punishment satisfied their sense of justice – just as it had satisfied the wives.
The second problem for certain critics is an apparent inconsistency in the character of Falstaff. The fat knight also appears in the two Henry IV plays, and these critics contend that the Falstaff of the history plays is far too witty and clever to believe that the children in costumes could possibly be real fairies. The critics argue that the level-headed Falstaff would never accept that fabricated fantasy as a reality. Then again, maybe he could. Shakespeare clearly thought the possibility was there, or he would never have written this conclusion. Falstaff is in a highly emotional state – as evidenced by his own words and explanation (Act V, Scene 5: 117-23). And Shakespeare, over and over again in his plays, reveals that even the smartest and greatest of men can be the losers in the conflict of Reason vs. Emotion. When an individual becomes too emotional in a situation, he loses his ability to reason. He becomes irrational. He becomes a little mad. Further, a reader (or member of the audience) may want to view Falstaff here as one that is older and more desperate than the one appearing in the history plays. His attempts to become wealthy have failed, and he is desperately grasping for some sort of solution to his financial crisis. This desperation is also an extreme emotion that affects his judgment.
Structurally, Shakespeare has devised his plot simply and superbly with three key scenes depicting the humiliation and punishment of Falstaff: