Beginning with the analysis of the two separate passages found in 5.1.127-139 and 1.3.200-207, there comes into view an overall theme that is central to the overall plot of the play, but is clearly demonstrated in Falstaff’s and Hotspur’s conceptualizations of honor in acts 5 and 1 respectively: the polysemous nature of honor. Meaning, there are countless interpretations of honor, it can be perceived in various and vastly contrasting ways. With respect to Shakespeare’s skillful utilization of the polysemous nature of honor, the two characters, Falstaff and Hotspur, are designful manifestations of such a nature, considering their two distinctly contrasting ideas of what honor is, as well as how their contrasting conceptualizations impact, or influence, their actions. In light of honor’s seemingly countless conceptualizations, Falstaff offers his particularly unique understanding of honor. Briefly at the battle of Shrewsbury, he makes his speech on the subject in the first …show more content…
Such distinct, yet equally true, interpretations effectively support the specified theme of the twain passages that honor, is indeed, polysemuous in nature, in both the process of its obtainment, and its resulting glorification of the individual that possesses it. Although the theme should be supported by the simple existence of contrasting interpretations, by both Falstaff and Hotspur, it is completely exhibited/embodied in/by their actions in the play. For instance, Falstaff fully/blatantly dismisses honor and therefore unshamefully/proudly leads the life of a thief; not to mention his false death at the play’s end. Hotspur, on the other hand, goes into the battle at Shrewsbury in full embrace of the glorious death he ultimately takes at the hand of Prince