Hi there. I had another English assignment and was wondering if I could get some editing--if you don't mind that is.
This is an expository essay on War. I'm not too sure about the title though as we have to write about Henry IV--an anti war or a pro war?
Heres the essay:
Militaristic Hotspur vs. Pacifist Bolingbroke
Honour; dictionary.com defines it as "high respect, as for worth, merit, or rank." It takes many years to earn honour, but it also takes less than a minute to shatter that same honour. Similarly, King Henry IV, by William Shakespeare, deals with honour and examines both, anti-war as well as pro-war.
First, King Henry does not want the war as he has just taken over the throne from Richard II which involved a brutal and deadly civil battle. So, King Henry tries to settle their differences without going to war right before it by talking to Worcester and asks him if he will "unknit this churklish knot of all-abhorred war." (V, i, 16-17) This is a metaphor which states King Henry asking Worcester if he will settle the differences that are between Hotspur and the King so there would be no casualties, no catastrophes and no war. This demonstrates that King Henry is the pacifist type as he is "opposition to war or violence" and concludes as Henry IV being an anti-war.
On the other hand, we have the brave-but hot-headed-Hotspur who is prepared to march his forces against the King at any given time and any given location. This demonstrates that Hotspur is the militaristic type as he has "strong military spirit or policy." We see Hotspur's hastiness when he "must leave [...] within [...] two hours" (II, iii, 38-39) after reading an anonymous letter. This hastiness of Hotspur, costs him his life and the war in Act V, iv when he finally rests in peace. Thus, this demonstrates a pro-war.
Third, Prince Hal is also the militaristic type-just like Hotspur-as he wants to earn pride and honour so he can successfully inherit the throne and make his father, King Henry IV, proud. When Prince Hal and Hotspur engage in a furious battle, Prince Hal will take "all the budding honours on thy chest and crop to make a garland for my head." (V, iv, 74-75) Prince Hal is suggesting that he will take Hotspur's honour by defeating him and will figuratively crown himself with it so he can earn two things: pride and honour from defeating one of the most brilliant soldiers in the opposition army. Thus, the war creates a new Prince as he gains honour and deals with one of the themes of this play which is coming of age as the Prince evolves from being a "a scourge" (III, ii, 7) for the King to someone who will "die a hundred thousand deaths ere break the smallest parcel of this vow." (III, ii, 159-60)
In conclusion, King Henry IV, by William Shakespeare, deals with honour and examines both, anti-war as well as pro-war. King Henry IV also examines the evolution that the Prince undergoes. War is not good or bad. It's the purpose behind the war that determines whether its good or bad.
This is an expository essay on War. I'm not too sure about the title though as we have to write about Henry IV--an anti war or a pro war?
Heres the essay:
Militaristic Hotspur vs. Pacifist Bolingbroke
Honour; dictionary.com defines it as "high respect, as for worth, merit, or rank." It takes many years to earn honour, but it also takes less than a minute to shatter that same honour. Similarly, King Henry IV, by William Shakespeare, deals with honour and examines both, anti-war as well as pro-war.
First, King Henry does not want the war as he has just taken over the throne from Richard II which involved a brutal and deadly civil battle. So, King Henry tries to settle their differences without going to war right before it by talking to Worcester and asks him if he will "unknit this churklish knot of all-abhorred war." (V, i, 16-17) This is a metaphor which states King Henry asking Worcester if he will settle the differences that are between Hotspur and the King so there would be no casualties, no catastrophes and no war. This demonstrates that King Henry is the pacifist type as he is "opposition to war or violence" and concludes as Henry IV being an anti-war.
On the other hand, we have the brave-but hot-headed-Hotspur who is prepared to march his forces against the King at any given time and any given location. This demonstrates that Hotspur is the militaristic type as he has "strong military spirit or policy." We see Hotspur's hastiness when he "must leave [...] within [...] two hours" (II, iii, 38-39) after reading an anonymous letter. This hastiness of Hotspur, costs him his life and the war in Act V, iv when he finally rests in peace. Thus, this demonstrates a pro-war.
Third, Prince Hal is also the militaristic type-just like Hotspur-as he wants to earn pride and honour so he can successfully inherit the throne and make his father, King Henry IV, proud. When Prince Hal and Hotspur engage in a furious battle, Prince Hal will take "all the budding honours on thy chest and crop to make a garland for my head." (V, iv, 74-75) Prince Hal is suggesting that he will take Hotspur's honour by defeating him and will figuratively crown himself with it so he can earn two things: pride and honour from defeating one of the most brilliant soldiers in the opposition army. Thus, the war creates a new Prince as he gains honour and deals with one of the themes of this play which is coming of age as the Prince evolves from being a "a scourge" (III, ii, 7) for the King to someone who will "die a hundred thousand deaths ere break the smallest parcel of this vow." (III, ii, 159-60)
In conclusion, King Henry IV, by William Shakespeare, deals with honour and examines both, anti-war as well as pro-war. King Henry IV also examines the evolution that the Prince undergoes. War is not good or bad. It's the purpose behind the war that determines whether its good or bad.
Do You Need