Category Archives: Measure for Measure

The Common Cold

Imagery, Measure for Measure, Verbal texture, ,

Sin and vice are genuinely synonymous with disease in Measure for Measure. An infectious sickness that runs rampant in the Duke’s city specifically, for which there is no known cure. Angelo believes that the only vaccine for such a tempting disease is imprisonment and ultimately death.

However viral this sin is, it seems to have one definite attribute – it’s common. Whether it be a Duke, a Gentleman, or even a women contemplating her place in a convent, temptation runs amidst them all. The Duke echoes this notion when he says, “None, but that there is so great a fever on goodness, that the dissolution of it must cure it…”(3.2.225-226). Somehow goodness has now become a tangible organ or vital component in human beings that can be infected. Sin has taken the form of a virus, causing symptoms such as fever that subsequently force good-natured people to act ill-natured.

Despite the destructive qualities of vice, its wrath seems unavoidable. Infecting people from all types of life, this common cold it would seem, does not discriminate. This might be the reason for the civil absolving of all crimes and action the Duke imposes at the end of the play. The commonality of sin saves its victims from blame. This salvation comes in the form of wit when the Duke says, “Craft against vice I must apply” (3.2.280). Knowledge takes the form of anti-bodies and heals the sick.

No more Half Measures

Character types, Class and status, Measure for Measure

In a play where lies, deceit, and disguises are at the core of the  plot, there remains only one man who continues to carry on his personal values regardless of the pressure to conform to the higher ups that lay down the law of the land; his name is Lucio, the true hero (maybe anti-hero) of the story. A man who decides to play by his own rules, regardless of the inevitable consequences that’ll be handed down to him continues to express his charismatic and witty personality towards every other character throughout the play; therefore forcing them to come to terms with their own personal demons and desires. The way he subliminally “pimps” out Isabella to Angelo so that she can free her brother Claudio from prison, or how he casually talks to the disguised friar(the Duke in disguise)  about how the Duke was a great leader not just because of his leniency but because how he also indulged in the pleasure of other women just like his fellow citizen. The term “sin” is blind to the of Lucio as he believes that it is not a sin to please ones desires, and that those who believe it to be so are clearly in denial of their own human wants and needs. Is Lucio a saint? Nope, but that is the reason he is the best and most relatable character within the play; he embraces his human instincts and does not sugar coat his opinion. The title of the play is  Measure for Measure but a lot of the characters within this story take half measures, as they decide to not fully embrace there own beliefs and desires. Angelo wants to enforce the law against premarital sex, but can’t resist Isabella. Isabella wants to save her dear brother Claudio, but refuses to commit a single sin to save his life, but will deceive Angelo in the end. The Duke wants to infiltrate the community as a common man, but still has issues letting go of his ego. It is only Lucio who goes all in from the beginning until the end, and even though he is disciplined by the king his character never wavers. Is he immature and volatile? Indeed, but within the character of Lucio there are no half measures, only full and that makes him the ultimate hero of the story.

Duke or Douche?

Class and status, Measure for Measure, Tragicomedy

Measure for Measure begins with the Duke announcing he must take leave and put Angelo  in charge of his dukedom, Vienna. The Duke then tells the audience he doesn’t plan on traveling outside of the city for business. He tells the audience that he wants to see Angelo handle the power of being a Duke and how he runs the dukedom in his absence.  The Duke Vincentio takes on the robe of a friar to overlook his city while remaining anonymous.

My biggest problem with the Duke is he appointed Angelo to power and yet, he set Angelo up to fail. I think that is grossly irresponsible and he isn’t being considerate of his comrade Angelo. I would say Angelo is loyal to the Duke and any individual who is granted power without any supervision is susceptible to misusing said power. The whole story of Measure for Measure could be avoided if the Duke doesn’t decide to do this social experiment. The Duke specifically says that he fears his city is starting to become fearless of his authority and he needs to put Angelo in charge to get them to start respecting authority again. At the end of the play however, he doesn’t hesitate in trying to kill off Angelo. I never really liked Angelo as a character; in fact I despised him in a way. However loyalty is something that should always be held up, especially considering Angelo is the Duke’s man. I felt like the Duke should have taken more responsibility for Angelo’s appointment. The Duke ends up being even more powerful with the city in shambles after Angelo’s reign and people supporting him even more. The Duke was this plotting character throughout the story. The one constant thing about Measure for Measure is that no character was really a hero and everyone was really full of it. I stick by the Duke being a Douche.

 

Measure for Measure: Isabella

Measure for Measure, Psychological states

If you were to ask readers of Measure for Measure who they believed to be the most innocent character in the play , certainly Isabella would come up.  I would argue that Isabella is not as holier-than-thou as she appears to be. If we were to examine Isabel’s reaction to Claudio’s plea to save him, and compare that with Isabella’s plea to save Angelo, I see a bit of hypocrisy.

Claudio:

Sweet sister, let me live:
What sin you do to save a brother’s life,
Nature dispenses with the deed so far
That it becomes a virtue.

(3.1.133-136)

Isabella:

O you beast!
O faithless coward! O dishonest wretch!
Wilt thou be made a man out of my vice?
Is’t not a kind of incest, to take life
From thine own sister’s shame? What should I think?
Heaven shield my mother play’d my father fair!
For such a warped slip of wilderness
Ne’er issued from his blood. Take my defiance!
Die, perish! Might but my bending down
Reprieve thee from thy fate, it should proceed:
I’ll pray a thousand prayers for thy death,
No word to save thee.

It is understandable to say Claudio is asking for much. Specifically, for Isabel to go against her beliefs. Not only is she repulsed by Claudio’s plea, but she scolds him, by  saying what he did was a sin and that, “Tis best thou diest quickly.” Before we revisit her plea to save Angelo, we can recall her plea to Angelo to pardon Claudio:

I have a brother is condemn’d to die:
I do beseech you, let it be his fault,
And not my brother.

Here Isabel is asking Angelo for mercy, to “Condemn the fault and not the actor of it?” as Angelo put it. But she cannot understand that Claudio is asking for the same kind of act on her part, “What sin you do to save a brother’s life,”. As egregious as the sin may be, to save Claudio is it so inconsiderable, to bring Isabel to say to a brother waiting for death,  “Tis best thou diest quickly.” ? I cannot agree.

Finally, Isabella’s plea for Angelo’s pardon is a bit odd considering her rebuke of Claudio’s plea. After she kneels for Angelo she states, “thoughts are no subjects;
Intents but merely thoughts.” Isabel considers that Angelo’s poor intentions ought to be forgiven, but cannot consider acting against her beliefs for the sake of her brother. Her reaction to Claudio is what Harold Bloom called a “sadistic display of enraged virtue.” And I agree. I think Isabel is a very complex character. I’m not saying she should or should not have taken Angelo’s offer, or that Angelo’s proposition was right, but I found it interesting how she thought of mercy for others intentions, while mercy for her, if she done wrong, for the sake of her brother’s life, is unfathomable to her.

The Scene in the Court – Measure for Measure Group 4 Reflections

Class and status, Generic characteristics, Measure for Measure, Prose passage, Stage techniques
Examination of Froth and Clown by Escalus and Justice | Photo Credits: BBC

Looking back to the day we had to act out the scene highlighting Pompey and Escalus (2.1.136-256), there is no denying that coordinating the rather tricky Shakespearean language entwined within the scene, the appropriate atmosphere of the characters and the setting and the limited resources (and not to mention ability) into a cohesive portrayal of this particular scene was initially challenging. However, being able to retrospect the challenges in recording the scene, and both understanding and analyzing the significance of the scene only gives an opportunity to once again appreciate the genius of Shakespeare in breathing life into what would be just merely physical movement, voices and props.

Before we had a chance to look at our dialogue we knew that we had to refrain from using the books on stage while filming. The productions we had seen of Shakespeare’s plays were powerful because the actor not only interpreted each line in his/her own way but also because they were able to look out into the audience and convey their emotions to the audience. So, the first thing that popped into my mind was a teleprompter. We’ve seen simple technology such as this being used on a daily basis in so many different TV shows and what we were taping was a video so in that aspect it worked out perfectly. When we finally read the scene we realized it was very apt to use the prompter because it was a court scene. Using the chair for Escalus to sit down and face his back towards the audience was a decision we took since he was the authority in that scene. Simple actions from Froth, Pompey and Elbow like stepping forward to present their case (i.e. read their parts) each time really immersed us into the roles as novice actors.

Unknowingly, a typical tribunal type of atmosphere arose from just our positioning, which eventually became necessary to get the feeling for the more serious questions regarding the actual law that was to be enforced and the type of crime that was committed. The second most important dramatic technique, attempted, was the idea of Pompey reciting the four lines alone as both Escalus and Elbow phase out of the line of sight of the camera to emphasize a sense of cynicism in the justice system presented by Shakespeare because it illustrates the persistence of certain deeds, and even the possibility of helplessness in erasing that same persistence. Just as Pompey critically derides Escalus’s duty to the law, “Does your worship mean to geld and splay all the youth of the city,” the selected scene that was required of us definitely gave the opportunity to not merely enact but to feel, at the very minimum, how the language woven within the directions of how the props and setting would be displayed creates the right atmosphere in thinking on terms like cynical justice or corruption. Hence going back to what was mentioned earlier, this is just a taste of the genius in Shakespeare breathing life, which can be appreciated only when one has attempted to enact that selected scene.

We found it very enjoyable working on this project despite everyone’s initial hesitation towards group projects. Everyone in this group was extremely cooperative, which helped a lot considering we had to do a number of retakes (close to 20?). One scene that stood out for us was the one between Escalus and Pompey regarding Pompey’s nickname. We all laughed out loud during the “bum” comments because we didn’t realize how hilarious they were until we recited the play.

 The scene showed us  a very different dynamic to Shakespeare’s work in that it showed comedy, however, it also illustrated his ability to created striking conversation. The scene the group did was not an introduction to the types of subjects the play addresses, but also the kind of quick hitting, “right back at you” type of dialect. In addition, while it was able to delineate multiple dynamics, it showed a very interesting lens in that it portrayed class distinction by way of vocabulary which was a bit new to me when it came to Shakespeare. All in all, he believes that sometimes we lose sight of the meaning behind Shakespeare’s work because of the language, but if we take the time to find the power behind the dialogue, we can gain a better understanding of the play, the times, and Shakespeare himself.

 

 

A few words on the philosophy of justice in Measure for Measure

Measure for Measure, Psychological states

Among all other themes in Measure of Measure, Justice is the central one towards which all characters and their actions are inclined. It all starts off with the protagonist’s, the Duke, plan to take a short leave from the power and empower someone well known for having profound integrity in justice and morality. Few questions rose to my mind while I was reading the opening scene of the play regarding the Duke’s intension of leaving his chair to Angelo, a man believed to have strong sense of ethics and duties, and disguising himself as a friar. However, as I continued to read the play, the underlying objectives of Duke’s plan started to unfold clearly in front of my eyes. It’s a test that he left for Angelo to conquer as a rational being, but Angelo, nonetheless, found himself as a human being, who was a slave to his personal necessities.

‘’If power changes purpose’’ (1.4.54), this quote hints the purpose of the Duke’s plan, to see whether power is superior to morality. Angelo’s verdict towards Claudio was objective at first, assuming Vienna had good laws, and he, as the interim Duke, followed  the code of laws for the sake of good of societies and its citizens . However, It became subjective on the arrival of Isabella, who came begging mercy on her brother, Claudio. His action was justifiable at the beginning, but it started deviating from the moral ground while his desire for her started losing ground in his consciousness. Here, desires consumed duties.

We define justice to be universal, uniform and equal to every one regardless of one’s status and situations. In a true rational world, we define our morality, according to Immanuel Kant, based on reasons. Kant gave us an account on justice and morality, which depend on freedom and reasons.  From the Kantian point of view, given this situation, Angelo as a Duke didn’t do justice on Claudio out of duty, but rather out of inclination, out of his personal interests towards Isabella. As a result, his motive of judgment lacked moral value. His determination of will, sentencing death penalty to Claudio, wasn’t autonomous as he wasn’t following the reasons; he was following the trail of his personal necessities. He wasn’t acting freely, autonomously, but he was acting heteronomously.

Angelo’s actions would have been moral, if he hadn’t chosen the Claudio as a means to an end, his desire for Isabella, if he hadn’t acted out of the motive of inclination. It would have been moral, if he had made the justice for the sake of justice, if he acted out of the motive of duty.

‘’Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end.’’

Immanuel Kant.

For Kant, motive is what gives our actions moral value. So when we have motive of duty, not the motive of inclination, then we only act out of duty, then we resist our motive for acting on our self-interest.

Angelo failed to rise above his self-interests. He failed to respect Isabella’s dignity. Even after she agreed with his proposal to save her brother’s life, he yet secretly gave the provost order to have Claudio executed. He didn’t keep his promise, which is odd with the categorical imperative. He used Claudio as a means to an end. His motives were the motives of inclination, his determination of will was heteronomous and his reasons were hypothetical.

Therefore, his all actions were immoral.

Angelo hasn’t given ground to his desire to Isabella, but he has to his morality to justice.

The Efficacy of Law in Measure for Measure

Class and status, Imagery, Measure for Measure, Verbal texture

In Measure for Measure, authority figures often anthropomorphize the law of Vienna. For instance, during his conversation with the Friar, the Duke describes Vienna’s laws as “strict” and “biting” (1.3.19). Similarly, Angelo callously assures Isabel that “It is the law, not I, [who] condemns your brother (2.2.80). Through their syntax, Angelo and the Duke separate themselves from the law, which offers an interesting insight on the way the law is perceived in the play: it is an objective, stand alone entity.

But in light of the play’s final scene,where one “fornicator” is absolved of his “crime” and the other is “punished,” are Angelo and the Duke right to take this view of the law?

Continue reading The Efficacy of Law in Measure for Measure →

Is Marriage Worse than Death?

Death and dying, Measure for Measure, Psychological states

Within Measure for Measure we are presented with the situation that bearing a child out of wedlock, despite out of love, is equivalent to death. (Having sex prior to marriage is illegal.) Although Claudio truly loved Juliet, the woman bearing his child, he was to be executed for his illegal actions. As we all know, he eventually escapes execution and is happily reunited with Juliet, leaving the possibility for the assumption that they marry and live “happily ever after.” But for some of the other characters, their ending was not so merry.

Lucio claims :”Marrying a punk, my lord, is pressing to death, / whipping, and hanging:” (5.1.30) This suggests that the woman who bore his child is a prostitute whom he did not love or care for marrying. Despite the severity in the repercussions, he still wished to not marry her. In effect, he preferred death, or any punishable acts, over being forever bound to a prostitute, or any woman whom he did not love.

A similar situation is presented to Angelo when the Duke orders him to marry Mariana for having pre-marital sex with her. Although he obeys the Duke, he never speaks a word, implying his dissatisfaction with the event that has occurred. This may be going too far into it but the fact that he sentenced Claudio to death may have implied that he was doing him a favor. By not believing in the true love between Claudio and Juliet, he would save him from a life of suffering. (This may of course be an invalid interpretation but i thought it was a bit humorous.)

Surprisingly, Isabella is confronted with the same situation. When she is finally told that her brother is alive and well, the Duke suggest that he has done her a favor. Most individuals believe that no favor is done out of pure kindness but rather because there is something that’s wanted out of the act. This applies to this event. After implying that he has done her a favor by forgiving the illegal act of her brother, and in effect, saving his life, he asks for her hand in marriage. She remains silent after the proposal but we are unsure whether she is silently happy or silently upset. One can assume that the silence is her expression of disbelief that she is once again being conned by a powerful figure. (Angelo attempted a similar action) “If he be like your brother, for his sake/Is he pardon’d; and, for your lovely sake,/Give me your hand and say you will be mine” (5.1.61).

In conclusion, we can  now see that death has typically projected a better outcome than that of marriage. If we took a step back, in the play. and attempted to imagine what it would be like if anyone who engaged in sexual actions prior to marriage, would be sentenced to death, how would it affect the characters. Who would change for the better? Would it change anything at all?

 

Measure for Measure: Uneven measurements of sin?

Measure for Measure, Psychological states

Isabella’s sound reprimand of her brother when he dared to ask her to consent to what was essentially her rape(3.1) seemed, at the time, wholly justifiable to me.  Whether she was afraid of her own basic, human desires more than the act itself was not a major concern, simply because it was her decision, a very personal and possibly emotionally scarring decision.  In the same position, many women would be torn and miserable if asked to make such a decision no matter what course of action they may choose.

However, this view changed when I was confronted by her rather abrupt change if heart in falling to her knees to beg for the salvation of Angelo (5.1). The strong overtones of Christian imagery make this an enlightened and beautiful act of growth and true justice, but it calls to my mind questions of her true reasons for her anger at Claudio. Her love of her brother was not strong enough to allow her to even entertain the thought of being bedded for his salvation, but the man who in essence attempted to rape her and murder Claudio is deemed forgivable? Her brother who simply begged to be saved, called on her ‘love’ to save him she condemned to bitter, restless death but Angelo was worthy of her falling to her knees for his life? This draws into question yet again the idea of degrees of sin. Are some sins more forgivable than others? Is Lucio more sinful than Claudio? Is Mariana less sinful than Juliet?

Rereading the scene in the prison between Claudio and Isabel, I have decided that the “lady doth protest too much”  (Hamlet 3.2).  No longer does she appear as the chaste, inexperienced woman balking at an insult against her Christianity and purity and instead has transformed into a woman terrified of her own desires, of the possibility of enjoying that which she has been taught to view as sinful.

(I rather like the differences between these two interpretations of the Act 3 Scene 1.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUaCwSASd24
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7siwW5Oqnk

 

Some by virtue fall

Measure for Measure, Psychological states

There is a recurring theme in Measure for Measure, a paradoxical relationship between vice and virtue where one becomes a vehicle for the other. This is reflected in both the plot, such as the duke’s deceptive approach to justice, as well as in the actual language of the characters.

 

Deception becomes a means for learning the truth and meting out justice. The duke disguises himself as a friar so he may learn about the goings on of the city: “Hence shall we see, / If power changes purpose, what our seemers be” (1.4.54).  In this quote the duke reveals his intention to disguise himself, so he may discover Angelo’s true nature, not just who he seems to be. But what does this reveal about the duke’s own nature? He prefers to manipulate in shade, rather than govern in a straight forward manner.

 

The duke’s questionable antics allow him to bring about what he perceives as a happy ending. Once he discovers the truth about Angelo he uses his disguise as a friar to save Claudio’s life, Isabella’s virginity and Mariana’s betrothal. He uses a morally questionable instrument to balance the scales.

 

Isabella’s virtue becomes a vehicle for sin in that her purity and innocence incites carnal desire in Angelo. Also, her unyielding adherence to the oath she made to the church forces her to abandon the one way of saving her brother’s life.

 

After Isabella’s supplication, Angelo admits that: “Most dangerous is that temptation that doth goad us on to sin in loving virtue” (2.3.180).  Isabella’s saintliness is highly desirable to Angelo, perhaps because he sees himself as an upstanding man up to that point. Or perhaps because he represents that quality in human nature that desires to defile that which is pure. In either case her chastity becomes a vehicle for lasciviousness.

 

Escalus echoes this theme in act 2 scene 1, when he says: “Some rise by sin, and some by virtue fall.” Angelo “falls” because of Isabella’s virtue. Similarly, one could argue that Isabella falls because of her own virtue in that she is so chaste she is causes the audience to question her morality. What really is the good of virtue, it one will not sacrifice a part of themselves to save the life of one they love?