CRITICISM

Altieri, Joanne. “Romance in Henry V.” Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900 21, no. 2 (spring 1981): 223-40.

Studies elements of the romance genre in Henry V.

Ayers, P. K. “‘Fellows of infinite tongue’: Henry V and the King's English.” Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900 34, no. 2 (spring 1994): 253-77.

Analyzes the inconstancy of Henry's language, arguing that the king uses language to manipulate and control people and situations.

Baldo, Jonathan. “Wars of Memory in Henry V.” Shakespeare Quarterly 47, no. 2 (summer 1996): 132-59.

Maintains that while the play's depiction of the battle of Agincourt is unremarkable, Henry V nevertheless offers an impressive examination of how a nation recalls its own history.

Dean, Paul. “Chronicle and Romance Modes in Henry V.” Shakespeare Quarterly 32 (1981): 18-29.

Examines the influence of the chronicle and romance forms on the structure of Henry V.

Derrick, Patty S. “Richard Mansfield's Henry V: The Shaping of an American Hero.” Theatre History Studies 19 (1999): 3-16.

Contends that in his 1900 staging of Henry V, Mansfield emphasized the patriotic elements in the play in order to make it more appealing to American audiences.

Gilbert, Allan. “Patriotism and Satire in Henry V.” In Studies in Shakespeare, edited by Arthur D. Matthews and Clark M. Emery, pp. 40-64. Coral Gables, Fla.: University of Miami Press, 1953.

Examines the ways in which Shakespeare utilized the dramatic and historical sources for Henry V.

Greenblatt, Stephen. “Invisible Bullets: Renaissance Authority and Its Subversion, Henry IV and Henry V.” In Political Shakespeare: New Essays in Cultural Materialism, edited by Jonathan Dollimore and Alan Sinfield, pp. 18-47. London: Manchester University Press, 1985.

Suggests that the Henry plays may be viewed as a confirmation of the Machiavellian theory that a prince's power originates in force and deception.

Hall, Joan Lord. “Critical Approaches.” In Henry V: A Guide to the Play, pp. 95-122. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1997.

Surveys recent modern critical approaches to Henry V, including the cultural materialist, new historicist, and feminist approaches, highlighting the various avenues of critical analysis within each method.

Jones, G. P. “Henry V: The Chorus and the Audience.” Shakespeare Survey 31 (1978): 93-104.

Asserts that most critical analyses of the role of the Chorus in Henry V are skewed, as such discussions reflect the untested hypothesis that the Chorus serves as the voice of the public theater.

McEachern, Claire. “Henry V and the Paradox of the Body Politic.” Shakespeare Quarterly 45, no. 1 (spring 1994): 33-56.

Analyzes Henry V's portrayal of power, and studies Henry's character as a reflection of the Elizabethan tendency to personify the crown.

Pugliatti, Paola. “The Strange Tongues of Henry V.” Yearbook of English Studies 23 (1993): 235-53.

Maintains that the play is not, as many critics have contended, an ambiguous statement of Shakespeare's politics; rather, it is a distinct political statement about the ambiguity of politics and history.

Royal, Derek. “Shakespeare's Kingly Mirror: Figuring the Chorus in Olivier's and Branagh's Henry V.” Literature/Film Quarterly 25, no. 2 (April 1997): 104-10.

Argues that the Chorus in Henry V reveals the darker side of Henry's character, and demonstrates that this method of critiquing the king's character is never fully explored in either Olivier's or Branagh's film adaptations of the play.

Shaughnessy, Robert. “The Last Post: Henry V, War Culture and the Postmodern Shakespeare.” Theatre Survey 39, no. 1 (May 1998): 41-61.

Examines the sense of irony and displacement revealed in the Royal Shakespeare Company's 1994 production of Henry V, directed by Matthew Warchus. The critic demonstrates the ways in which this production was more concerned with nostalgia and myth than it was with portraying the physical reality of war.

Spencer, Janet M. “Princes, Pirates, and Pigs: Criminalizing Wars of Conquest in Henry V.” Shakespeare Quarterly 47, no. 2 (summer 1996): 160-77.

Explores the juxtaposition between scenes in which Henry seeks to justify his war with France through religion or through his displacing of responsibility, and scenes in which his campaign is criminalized.