I couldn’t help but get some similarities between the characters of Henry V and those of The Taming of the Shrew and Much Ado About Nothing. Just as Beatrice in Much Ado echoed some of Kate in Taming, I think some of the characters in Henry V echo some of the previous characters as well.
For instance, the Dauphin reminds me somewhat of Claudio in Much Ado. Claudio was very naive and quick to believe everything he heard. The Dauphin has similar qualities. He refers to Henry V as a “vain, giddy, shallow humorous youth” which undoubtedly he was once, but as we’ve seen in earlier acts, is no longer. Earlier characters have spoke of Henry V with almost reverence, praising how well he’s slipped into the role of King despite his reckless past. But the Dauphin refuses to listen to the newest information and latches onto only the info that gives him a right to talk badly about Henry. Similarly, Claudio only had to listen to a tiny bit of information about Hero’s alleged infidelity to believe everything bad about her.
Even a minor character, the hostess, reminds me of previous characters. Though she is married to Pistol, she has had a romantic past with Nim. This arguing over a woman brings a strong reminder to everyone’s fascination with Bianca in The Taming of the Shrew. And in her speech in Act 2, Scene 3, when she is speaking of Falstaff dying, she makes many malapropisms that remind me of Dogberry in Much Ado.
These reminders may be unintentional, but I think it shows how Shakespeare had recurring themes in his plays, despite how differently themed they are. While Henry V reads more like an epic play, the fact that it can call up reminders of his earlier comedies differs Shakespeare’s writing from anyone else’s.
This post is interesting, but I think it raises a larger point that we have discussed in class on occasion, that perhaps Shakespeare was writing characters based on who was acting in his troupe. We see many similar characters already in the few plays we’ve studied thus far this semester, however in most of his works there are similarities to be drawn between characters. This lets us believe that Shakespeare knew very well who he had on hand, and the specific talents and specialties of each actor. Writing towards the talents of the actors would allow him to ensure better performances. More so than intentional connections between themes, I think we can conclude that Shakespeare was using his resources to the best of his abilities. The easiest example of this is with characters who provide comic relief, such as the nurse in Romeo and Juliet and Dogberry from Much Ado. Shakespeare knew who could play what, and needed to apply these roles to the different stories he told.
There’s no question that certain members of the company were distinguished for their comic abilities. It’s useful to pair the Nurse in R&J with Mistress Quickly; there must have been at least one adult male who was really good at these funny lady parts. It’s also true that malapropisms are a feature of almost all the lower-class comic characters; but the malapropisms usually contain profound truths as well.
I definitely agree with your post, Mary, as well as the comments above.
Two other characters that I found similar were Beatrice from “Much Ado About Nothing” and Kate from “The Taming of the Shrew.” Both outspoken and both more interesting than Hero/Bianca.
In addition to the comparisons you’ve mentioned, perhaps there is also a broad theme/message that Shakespeare is trying to convey: that human nature is more less going to be the same meaning that no matter who we are or where we’re from, we all share similar characteristics and similar problems/troubles (ie, conflicts within ourselves, common human strengths and flaws, etc)