Once More
Unto the Breach |
“Once more
unto the breach.”
This
quotable quote from the middle of Henry V is an apt motto
for the play itself. Kenneth Branagh’s epic film brought
Shakespeare back onto the screen and enlivened this difficult
play and each experience of a performance is a plunge into the
heart of it. The play makes a lot more sense in performance
than on the page. There are over 40 named characters. Many
would have been doubled in Shakespeare’s company (as they are
here). Visual cues and distinct personalities help to
distinguish the characters. Still, there is quite a bit of
English history embedded in the play. Although the play
telescopes about five years of war into what seems like a few
days, the events are largely true, as reported in Holinshed’s
Chronicles. The English were, indeed, outnumbered by the
French at Agincourt, and successfully settled the peace with
Henry’s marriage to Katherine. But, as the Chorus reminds us at
the end, this peace would be short-lived. England would lose
France under Henry VI (an infant when he took the throne). Of
note, Shakespeare had already written the Henry VI
plays.
Henry V
begins shortly after Prince Hal (as he was known in the Henry
IV plays) has taken the throne, and he is deciding whether
or not to invade France (a popular pastime for kings of England
and something his father had hoped to do). He seeks an
endorsement of his claim, and so he asks for an interpretation
of the Salic Law of France. Fortunately for the audience of
this performance, the director decided to eliminate the
complicated first scene between the bishops of Canterbury and
Ely. In this long-winded scene, the audience learns about the
greedy machinations of the Church (still Catholic at this point
in England’s history). To English Protestants this would have
been a bit of delicious mockery, but for us, it adds a layer of
confusion. Henry’s decision turns on disputing the French claim
to follow the Salic Law that prohibits inheritance through the
mother’s bloodline. This law originated in an area of Germany,
conquered by the Holy Roman Emperor , who then promoted
intermarriage of French soldiers with the local women – but
wanted to prevent the women from gaining power through
inheritance. France eventually claimed this law for its royal
succession. Henry’s claim to the throne dates back about 75
years (to Edward’s claim to the throne by way of his French
mother). The events recounted in Henry V are part of the
period now known as “The Hundred Years’ War.”
King Henry V
receives the reading he wants to hear from the Archbishop of
Canterbury. The Salic Law only applies in Salic Lands – not in
France. As if Henry needed further reason, a messenger from the
Dauphin of France (the crown prince) arrives with a “mock”
tribute – tennis balls. While the Dauphin is himself a bit too
cheeky (and will pay for this dearly), the French mockery is not
without reason. The English audience would be familiar with
Henry’s reputation as the crown prince. He ran with a wild
crowd, including John Falstaff (one of Shakespeare’s dearest
characters) and the Eastside Cheaps who appear, and slowly
disappear, in Henry V. He was a prankster and a
light-hearted troublemaker. Once he is crowned, however, he
distances himself from the old crowd, and in one of the first
scenes of Henry V we learn of Falstaff’s death – of a
broken heart. Eventually, Bardolph and Nym will be hanged under
edicts issued, and ultimately endorsed by King Henry. There is
a certain ambivalence in the king, well portrayed in this
production, but he is resolved to be a fair and just king, and
not to pardon his former fellows. By the end of the play, only
Ancient Pistol remains, and he is cudgeled and forced to eat a
leek. Although this is one of the play’s wonderful comic scenes
(and performed exceedingly well by the Hawaii Shakespeare
Festival), it also mournfully mocks the end not only of Prince
Harry but of the old lovable gang (Falstaff, Bardolph, Nym,
Pistol, and Nell Quickly). In the first half of the play (as in
Henry IV), they provide needed comic relief but more
importantly a poignant counterpoint to the ideology motivating
the king’s actions.
Just after
Henry resolves to invade France, the scene cuts to the Eastside
Cheaps, and a commentary on the real costs of war. While the
generals grow excited at the prospect of battles in France, the
common men say goodbye to their wives and wearily trudge off to
fight. There is much lip service in this play to the “equality”
of all Englishmen, whatever their rank. However, the rhetoric
is not lost on the common soldiers. When Henry disguises
himself and wanders about the camp on the eve of the Battle of
Agincourt, he hears first-hand that the soldiers don’t believe
much of what he says. He has insisted to the French herald that
he will not ransom himself, but the soldiers believe that if it
gets too tough, the King will most certainly submit to the
French demands. Henry is provoked but maintains his disguise
and vows to settle the dispute with a mouthy soldier after the
battle with the French – if they both should live. This vow is
resolved in the glow of victory. In this performance, the scene
is truncated so that Henry immediately reveals himself to the
soldier Williams. Remarkably, the soldier blames Henry for the
reception he received while in disguise, and Henry rewards him
with a glove full of gold. In the text, the scene plays much
longer, with Henry mischievously setting up Fluellen with the
glove that will provoke Williams. It’s a bit of the old Harry
that we lose in this production – but Henry V requires
such cutting to be performable, and the scene as written is
confusing except for the glimpse of the old Harry.
Power of Language
This is one
of the first English plays to use the role of Chorus to propel
the action forward. The Renaissance ideal for drama was a
particular interpretation of Aristotle’s Three Unities. It was
believed that the action should believably take place within the
span and space of the performance. Shakespeare loved to flaunt
this expectation. He telescopes the events of many years into
about three hours’ time. However, he uses the Chorus very
effectively and self-consciously to propel the action back and
forth across the Channel and across time. As in every play (to
some degree) Shakespeare puts the stage on stage. The Chorus
freely admits to the inadequacies of “this wooden ‘O’” and
“unworthy scaffold.” How can one possibly present the great
battle of Agincourt? “Can this cockpit hold / the vasty fields
of France? “ The Hawaii Shakespeare Festival’s Chorus enters
smiling, and continues to smile with playful humor, even as she
describes the horrors of war. She smiles, I think, at the
wonders of the theatre – in fact, this cockpit can hold
the vasty fields of France and Henry’s vast movements. The
stage also is “dressed” appropriately, with a wooden “O” on the
floor, the battling lion of England and the fleur-de-lys over
opposing doors.
Most
productions will show some of the battles in Henry V,
even though they are not scripted. In the text, most large
events take place off stage, with bits of running through the
stage area to report on the action. This production includes a
few well-done fight scenes that capture the intensity of the
battles of Harfleur and Agincourt. The most effective weapon in
the play, however, is language itself. It is the only weapon we
see Henry use (in the script), and thus the play yields some of
the most quotable of Shakespearean quotes.
“Once more unto the breach, my friends, once
more,”
“We few, we happy few, we band of brothers.”
Like that of
the reigning Elizabeth I, Henry’s rhetoric rallies his troops
beyond their obvious capacity. You cannot help but notice these
powerful rhetorical speeches in the play. Despite knowing the
play and watching it on two consecutive nights, the “band of
brothers” speech still gives my spine an involuntary tingle.
Elizabeth’s speech to the Troops at Tilbury was a similar
rhetorical event, one that cemented the power of her reign. The
English defeat of the Spanish Armada was another underdog
victory.
This Performance
The Hawaii Shakespeare Festival has taken on this
militaristic and macho play with an all female cast. As Tony
Pisculli notes, he dropped his original conceptualization and
justification for this casting because the women simply took on
the parts naturally. One virtually forgets that the cast is
female because the overall effect is so convincing. I think
this single-gender casting actually gives us an experience akin
to the Elizabethan performance, which was staged by all-male
casts, with pre-pubescent boys playing most female parts (thus,
there are so few female parts in the plays). There have been
attempts to recreate the all-male casting, but there is always a
frame of pretense to these projects. Somehow, the all-female
casting comes closer to the original presentation (in my
opinion). There is even the mild shock of Henry and Katherine’s
kissing consummation of the peace. Such scenes between male
actors were indeed a point of contention for Elizabethan
puritans, who ultimately succeeded in closing the theatres in
1640.
Shakespeare’s history plays challenge the modern
American audience. We are unfamiliar with the historical
background and the politics is dizzying. But Henry V is
a rich and powerful play that will draw you back to “work, work,
work your thoughts” – once more into the breach.
Brenda Machosky
Assistant Professor of English
University of Hawai‘i West O‘ahu
|