ABSTRACT
The rejection of Falstaff has caused the most notable and divided dispute. But other profound divisions have occurred in the theater and among critics: the poet-king versus the Machiavel, Richard versus Bolingbroke, and Henry V as heroic play or subversive war pamphlet. Perhaps the problems ending history derive as much from the fall into language as from the difficulty of closing the flow of time in historical representation, especially in the brief compass of a play or even a series of plays. The metaphor of theater and world reveals ironic complexity and the seeping of opposites, so that the audience finds itself in a situation that is both/and as well as either/or because the theater is part of the world and represents or supplements it. The history play is a good place to study temporality in art and drama. The chapter also presents an overview of this book.
