As we can see, Henry isn’t exactly the ‘Mirror of all Christian kings’. However, I don’t believe that the way Henry acts really shows us he is a bad person. It could be argued that to be a good King you sometimes have to be cold hearted. Even though Henry had his friend executed, the only reason he did was because it was the morally right thing to do. Had he not ordered that Bardolph was killed, he would have been a bad king, showing favouritism towards one particular soldier, when others would be killed. His soldiers would dislike him as they could take the view that had it been anyone else, or themselves, they would be dead by now.
The fact that Henry was clever enough to get the Archbishop of Canterbury to take the blame for the battle I think shows he is an extremely good king. Henry managed to get himself into a position where no matter how the battle turned out, he would appear to be the hero. This proves he is a very wise leader, he knows that sometimes he will have to be cold hearted, like executing Bardolph, but this doesn’t make him any less of a hero. People always think he is doing what is best for the country, so Henry never gets the blame.
Another function of the chorus is to add to the patriotic mood of the play, by speaking some memorable verse. The chorus explains some of Henry’s exploits in a grand rhetorical style, which suits the epic treatment of the subject. It also helps to make the play become a magnificent poem. From the first few lines of the play we discover it is to be something special:
‘O for a Muse of fire, that would ascend the brightest heaven of invention, a kingdom for a stage, princes to act, and monarchs to behold the swelling scene’
This shows us that the chorus wishes that there was a whole kingdom to house this play in and princes to act the parts. It suggests that this is a very special play; because of the way it is described. In addition to this, the way Henry is almost worshipped throughout the play helps the audience to feel proud and patriotic.
One way the chorus achieves this is by an extensive use of comparison to extremely important historical figures. Henry is said to be England’s ‘Conquering Caesar’ and ‘The mirror of all Christian kings’ He is even compared to Gods:
‘Then should the warlike Harry like himself assume the port of Mars’
He is seen as the ‘Star of England’.
The Chorus also suggests to us that the battles during the play will be a lot worse for Henry and his men than they actually will be. However, this isn’t a bad thing. It is an example of a hyperbole, where the chorus exaggerates the action so the audience become more emotional. In this case, by making the battles seem like such a dangerous and difficult task for Henry and his tiny army, the audience are sympathetic and feel more patriotic.
An example of the chorus exaggerating is when we are told that all of England’s men go to France, and that England is now ‘Guarded with grandsires, babies and old women’. However, we know that more than two thirds of the army stayed in England to help guard the Scottish border. Henry tells us earlier that he would not have England undefended and gave orders to ‘Lay down our proportions to defend against the Scot’. This use of hyperbole means the audience believe there is a great challenge ahead in this battle. This means the English appear bold and courageous, successfully adding to the purpose of the play- a celebration of the English monarchy and England’s military qualities.
The chorus also interprets events to ensure that the audience doesn’t get bogged down in the storyline; this helps to maintain the dramatic tension. In addition to this, it asks the audience to ‘Brook abridgment’ during the play. Because the events of the play actually take place over many years, it would be impossible to include all that happened in this time, the action couldn’t be sustained.
The chorus will also explain scenes that would have been too political to put in the play. For instance, after Henry returns to England, we know it was several years before he travelled back to France to meet Katharine. The chorus explains that Henry has come back to England. Then asks you to imagine that time has passed, ‘The interim, by remembering you ‘tis past’. Then we are told that Henry is going back to France: ‘After your thoughts, straight back again to France’.
The chorus does this several times. For example in Chorus II when the army leave for Southampton we are told to imagine that we have seen the ship set sail and that we are leaving England. Also, we are told about the traitors, which have now been punished and now that the king is to travel down to Southampton. By only explaining some details of the story briefly, tension is sustained.
Shakespeare includes a lot of history in Henry V, as we have discussed much of it is unsuitable for the stage, so the chorus can narrate it. For example, the French offer Henry some ‘petty and unprofitable dukedoms’, which he rejects. However, this information has to be included, because a lot of it helps to encourage the patriotic mood of the play. Henry V was written in 1598, ten years after the events of the Spanish Armada. As the English were victorious, there was a great sense of nationalism and Elizabeth I would be pleased that Shakespeare wrote this play as a celebration of a great former victory. There are direct compliments to Elizabeth I in Chorus V, she is described as ‘Our gracious empress’.
The chorus also helps to make the action considerably more vivid. Instead of merely telling us what has happened, and what is about to happen, it creates impressive pictures in our heads, helping to build up excitement and tension. Somewhere where this is particularly evident is when the English fleet sail from Southampton. There are the silken streamers fanning the sun, the ship boys climbing the ‘hempen tackle’ and the ‘shrill whistle’ of the master of a ship, and the ‘huge bottom’ moving slowly through the water, like a city dancing on the ‘inconstant billows’. The chorus, as we can see, doesn’t just tell us events; it recreates them in your imagination. As the action is told in such a captivating manner, the audience are far more excited when they see the next scene. However, sometimes in Shakespeare’s Henry V, what you are led to expect will happen next, isn’t actually what does happen.
In the first chorus we are led to expect battle scenes. However, we first see a political discussion between the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of Ely. This scene isn’t exactly what we anticipate, we have been told to expect a great war play. However, this is effective. Shakespeare manages to build up tension by delaying the action, as the audience have to wait longer to see this great king Henry that the chorus has described.
There are some inconsistencies in the play: The second chorus tells us that ‘Honour’s thought reigns solely in the breast of every man’. However, we know this isn’t true. The next scene after this chorus shows us the low lives who admit they are going to war to benefit themselves: ‘For I shall sutler be unto the camp a profits will acrue’. This is Pistol’s admission that he wishes to profiteer. Being a ‘sutler’ is to be a supplier of provisions to the army, a job where he won’t have to fight, but will be able to make money. This shows that not everybody is going to war for moral reasons.
The third chorus tells us of the victory at Harfleur, however the next scene begins with Henry psyching his men up, trying to make them confident and give them hope for their next challenge. ‘ Once more unto the breach dear friends’.
I think Shakespeare chose to write in this format to emphasise the comparisons in opinion. Often, the chorus will glorify an event, like war, and then next we will see a group of tired, hungry and weary soldiers or the low lifes who wish to gain out of the situation. By doing this, people consider another less glorious side of war. This may make them reflect upon the action.
Another way in which Shakespeare helps the audience feel involved in the action of Henry V is by asking them to use their imaginations, as the chorus frequently does. The Chorus often apologises for the poor stagecraft and the inadequacy of the theatre, so asks them to see the scene in their heads instead.
The chorus apologises that it can’t truly represent the great events of Henry’s reign on ‘This unworthy scaffold’ and that their attempts to show Agincourt will be carried out by actors with ‘Four or five most vile and ragged foils’. To counter balance this, the audience are constantly asked to imagine the scene. In fact, this phrase is used in nearly every chorus in the play:
‘Thus with imagined wing’ In Act three, ‘Now entertain a conjecture of a time’ in Act four and again in Act five, ‘Heave him away upon your winged thoughts’.
By encouraging the audience to use their imaginations, the play seems far more interesting to them, as they are directly involved in the action.
However, I have noticed that Branagh has still continued to apologise for poor stagecraft. Branagh includes choruses that apologise for unrealistic battle scenes, and then we are shown an extremely realistic battle. However, I think it is acceptable to do this. The chorus’s purpose, even though it always apologises first, is to tell us to use our imaginations. I think that had Branagh cut out the choruses that weren’t relevant to his version, it would have lowered the quality of the play and leave the audience less satisfied. It would mean that the audience would just be spectators of the play; they would have no involvement because no one is asking them to use their imaginations, just sit and watch what is happening.
The chorus is used to link scenes, and without it the play would become confusing, as we lose the information about where we are going and the summary of what has happened. This would make audiences confused and less likely to enjoy the play. Although I think that Branagh chose to include the choruses for another specific reason:
Kenneth Branagh is showing us Shakespeare’s Henry V, not his own version of the play. His intention was to get a modern audience to react in the same way as a Shakespearian one would have. The play is intended to be a shared experience, with the audience being asked to imagine the scenes for themselves. Although a modern audience can see the scenes vividly, Branagh doesn’t want to take away the excitement and originality that Shakespeare had used to make his audience enjoy the play.
Branagh makes a few other changes to Shakespeare’s Henry V.
For instance, the Act II Chorus, Branagh ends at line 11 of the speech. ‘What is promised to Harry and his followers’. He is clever to do this, as it changes the way the audience react and their expectations of the next scenes. The point where Branagh ends his chorus is important and he has chosen the line well. Before this point, there is a great build up, the chorus tells us about how the ‘Youth of England is on fire’ and how everyone is preparing for this great battle. This part of the chorus builds up excitement, and makes us think that the next scene will be full of action. However, after this, the information given by the chorus is less exciting, and deals with the traitors and the subsequent events. This lowers the audience’s expectations of the next scene.
I think Branagh changed the chorus because he wanted to continue the excitement; he wanted the audience to expect a really great next scene. Also, because it creates a huge contrast. The next scene isn’t a particularly interesting one, showing us the low lifes. Cleverly, Branagh shows us the part of the chorus that explains how courageous everyone is, and how they are going to war for all the right reasons. Then we see the low lifes, who are going to war for all the wrong reasons.
This is effective and I prefer Branagh’s method in this chorus. There is a far more action in the play if you cut out some of the chorus. Also, it really helps to emphasise the role of the low lifes. If the chorus had continued, the audience would have wished to see the traitors, and the contrast of the good and bad would sink into the background. Where Branagh stops means we see the low lifes directly contrasted with the idealistic language of the chorus. It is one of the most important messages in the play, that although there are many heroes fighting for what’s right, there are still people who wish to gain out of bad situations.
Branagh has also made major adjustments to the fourth chorus. In Branagh’s version, half of this chorus comes before Act 3 Scene 7, so this scene flows more rapidly into Act 4 Scene 1. Also, he made several cuts to the scene. His intention was to keep the action and tension continuous and in fast succession for his modern audience to appreciate, as they have a lower attention span.
Branagh chose to display the chorus in a format that gives you a little narrative, then a scene with the French, then some more narrative and then a scene with Henry. Whereas Shakespeare simply showed the French, the entire chorus, and then the English.
I think that Branagh’s version is far more effective. The purpose of having a gap between the groups of the English and French is to create a contrast. However, I think that Shakespeare left a too longer gap. By the time you have sat through the entire chorus you begin to forget about the previous scene and what exactly you are comparing the English too. This makes the comparison far less impressive. In Branagh’s version, the gap is considerably shorter so the contrast is emphasized. In this presentation, Henry looks very heroic as he is seen quickly after the French, who are portrayed as arrogant and lazy.
Another contrast that Shakespeare used which Branagh didn’t was that of the caesura in the Act four chorus. Shakespeare used this break for effect. The cut makes the French appear confident. Then after the break we see the poor, tired and scared English. Again we see the contrast between the English and the French. However, Branagh doesn’t need to use this break as he can compare the armies visually.
Again, I prefer Branagh’s format. I think that it is far better to actually see the two armies, that just to hear about them. It is far more effective to see men acting out what the chorus says as it magnifies the feelings in the script and makes more of an impact on the audience, making them far more sympathetic towards Henry and the English army. Also it is a lot easier for a modern audience to appreciate. We prefer to see things as it takes less time to understand the message, you don’t have to think about words. All you have to do is look at the faces of the soldiers and you know what is happening.
It is clear therefore, that the chorus has many important functions. In fact it is essential to the play. The chorus adds to the drama of the play, but also it helps to explain and interpret the action. It tells is what has happened and also what will happen in the future. The chorus helps to make the audience feel far more involved in the play and I think that this is extremely important. Another very important function of Shakespeare’s chorus is to apologise for the poor stagecraft and to encourage the audience to use their imaginations. Again, these features help the audience feel involved in the action, as they are being asked to think throughout the play ‘Now entertain a conjecture of time’ and ‘Be here presented. Now we bear the king towards Calais’ are just two examples of the chorus telling the audience to use their imaginations.
This function isn’t completely necessary in Branagh’s film version of the play, but he chooses to include it so that his modern audience feels as involved in the action as Shakespeare’s audience did. In fact, I think that making the audience feel involved in the action and encouraging them to use their imaginations are the most important functions of the chorus.
I think that writing a part like that of the chorus into a play, which makes the audience concentrate on the action on stage, was a very good idea. It means that the audience get so much more out of the play, they haven’t just sat and watched the action, they’ve been asked to recreate it in their minds, so will enjoy the whole experience a lot more.
Shakespeare was an extremely clever writer, because he knew that he could make plays that could be seem boring to ‘normal’ people more interesting by just simply making them feel involved. Once he’d done this, it wouldn’t matter to them about poor stagecraft, the play becomes epic to them, the exact intention Shakespeare had.
