"I want to be invisible...I paint my face and travel at night." Ralph Reed, as quoted in The Virginian Pilot and Ledger Star, 9/11/91 Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Achieving “invisibility,” or privacy from the public's glaring gaze, remains a distinct desire of modern society. This goal has given rise to the creation of "high-tech" home security systems, aliases for everyone from famous authors to the average person who purchases "indecent" material on the Internet, and protections on computer hard drives. In addition, the book market has been flooded with works that teach how to protect personal information from the prying eyes of telemarketers, scammers or vengeful ex-lovers. JJ Luna, author of How to Be Invisible, a guide to "protecting your assets, your identity, and your life," describes the situation aptly: "Privacy is now poised to become the most sought-after luxury of the twenty-first century" ( Moon 1). But why do people go to such great lengths to keep their public and private lives separate? Shakespeare's Henry IV, Part One, seems to offer the answer. Henry IV presents us with a rich mix of characters who, not surprisingly, have "erotic, fiscal" and "self-deceiving" (Steiner) "impulses" that guide their private actions. However, as the political situation of the play becomes more and more twisted, the characters' private desires become intertwined with politics and "state matters" (Steiner). The Prince of Wales, Hal, clearly shows the positive impact of politics on private life; when the lazy and immature Hal is thrown into war, he rises to the occasion and proves himself honorable. His friend, Sir John Falstaff, however, fails to understand the broader meaning of the war and instead of fighting valiantly, chooses to remain dominated by his private fiscal desires. It is therefore through politics, through the intertwining of public and private life, that Henry IV's characters are forced to reevaluate their private "impulses" in light of their public consequences; the success of political action, therefore, depends on the balance between private desires and political needs. Erotic impulses constitute our most private desires. It is therefore not surprising that popular celebrities often try to hide their relationships from the press. Furthermore, when President Bill Clinton's private life came into the spotlight, he too was reluctant to provide details about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky and ended up swearing perjury. Similarly, Henry IV's warriors conclude that erotic impulses have no place in political relationships and consequently seek to repress their wives' desires. However, Shakespeare clearly suggests that there is a "right" way and a "wrong" way to do this. Lord Mortimer listens attentively to his wife's Welsh pleas and Owen Glendower's translation. He assures her that: "I understand your kisses, and you mine / And this is a sentimental dispute [dialogue of feelings]" (3.1.204-205). He tells her that although she cannot "be a soldier too" (3.1.193), she will soon be able to join Glendower in his march to battle. In stark contrast to Mortimer's affectionate speech to his wife and attempts to understand her frustrations, Harry Percy or Hotspur is rude and impatient with his wife. At first, Lady Percy very politely asks Hotspur why he is snubbing her: For what offense have I been these two weeks a woman banished from my Harry's bed? Tell me, sweet sir, what is it that takes away your stomach, your pleasure and your desire for golden sleep? (2.3.39-42)In this speech, Lady Percy showsgenuine concern for her husband and his strange behavior. She is concerned about developing insomnia and worry about the battle at the expense of their marriage. However, instead of dispelling her concern, Hotspur simply ignores her pleas and demands that his horse be brought to him. By obsessing over the war and excessively suppressing his natural erotic impulses, Hotspur not only despises his wife, but also sets himself up for a deafening political defeat. In our money-driven society, many people allow their fiscal desires to dominate their lives. In addition to the classic "workaholic", there are people willing to risk their safety or even their lives for financial reward. There have been many cases of wives or husbands killing their spouses to collect on their life insurance policies. Additionally, fiscal desires provide the basis for some strange and disturbing television shows and movies. One such television program, Fear Factor, features people who willingly eat insects, jump out of airplanes, and crawl through sewer drains to reap some financial reward. On a more serious note, a recent film, The Glass House, depicts a self-centered business tycoon who kills his best friend so he can have custody of his friend's children and their four million dollar inheritance. The old saying "You can't buy happiness" seems to have been lost on some of these people. In Henry IV, Falstaff's private life is consumed by financial desires; he is a hedonist to the core who needs large funds to buy an "intolerable deal of sack [wine]" (2.4.543). At the beginning of the play, Falstaff is just an isolated drunk whose actions have no real meaning in the larger world. However, when Hal puts him in charge of a band of foot soldiers, he is given the opportunity to change. And Falstaff considers the merits and pitfalls of acting honorably: Honor stings me. Yes, but what if honor stings [kills me] when I arrive? How then? Can honor be set on a leg [replace a lost one]? No. Or an arm? No. Or take away the pain of a wound? No. So the Honor is not an expert in surgery? No. What is honor? One word. What's in the word honor? What is this honor? Air a fair showdown! Who has it? The one who died on a Wednesday. Do you feel it? No. Do you feel it? No. So is it senseless? Yes, to the dead. But won't he live with the living? No. Why? The deduction [slander] will not be suffered [allow it]. So I won't do anything about it. (5.1.129-140)Rather than allow his feelings of public duty to penetrate his private fiscal impulses, Falstaff selfishly concludes that since honor is of no use to the living man, he will not die trying to obtain it. He concludes his speech by again linking honor with death and calling it "a mere shield" (52E1.140-141), which is a painted decoration for the coffins of the dead. Furthermore, Falstaff goes beyond simply attacking the abstract idea of ​​honor. ; undermines its principles to achieve its fiscal objectives. We are first introduced to him as a somewhat ruthless and greedy man who jumps at the opportunity to steal money from innocent travellers. Furthermore, he insists that if Hal does not join him in this little enterprise, then Hal "has neither honesty, manhood, nor good company in you, nor are you of royal blood if you dare not defend [rob someone of] ten shillings" (1.2.143-145). However, Falstaff's dishonorable actions to further his own fiscal desires at the expense of the royal family do not stop there. When Hal puts him in charge of a brigade of foot soldiers, Falstaff impresses only the richest, "toast" men (4.2.21) who can affordto pay for their discharge from service. While Falstaff acknowledges that he has "reprehensibly abused the King's press [power of conscription]" (4.2.12-13), he is pleased to have received, "in exchange for one hundred and fifty soldiers, three hundred and more pounds" (4.2.13 -14). Falstaff's actions in this situation are unique in that they could have a direct effect on the war and, by extension, the English kingdom. By choosing a group of "dishonorable" (4.2.31) and "discarded unjust servants" (4.2.28) as his soldiers, Falstaff is single-handedly weakening the English forces. However, Falstaff does not consider the wider consequences of his selfish actions; he simply marvels at his own intelligence and ability to satisfy his private fiscal desires at the expense of the English public. With Owen Glendower, Shakespeare presents a sort of "fiscal" obstacle for Falstaff; Glendower recognizes the significance of the war and consequently reevaluates his fiscal impulses in light of their political ramifications. Glendower, the leader of Wales, is a wise and powerful warrior, accustomed to doing what he wants and not tolerating insolence. However, when the fiery Hotspur insists that his share of land under the rebels' proposed land division "is equal in quantity to none of yours" (3.1.96), Glendower agrees that Hotspur can straighten the River Trent so that the his possessions include a fertile valley: «Come, you will make Trent turn [straighten]» (3.1.135). Glendower gives in to Hotspur at his own fiscal expense because he recognizes the potentially disastrous results that internal division among the rebels could have on their war effort. Several characters in Henry IV also display self-deceptive impulses that hinder their political action. People often act in self-deceptive ways because they want to hide from reality and feel better about themselves. In Jane Austen's Emma, ​​the protagonist, Emma Woodhouse, is the perfect example of self-deception. Emma is the town matchmaker, yet she has convinced herself that she doesn't want a spouse and is happy to be single. It is only after Emma is able to overcome her self-deceptive barriers that she can recognize her love for Robert Knightley and act on it. Likewise, alcoholics and drug addicts' refusal to admit they have a problem often slows the recovery process. At the beginning of the show, Prince Hal appears to be living in self-deception. He spends his days flirting in various taverns and hatching immature plots to embarrass Falstaff. We initially see Hal as extremely self-centered; he doesn't seem to care that his callous behavior is disgracing the royal family. Indeed, Hal mocks the young warrior, Hotspur, whom his father admires most: "I have not yet the mind of Percy, the Hotspur of the North: he who kills me six or seven Scots at breakfast, washes his hands, and says to his wife, 'Damn this quiet life, I need to work'" (2.4.112-116). However, as a testament to Hal's self-deception about his warrior aspirations, we see him embody Hotspur's fighting spirit. as he enters battle. Sir Richard Vernon, a relative of the Percys, describes Hal approaching as follows: I saw young Harry with his beaver [helmet], his pads [thigh armor] on his thighs, valiantly armed. , rise from the earth like feathered Mercury, And so easily hovered upon his seat, as if an angel fell from the clouds, to turn and envelop a proud Pegasus, and bewitch the world with noble skill on horseback (4.1.103-109) Hal continues to fight valiantly in the war and finally rejects the senseless activities of his youth when he meets Falstaff on the battlefield. When the "fact" (5.3.39) Falstaff, too concerned with his own well-being to 1986.