A Comparison of Hal and Hotspur
King Henry IV, the richly dramatic history play by William Shakespeare, is not only teeming with affluent language, but also character comparison. Oddly enough, the play does not revolve around the assumed King Henry IV, but rather around Henry V (Hal). Prince Hal is both reckless and free-spirited, his actions often procuring scorn from his father, Henry IV. Hotspur, son of Henry Percy the Earl of Northumberland, differs quite greatly from Hal in both attitude and character. The comparisons of Hal and Hotspur become prevailing theme throughout King Henry IV. Similar in only age, the contrast of these two men becomes the structural foundation for body of the play.
As the play begins, the audience is immediately introduced to the King's son through his comparison to Hotspur. Word of Hotspur's success on the battlefield does quickly reach the ear of King Henry. Henry proceeds to inform the audience of his sin "In envy that my Lord Northumberland/ Should be father to so blest a son"(1.1.74-75). Henry feels as such because his son Hal has "dishonor stain the brow" while Hotspur is "the theme of honors tongue"(1.1.80-87). Henry's constant praise of Hotspur's honor later influences Hal and his perception of honor. Thus, through Henry's description of Hal and Hotspur the audience becomes first acquainted with the notion of honor, and its apparent value to each character.
When investigating into Hal's character the audience instantly perceives an air of lightheartedness. Shakespeare presents the audience with a clear picture of Hal in his introductory scene. Here Hal is seen drinking with his chums; discussing a robbery. As their discussion continues it becomes apparent that Hal fears the repercussions of being caught, and does not actually wish to follow through with the robbery. Against his judgement Falstaff, Poins, Bardolph, Peto and himself burglarize the transport. An important insight into Hal's character is thus gained because after this thievery Hal returns the booty. Although he is willing to engage in the act of stealing, he is unwilling to remain in wrongful possession of another's property. The hypocritical nature of his actions simply reveals his internal struggles between what is immature and what is adult. During Hal's preliminary scene the audience is already able to determine that Hal is growing out of adolescence and into the shoes which will eventually become the king's. In his closing soliloquy Hal foreshadows his eventual maturation when he says, "[offensive actions] So when this loose behavior I throw off,/ And pay the debt I never promised,/ By how much better than my word I am?(1.2.205-207).
Unlike Hal, Hotspur spends his time dreaming of battles and glory. The focus of Hotpur's life revolves around conflict and the bravery, grandeur, and honor associated with being the victor. Critics often cite "his greed for honour is for monopoly; he aims only at war; he is as much a liability as an asset to his allies." (Dorius 21). In contrast with Hal and his reasoning of consequence in the robbery scene, Hotspur often acts on impulse. Two characteristics become apparent as the audience listens to Hotspur speak. Firstly, Hotspur appears surrounded by a conceited air, and secondly he is extremely long winded. His superfluous use of language is a weak attempt at disguising his feeble mind. False notions of honor lead him to a continual pursuit of glory, glory that he only achieves at the expense of his balancing features. Hotspur is known for his audacity on the front line but not for his courtship, love of the arts, or mercy. As for living up to the code of chivalry, Hotspur fails. In comparison with Hal, Hotspur is severely off balance, a flaw that ultimately results in his downfall.
Shakespeare chooses to develop the audience's relationship with Hal much differently than with Hotspur. One may find this decision especially interesting after investigating the character traits of Hal and Hotspur. Although it is quite apparent that Hal's virtues need reform (he was involved with the robbery of a transport), the audience remains sympathetic with him (he later returns the stolen merchandise). The audience connects with Hal through his warmth, humor, and eventually bravery combined with humility. However, Shakespeare imparts to the audience a much different impression of Hotspur. Unlike Hal, Hotspur's character is hard, stiff, and full of conceit. Even though Hotspur demonstrates bravery, boldness, and honor the audience does not identify with him in a supportive manner. If this appears quite obvious to the audience, it should. The hostility towards Hotspur contrasted with the support shown to Hal serves as a template on which the play climaxes.
Even as the play moves towards its conclusion the comparisons are made between Hal and Hotspur. Again King Henry critiques his son's unsatisfactory behavior requesting he "Make me believe that thou art only mark'd"(3.2.9). Hal is then quick to voice his yearning to please his father by saying, "So please your majesty, I would I could/ Quit all offences with as clear excuse"(3.2.18-19). Henry's contrast of Hal's childish behavior to Hotspur's apparent bravery and honor procures a realization in Hal. This being the turning point for Hal, he realizes he must prove to his father that he is honorable by fighting Hotspur. Surprised and impressed by what his son declares, the king retires ending the scene.
When comparing Hotspur and Hal one may choose to view their characters through the eyes of chivalry. Hal is caught in the mean between his friend Falstaff, and his enemy Hotspur. Both corrupt the code of chivalry at two different extremes, "Falstaff in a comically pathetic manner, and Hotspur in a tragic pursuit of misguided ambition."(Pereira). Unlike either Hotspur or Falstaff, Hal emerges from the situation remaining neutral, and by doing so proving himself gracious, forgiving, honorable, and just. Hal manages to balance a mix of extreme virtue by following a mean. Aristotle outlines a similar philosophy, which he calls the method to virtuosity. Aristotle suggested that the most virtuous course of action lay somewhere in-between two extremes. By recognizing these extremes and choosing to walk the line between them, Hal not only separates himself from Hotspur in intelligence, but also character.(Pereira)
During the final scenes Hal and Hotspur's differences are stressed yet again. Both men are eager to meet one another in battle, but unlike Hotspur Hal is not searching for glory. Here the audience sees Hotspur's angst so high testosterone seems to pour from his ears, while Hal is off fighting to save lives. As the battle is drawn to a conclusion, Hal slays Hotspur. However, he shows no hatred towards his enemy and completes his epitaph for him. If the roles were by chance reversed, and Hotspur had arisen victor the audience would expect he would gloat and soak in the glory. One would expect Hal, being aware of this, would do the same thing. He does not. He does not even speak against Falstaff when he claims he killed Hotspur. Hal's modesty is in direct contradiction to Hotspur's conceit.
Hal and Hotspur are two characters very different from one another. Their similarities split from age and sex, never to converge again. Although their differences appear slightly more pronounced during the beginning of the play, they remain present throughout. Shakespeare masterfully crafted a history play intertwined with drama, action, and suspense revolving around two men and their differences in character.
Works Cited
Dorius, R.J. Ed.Twentieth Century Interpretations of Henry IV Part 1. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall,
Inc.,1970.
Pereira, Kim. The Making of a King. http://orathost.cfa.ilstu.edu/shakespeare/research/ISFhenryIVI.html
Shakespeare, William. Henry IV Part I. New York: Airmont Publishing Company, Inc.,1967.