| Quote #4
In Henry IV Part 1, Hal told us that he was playing the role of the bad-boy prince so he could stage a dramatic "reformation" when he became king, which would amaze everyone and endear him to his subjects. By the time we see Hal in Henry IV Part 2, it seems like he's trapped in the role he's created for himself. Although he's inwardly sad that his father is ill, he can't show his true feelings because he's created a "wild Prince" persona that everyone expects him to live up to. If Hal were to openly grieve for his father now, everyone would think he was a "hypocrite" and that his tears were disingenuous because he's spent so much time thumbing his nose at his father and hanging out with the likes of Falstaff.
| Quote #5
When Falstaff wants to discredit Mistress Quickly, who has filed a lawsuit against him, he lies to the Lord Chief Justice and claims that Mistress Quickly has been telling people the LCJ is the father of her child. Later in the play, Falstaff tries to discredit Poins when he lies to Prince Hal and claims that Poins has been telling everybody Hal is going to marry his sister. Are you noticing a pattern here? What's with Falstaff and all the lies about women and sexual relationships? Falstaff's as petty as an online gossip column. Falstaff, then, seems to be associated with the figure of Rumour, who also spends a lot of time spreading stories.
| Quote #6
Mistress Quickly files a lawsuit against Falstaff, who has borrowed a bunch of money that's never going to be repaid. Mistress Quickly also reveals that Falstaff broke his promise to marry her, even after she took care of him when he was wounded. We know Falstaff's not the most honest guy in the world but taking advantage of Mistress Quickly seems pretty despicable, don't you think? Is Shakespeare setting it up so that we don't get too sentimental when Falstaff is eventually banished by Hal?