Second Major Essay
Goldy Locks Honor is commonly associated with people in places of high worthiness and respect, in Henry IV – Part 1 we aren’t given a set definition of what they view honor to be. Instead, honor has different meanings to different characters in the play. Shakespeare portrays his views on honor through the characters of Hotspur, Falstaff, and Hal. Since these characters have such contrasting views on honor it creates conflict for them with other individuals because they aren’t able to see eye to eye on their opposing actions. Hotspur’s view on honor is one of a solider, he believes that a win on the battlefield will win him equal honor. This take on honor is slightly barbaric; he seems to be certain that honor is something concrete in a physical sense, instead of something intangible. …show more content…
In this comparison, Hotspur is the too hot porridge, Falstaff is the too cold porridge, and lastly Hal is just right. Hal is the perfect in between of Hotspur and Falstaff. Hal understands honor to be noble behavior, not noble actions. He shows us at the beginning of the play that he’s a ruffian, but lets us in on his plan to regain the honor later. These actions of hanging out with criminals and hoodlums didn’t earn him favor with his father or with England for that matter. His plan to earn the honor later was to lower the views of him now, so that when it is time to be the hero everyone will love him even more instead of just expecting it from the get-go. His longing for honor is in moderation and he achieved honor in a suitable way. When Hal fought Hotspur it wasn’t so that he could earn honor but so he could save the thrown and his father, it was essential. Hal’s plan was effective, removing himself from his previous lifestyle just in time to be the hero his father needed him to