play.
10. Discuss Hal’s search for role models; how do his companions educate him about his country? How do the three worlds of the play—Court, Rebel, Tavern—converge in him?

9 Comments:

Blogger Sean K said...

3.1-197
5)
At the beginning of scene three, I was surprised by Glendower’s pretentious comments when he boasts that the Earth trembled in fear of his nativity. This could be used to characterize the Welsh as prideful. Also, I was confused when he challenged Hotspur to find a human that could match him in occult experiments because I could not determine if this was a cynical remark to Hotspur, or the truth. He does mention how he used it to make King Henry IV walk home bootless and Mortimer says that he is well read in strange topics. Since Glendower is the host of the meeting, he could be telling these stories as entertainment before they revise the map. Finally, I wondered if Glendower offended Hotspur in asking for more land during the meeting.

Tue Sep 19, 05:02:00 PM 2006  
Blogger Melissa said...

3.1.1-197

6) Hotspur and Glendower's relationship in the beginning of scene 3 was quite interesting to me.

As the group of Rebel leaders attempts to devise their plan for the rebellion against King Henry IV, Hostpur and Glendower are constantly bickering and fighting. Hotspur begins by mocking Glendower when he speaks of his strong belief in Welsh pagan traditions of magic, and when he says that the Earth trembled and the sky was fiery when he was born. Hostpur makes fun of Glendower's claims of having magical power, "...he angers me/With telling me of the moldwarp and the ant, of the dreamer Merlin and his prophecies..." (146-148). He is bored by Glendower, and has no respect for the man, even though he is incredibly respected and strong. Hostpur also begins another fight with Glendower when the men are divvying up land on the map. He is unsatisfied with his territory and wants to alter it; Glendower disagrees with him. They fight even more, until eventually Glendower ends the fight and leaves.

The entire scene, Hotspur disrespects Glendower, a high and mighty man. Hotspur is on fire! He dislikes Glendower, and I suspect there is some jealousy in the relationship. He is constantly trying to make Glendower look like a fool, what with making fun of his beliefs. He also demands that he get more land than Glendower.

Glendower, however, tolerates Hotspur. Mortimer tells Hotspur, "He holds your temper in a high respect/And curbs himself even of his natural scope/When you come 'cross his humor" (168-170), to let him know that Hotspur is not witnessing Glendower's temper. Why is that? Maybe Glendower sees some of himself in Hotspur; maybe he wants Hotspur to succeed and thinks that he will be a good aid for the rebellion. Any opinions?

Thu Sep 21, 10:46:00 PM 2006  
Blogger Melissa said...

Matt--

I really liked your ideas. I also think that (to add to your comment about the contrast between the two men) there is another contrast/irony in that Glendower is concerned with summoning the devil and pagan, unholy practices, yet he is somewhat of a better person from what I can see than Hotspur. The whole scene they bicker and fight, yet Glendower tolerates Hotspur. It is also Hotspur that initiates the bickering, and mocks Glendower for his beliefs and practices. He is just plain rude. Hotspur may have attractive beliefs in saying that he may shame the devil by telling the truth, by he is acting a devil by being so rude and close-minded towards Glendower.

Thu Sep 21, 11:32:00 PM 2006  
Blogger Stacie C said...

Act III, i. 1-197
Significant Sentence
(Worcester is speaking to Hotspur) "You must needs learn, lord, to amend this fault[impatience]. Though sometimes it shew greatness, courage, blood, (and that's the dearest grace it renders you), yet oftentimes it doth present harsh rage, defect of manners, want of government, pride, haughtiness, opinion, and disdain, the least of which, haunting a nobleman, looseth men's hearts and leaves behind a stain upon the beauty of all parts besides, beguiling them of commendation" (175-183) I found this quote significant because it serves as a warning to Hotspur, and suggests that he may try to act without being aware of the entire situation. How has Hotspur shown his impatience in the past? Clearly, he has a hot temper, (irony of his name), and seemed to become angry very rapidly while talking to King Henry in the first act. Worcester tells Hotspur to work for patience-- does this foreshadow some kind of internal change in Hotspur? Will he learn to work with others and act wisely? It seems like Worcester is issuing a very general warning, that all of the characters need to develop a balance between acting spontaneously, i.e.,responding valiantly to a surprise attack, and acting without caution and without understanding the situation.

Fri Sep 22, 09:52:00 AM 2006  
Blogger Maya R said...

8.
Something Shakespeare does often is talk about the influence man's actions has on the environment. This convention are associated with Glendower and Hotspur in this scene.
"At my nativity the front of heaven was full of fiery shapes, of burning cressets, and at my birth the frame and huge foundation of the earth shak'd like a coward" (12-16).
In lines 95-118, Hotspur tells the others that he wants to fix the windy river that blocks off much of his land. Glendower disagrees with this and they discuss it.
This motif reveals the difference between Glendower and Hotspur. Glendower boasts of his indirect affect on the world. His illustration about his birth is absurd and he is mocked by Hotspur. On the other hand, Hotspur directly speaks about affecting the environment. He will physically alter the river on his property. When Glendower tells him not to do this, it suggests Glendower may be jealous of Hotspur's influence on the world. Glendower can only pretend to make a difference to the world, while Hotspur actually does something to matter.

Fri Sep 22, 10:51:00 AM 2006  
Blogger read said...

Greetings from Mr. Kleeman's class. This is in response to Steph's post and the quote "and I can teach thee, coz, to shame the devil/ By telling the truth."

I also enjoyed this witty quote and it seemed to me like a perfect response to Glendower bragging about how he can use magic (whether he can or not remains to be seen). Once again, Shakespeare is setting Hotspur up against Hal, the two Harrys, to illustrate their characters. Hotspur is blunt, he speaks what is on his mind and he doesn't care what other people think. Shakespeare also sets Hotspur up as a moral person here; as Stephanie said, this quote has a moral about honesty.

In our class, we've been questioning if Hal really is a moral person because he puts on this deceitful guise to further his own ends. Here it appears as if Hotspur is more moral as he always speaks the truth, and Hal is the lower Harry. However, I can't help but think less of Hotspur, because his enterprise is also motivated by greed and his blunt and overbearing nature seems ignorant when compared to Hal's subtlty. In Hotspur there is no tact, no regal attitude, and in the context of the play, he is the villain.

Fri Sep 22, 07:42:00 PM 2006  
Blogger Emily S said...

Sarah G. - I completely agree with your argument that Hotspur is unfit for a position as king after his conversation with Glendower and Mortimer. In my blog I questioned Hotspur's sudden change in attitude from being trustworthy and potential ruler to an immature child. He is acting more like Prince Hal is known to behave, not like a man that King Henry IV believes would be a great person to be crowned king after he dies. I believe that Hotspur, when faced with important decisions like the ones he conversed with Glendower and Mortimer about, tends to cower in the face of such superiority and acts childish and immature. He is obviously unfit to be crowned a king based on his impolite mocking of Glendower and his unwillingness to compromise, and would be a terrible ruler of the kingdom.

Mon Sep 25, 10:19:00 PM 2006  
Blogger Meghan L said...

Maya and Karen,

Maya, your interpretation of the dialogue between Hotspur and Glendower was really interesting! While reading it I definitely thought about it in a different way. I wonder what would happen if we were to combine your interpretation and Karen’s interpretation, they are different but both understandable.
I think the different impacts that Glendower and Hotspur have on the environment are the main concept, but “the earth shaking” could mean an earthquake like Karen suggested, in which case the two still create different impacts on the natural environment.

Mon Sep 25, 10:58:00 PM 2006  
Blogger Arielle said...

Response to Sarah G-

I agree that Hotspur's boyish passion seems to make him unfit for a king. But as many people have mentioned, he is a foil to Hal; does this mean that Hal is fit to be a king? I'm not sure either has exibited remarkable traits. Hotspur may be too passionate and hot-headed, but it is that aggression that is important during times of war and conflict. Hal has, thus far, proven to be passive and unwilling to step of to the challenge of royalty.

Also, King Henry IV acquired his royal position through immoral stealth, not divine right or justice. What kind of leader is he? Can his type of leadership be more closely related to Hotspur or Hal? Does the country necessarily want a leader like Henry again?

Tue Sep 26, 09:49:00 AM 2006  

Post a Comment

<< Home