Measure For Measure (Shakespeare By The Sea 2021 Online Production) Theatre Review

Shakespeare is always relevant. Measure For Measure, with its corrupt and hypocritical authority figure and the way it addresses the question of whether a woman’s accusations will be believed, certainly rings true in today’s strange climate. And while Shakespeare By The Sea does place the play in a more modern setting for its new online production, the company chooses the Wild West of the 1800s. While it is always somewhat risky and problematic to set one of Shakespeare’s plays in a different time and place, this setting does work with that sense of lawlessness that troubles the city and in fact indirectly sets the action in motion. A major piece of the set is the exterior of a saloon, working as a reminder of the rampant lawlessness of the time and of the setting of the play. Though this production is set in the wild west, the text is not changed from Vienna, which is slightly disconcerting at first, as when Pompey says “All houses in the suburbs of Vienna must be plucked down.” However, at a certain point, the setting becomes almost irrelevant, and you just enjoy the performances.

The first scene of this play always feels too brief, as the Duke seems in a hurry to set his machinations in motion, to place Angelo in charge and don his disguise. It feels even more rushed here, as several of the Duke’s lines are cut. The Duke basically announces his intention to Escalus, hands Angelo his commission and departs. Patrick Vest plays the Duke and also directed the production, which is interesting, because the Duke does his best to direct the action within the play, and Vest’s dual job seems a comment on that very thing. This production features a female Escalus, played by Jane Hink. From her expression upon hearing the Duke’s intention, it doesn’t seem she shares his estimation of Angelo. Or perhaps she simply thinks it a bad idea for the Duke to place control in anyone else’s hands. The Provost (Tara Donovan) is also female in this production. It is interesting that there are women in positions of some power, because this play has felt to me to be, at least in part, about women’s lack of power. When Angelo (Jonathan Fisher) enters, he is dressed in black, so we get the sense of him as a villain from his first appearance. I like that he takes a moment before exiting, to appreciate his new position.

When the Duke speaks with the Friar, the Friar is in black, which draws an important connection between him and Angelo, who is supposedly a pious and moral man. The nun Francisca (also played by Tara Donovan) is also in black, in contrast to Isabella’s white and pale blue habit, showing that Isabella (Melissa Booey) has not yet taken her final vows. Francisca is funny when explaining the rules regarding talking to men, even hiding her face. And when the Duke disguises himself as a friar, he changes his outfit from red to black. His disguise also includes a pair of glasses, and a change in his voice. But, hey, no one recognized Clark Kent as Superman either, so I suppose we can accept this. There is a funny moment when he catches himself being too familiar with the Provost, and it is then that he changes his voice. Humor is often a strange element in this play. For example, it feels a bit twisted to us when the Duke tries to joke with Juliet in prison.

When we meet Mistress Overdone (Dana DeRuyck, who also plays Juliette and Mariana), she stands on a platform, as if to draw customers. Pompey (Brendan Kane) takes particular delight in all his jokes. Though he seems much too thin for the joke aimed at him about his bum being “the greatest thing about you.” Interestingly, Pompey is at his best and most compelling when he is in trouble and more serious, particularly in the scene when he has been arrested by Elbow and then feels betrayed by Lucio. Of course, there is still some good humor in that scene. When Elbow (Andy Kallok) delivers his “strange pick-lock” line, he pulls out a flogger. Lucio (Cylan Brown) drinks from a flask, even offering some to the manacled Claudio (Rogelio Douglas III), who declines. Cylan Brown gives one of the production’s best performances. I love his simple delivery of lines like “Not to be weary with you, he’s in prison.” He is able to deliver subtle, honest moments, and then take great fun in some of his wilder bits, as at the end when he is driving the Duke a bit mad with his interruptions. He takes a sip from his flask when he mentions Angelo, a nice bit of business. Wouldn’t Angelo drives us all to drink?

Angelo says “Stay a little while” to Provost upon first seeing Isabella, making us wonder if he already finds her attractive and doesn’t trust himself alone with her, or if it is simply a matter of propriety. I like Angelo’s reaction to Isabella’s line about him slipping just as easily were he in her brother’s place. He dismisses that idea with a laugh and a shake of his head, as if she uttered a thing absurd, a thing ridiculous, when we know he will desire to do exactly the same thing before long. It is interesting that Isabella at least at one point looks to Lucio for confirmation that she is making a sound argument. It’s a nice moment. And there is an excellent moment when it seems Angelo might be swayed by her arguments. This scene, by the way, has that fantastic line, “Oh it is excellent/To have a giant’s strength, but it is tyrannous/To use it like a giant.” And after Isabella’s exit, we see Angelo’s anger, even disgust with himself, as he tries to come to terms with the feelings she has stirred within him. There is a moment where he might choose a better course, but then he basically talks himself out of it.

The second time Isabella calls on Angelo, we see from her expression that she expects the news to be good. I love the section when she is not quite following his point. And when he is more explicit and asks “What would you do,” his eagerness in hearing her answer is clearly shown on his face. After his “let me be bold,” Angelo touches her arms from behind. Isabella pronounces her threat to reveal Angelo’s sin with strength, then immediately turns to him with worry to see what effect her words have had, an absolutely fantastic moment. And that is even before he counters with “Who will believe thee, Isabel?” And isn’t that the line that strikes at the matter, and feels pertinent in today’s climate, when someone like Brett Kavanaugh can reach the Supreme Court? Both Melissa Booey and Jonathan Fisher do excellent jobs with these pivotal and difficult scenes.

Isabella seems to have taken some joy in her work in the subterfuge regarding the bed trick, which is interesting. This also helps prepare us for that sometimes-troubling ending when the Duke proposes marriage, for it shows us similarity between the Duke and Isabella, and gives us the sense that perhaps she is not quite nun material after all. The Duke takes an even more perverse pleasure in withholding from Isabella for the moment the good news regarding her brother. The Duke adds a little pause before the word “goodness” in the line “I have made enquiry of you, and I hear/Such goodness of your justice,” giving Angelo a moment to worry, to squirm. Again, the Duke is taking delight in his role, in controlling the action. Dana DeRuyck is really good as Mariana, particularly in her reaction to Angelo’s death sentence. Claudio and Isabella do sit together toward the end, though of course without speaking, for Shakespeare has provided them with no lines. Isabella also famously has no vocal response to the Duke’s proposal. However, in this production, we see a joyful smile as they step toward each other, indicating she accepts.

This production of Measure For Measure premiered on March 27, 2021, and can be viewed online by visiting Shakespeare By The Sea’s website. It is free to watch, but donations are suggested, and there is a link on screen at the end of the performance. There is one intermission, coming after Act III Scene i. While normally an intermission lasts fifteen minutes, here it is but a few seconds. Of course, you can pause it as long as you need, in order to visit your own concessions stand.

Shakespeare Reference in Slammerkin

Emma Donoghue’s novel Slammerkin, about a young woman in 18th century London, contains a Shakespeare reference. Donoghue writes: “‘Madam!’ protested the dressmaker. ‘Hers is nothing like. Not half so dainty. This is the very pattern of the one Mrs. Cibber wears as Juliet on the Drury Lane stage, Mary tells me’” (p. 194). The reference is to the production of Romeo And Juliet by David Garrick starring Susannah Cibber.

And actually, there is a phrase, “no rhyme or reason,” that is used twice in the novel, once at the very beginning and once at the end (at the end it is “no rhyme nor reason”). Though apparently Shakespeare did not coin this phrase, he is known for it. He used it in the second act of his early play The Comedy Of Errors, with Dromio of Syracuse saying, “When in the ‘why’ and the ‘wherefore’ is neither rhyme nor reason.” He used it again in the third act of As You Like It, with Orlando saying, “Neither rhyme nor reason can express how much.” In this novel, Donoghue writes, “Some were chained up after sunset, but not necessarily the murderers; there was no rhyme or reason to it that Mary could see” (p. 2). Then just before the end of the book, Donoghue writes: “Killing was killing, when you came down to it. Punishment had no rhyme nor reason; it fell like hail” (p. 380).

Slammerkin was published in 2000. The First Harvest Edition was published in 2002.

Shakespeare References in The Actor’s Book Of Movie Monologues

The Actor’s Book Of Movie Monologues is, as its title suggests, a book of monologues from films. But it also contains an introduction about going on auditions, as well as advice from actors, directors and casting directors on auditions. And the book contains several Shakespeare references. The first two are in the introduction, written by Jeanine Basinger, and both are to Hamlet. Basinger writes, “And no actor expects a great many ‘to-be-or-not-to-be’ speeches in his film career” (p. xix). Then: “More people have probably watched Mr. Smith Goes To Washington in the past year than have gone to a production of Hamlet in the past ten. This doesn’t downplay ‘to be or not to be,’ but it does suggest that what Mr. Smith has to say is every bit as meaningful, as powerful, as moving, as entertaining, and as challenging to hear performed as anything else ever written for actors” (p. xxi). I could not disagree more, of course. Enough of Jeanine Basinger. The next references come in an interview with Nikos Psacharopoulos, the artistic and executive director of the Williamstown Theatre Festival. Psacharopoulos says: “If, in an audition, somebody wants to do Hamlet as a comedy or as a drama or as a tragedy or as a melodrama, I don’t really care. I only care about how they use their emotional, vocal, and physical equipment, and if those three things go together” (p. xxiv). A little later in that interview, Psacharopoulos says, regarding an audition by Frank Langella, “At that time he hadn’t done anything, but after his four lines from Richard II I knew I wanted to use him” (p. xxv). Psacharopoulos refers to Shakespeare several times in this interview, actually. He says: “What really makes a good monologue, such as one by Shakespeare or Chekhov, is that there is a moment of a certain intensity which becomes personal and transcends the public event. So, if Hamlet is going to say, ‘To be or not to be,’ if he is going to ask, ‘Do I kill myself or don’t I kill myself,’ he has to do it alone, right? There’s no way around it” (p. xxvii). The last Shakespeare reference in this interview is also to Hamlet, with Psacharopoulos saying “People don’t realize that in an ideal world people should see six actors’ Hamlets” (p. xxix). Oh, at least that many, don’t you think?

Throughout the book, there are a few more Shakespeare references. The next comes in the description of Jules And Jim: “Catherine, a Frenchwoman, teaches Shakespeare” (p. 85). Then in the monologue chosen from Harry And Tonto, we have a reference to Shakespeare: “It was like living in Shakespeare’s London. Bristling with energy” (p. 130). There is also a monologue from The Goodbye Girl, and in the description of the film, Smith and Schewel write, “Eliot, in his thirties, is an actor from Chicago who has moved to New York to play Richard III Off Broadway” (p. 147). Then, in the monologue, Eliot says, “And because of a mentally arthritic director, I am about to play the second greatest role in the history of the English-speaking theater like a double order of fresh California fruit salad” (p. 147).

Then in the afterword, the section of thoughts and advice offered by various people, there are a few more Shakespeare references. The first is to Richard The Third, with casting director Deborah Brown saying, “The actor proceeded to take off all his clothes as he did a monologue from Richard III” (p. 221). Austin Pendleton, an actor/director/teacher, says he prefers “When the actor talks to the audience and doesn’t involve another character, e.g. Shakespeare, Williams, Wilder’s Skin Of Our Teeth” (p. 227). He adds, “I was always doing Shakespeare and other ‘speeches’ that were delivered to other people” (p. 227). The book’s final Shakespeare reference is to Julius Caesar, in an anecdote regarding actor Paul Sorvino: “Marlon Brando’s rendition of the ‘Cry havoc’ speech in the movie version of Julius Caesar inspired Mr. Sorvino to try the same speech at an audition for the Broadway show Viva, Vivat Regina” (p. 230).

The Actor’s Book Of Movie Monologues was published in 1986.

Shakespeare Reference in Ouija: The Most Dangerous Game

Yup, Shakespeare references seem to pop up everywhere. In Stoker Hunt’s book on the Ouija board, there is one mention of Shakespeare. Regarding the work of Patience Worth, supposedly a spirit who did a lot of writing through a woman named Pearl Curran, Hunt writes: “Reedy was a regular visitor at Pearl’s house, and he said of her poems, ‘They contain passages of bewitching beauty, of rare high spirits, of pathos. It does not equal Shakespeare or Spenser. It is not so great as Chaucer” (p. 31).

Ouija: The Most Dangerous Game was published in 1985. The copy I read was a First Edition.

Shakespeare Study: Revisiting Some of the Comedies

I was feeling depressed in December, and decided to revisit some of Shakespeare’s comedies. I began with The Merchant Of Venice while self-quarantining after someone at work tested positive for COVID-19. It was especially difficult being apart from my girlfriend those days, and reading Shakespeare helped me get through it. When I’d finished that play, and a book on Shylock, and gotten my test results back (negative), my girlfriend was then sick, and worried that she might have caught the virus, and so our separation continued. During those days I read Much Ado About Nothing. And then I continued from there.

The Merchant Of Venice by William Shakespeare – This time I read the Folger Shakespeare Library edition, edited by Barbara A. Mowat and Paul Werstine. This volume’s introduction contains some thoughts on the character of Shylock, of course: “Shylock would have been regarded as a villain simply because he was a Jew. Yet Shakespeare was led by his art of language to put onstage a character who gave such powerful expression to the alienation he felt because of the hatred around him that, in many productions of the play and in the opinions of many famous actors, Shylock emerges the hero of The Merchant of Venice. In fashioning in Shylock a character whose function is to frustrate the satisfaction that we are invited to desire for the play’s lovers, Shakespeare has, for many people, brought forth a character who rivals the lovers in the power he exerts over us” (pages xiii – xiv). The introduction also includes some thoughts on Portia and her appeal as a character. The introduction also contains a section on Shakespeare’s sentence structure, and other ways he plays with language. There is also a section of biographical information, including mention of some of the legends that persisted for many years. “One hears in Shakespeare’s plays the voices of London – the struggles for power, the fear of venereal disease, the language of buying and selling. One hears as well the voices of Stratford-upon-Avon – references to the nearby Forest of Arden, to sheep herding, to small-town gossip, to village fairs and markets” (pages xxix – xxx). This edition is based directly on the first quarto printed in 1600, with some minor changes to modernize the text. Notes, rather than being printed at the bottom of each page or at the back, are printed on pages facing the text. A note on the character of Lancelet reads: “Editors almost always change this name to ‘Lancelot,’ but it appears as ‘Lancelet’ or ‘Launcelet’ throughout the First Quarto and the First Folio. Since ‘lancelet’ was a word, meaning ‘lancet’ or ‘small lance’ (a small weapon or man-at-arms), we see no reason to change the name” (p. 46). At the end of the book, there is an essay on the play by Alexander Leggatt, offering a modern perspective. Leggatt writes, “If The Merchant of Venice has always seemed one of Shakespeare’s more problematic and disturbing comedies, this may be because it examines the networks of society more closely than usual, and treats outsiders – one in particular – with a severity that seems to go beyond the comic” (p. 211). Regarding Shylock, Leggatt writes: “Shylock’s boast that he makes his gold and silver breed like ewes and rams would remind his audience of the familiar argument that usury was against the law of God because metal was sterile and could not breed. Not just in his threat to Antonio, but in his day-to-day business, Shylock would appear unnatural” (p. 215).

The Merchant Of Venice was published in August 1992.

Shylock: His Own Story by Bertram Fields – This book is dedicated to Dustin Hoffman, whose performance as Shylock in The Merchant Of Venice led to its writing. The story is told in the first person, at least at the beginning. But soon Shylock switches to third person. Right away we learn that “Shylock” isn’t the man’s actual name. It is Shilach. That means that each time someone utters his name in the play, it’s like a minor insult to him. A nice touch. This book also deals with the anti-Semitism almost immediately, indicating that Venetians were “Jew-haters” (p. 12). This book gives Shylock, or Shilach, a backstory, not just relating the events from the play. In this telling, it is Bassanio who suggests that Antonio borrow from Shylock, and Antonio is reluctant. Regarding the unique way a husband was to be chosen for Portia, Fields writes: “If the message was affirmative, the match was made. If not, the suitor must leave Venice never to wed, a dramatic promise which, of course, was completely unenforceable” (p. 21). I always wondered about that aspect. It’s not like anyone was going to follow the Prince of Morocco around for the rest of his life, reminding him of his vow. It’s really about his word of honor. And in this story, Portia is accused of cheating at the casket game, which doesn’t seem to fit with what we know of the character. But of course it is told from Shylock’s perspective, and he has his own prejudices. The question of Antonio’s affection for Bassanio is answered rather explicitly, with Gratiano saying to Bassanio, “The man’s been trying to get you in bed for years” (p. 25). There are several differences in the characters in this story. For example, in this telling, Shylock is more concerned with his daughter’s absence than with the sum she stole. And he reveals: “I have no intention of killing Antonio or cutting out a pound or even an ounce of his flesh. I want to terrify him, make him plead for his life” (p. 68). Portia might be the most changed, however. She declares that she won’t pay the Jew the money Antonio owes him. And when she appears in court, she is not disguised. Everyone knows her identity. The book then follows Shylock after the fourth act, rather than dealing with the business of the rings. At the end of the book, there is a little joke about Shylock meeting, we presume, Shakespeare. Fields writes, “I met a young Englishman at the tavern…He wanted to hear my story…Who knows, maybe someday he’ll write it” (p. 89). However, the chapter title indicates this takes place in May of 1560, four years before Shakespeare was born. So…? Is Bertram Fields one of those silly people who think someone else wrote Shakespeare’s plays?

Shylock: His Own Story was published in 2015. My copy is a First Edition.

Much Ado About Nothing by William Shakespeare – It had been a while since I’d read this play, and this time around chose The New Penguin edition, edited by R.A. Foakes. The book’s introduction focuses in part on the reasons for the popularity and appeal of the characters Beatrice and Benedick: “Perhaps it is not so much the quality of their witty exchanges that makes them such powerful and vibrant figures, as the energy and skill with which they parry each other, and so preserve a stance of tough-minded independence” (p. 8). And then: “They are able to flout conventions too because Shakespeare has taken care not to encumber them with close relatives; Benedick has none, and Beatrice is an orphan to whom Leonato, her uncle and guardian allows a freedom he would not permit his daughter Hero to have” (p. 10). Regarding Don John and Claudio, Foakes writes: “Don John’s independence as a villain relieves Claudio of any responsibility for punishing him, for he is everyone’s enemy, and offends society as a whole. The emphasis in the presentation of Claudio is, then, on his sense of honour and conformity to the codes prescribed by convention: he loves Hero as a name rather than as a person, and is perhaps fortunate in the end to find that after all Hero lives up to the chastity implied in her name” (pages 17-18). And regarding the watch, Foakes writes: “In a world where the officers of the law are so inefficient, no serious villainy can be expected to take place, or a better policing would have been established. So Dogberry and Verges are reassuring figures, and their comic ineptitude establishes a perspective in which we know instinctively that Don John cannot succeed in his mischief” (p. 21). There is also some information on the text, and a mention of some of the play’s criticism. All the notes and comments are presented at the end, after the play. Regarding Borachio’s line “I whipt me behind the arras,” the note reads, “Tapestries were hung on the walls of rooms for warmth and decoration, and were often mounted far enough away from the wall to allow a man to hide in the space between” (p. 133). Regarding some of Balthasar’s lines in Act II scene i, the note reads, “In Q and F these lines are assigned to Benedick, but the pairs of dancers talk in turn, and Benedick is paired with Beatrice at line 111, so that there is good reason to think the speeches wrongly assigned here” (pages 134-135). Regarding the interaction between Benedick and Boy at the beginning of Act II scene iii, and specifically Boy’s line “I am here already, sir,” the note reads, “The Boy means, ‘It is as good as done’, but Benedick jokes by taking his words literally” (p. 140). The book also contains some information on the text, and the differences between the Quarto and First Folio versions.

Much Ado About Nothing was first published in 1968. The copy I read was a reprint from 1988.

The Merry Wives Of Windsor by William Shakespeare – I picked up the Stratford Festival Edition of this play, edited by Elliott Hayes and Michal Schonberg. This volume is aligned with the 1982 Stratford Festival production, directed by Robert Beard. It contains a short introduction by Robert Beard, in which he writes: “If Falstaff were truly in love, Mistress Ford and Mistress Page would become totally unsympathetic, cruel, and unattractive. But Falstaff is not in love, these spirited women have a wicked sense of humour, and Windsor is a town with limited diversions. The Wives are quick to see the possibilities of a game, and once the fun begins, they are loath to stop. Having succeeded in one narrow escape, they are immediately plotting a second episode, enlisting Mistress Quickly to lure Falstaff back for more derision; so caught up are they in the joy of the game that they avoid becoming harpies in our eyes” (p. 2). This book contains plenty of photos from the production, as well as costume design sketches. Notes are presented at the bottom of each page, and are far from extensive. After the play is a list of changes and cuts made to the text for this production, and the reasons for those changes. The book concludes with some biographical information on the play’s director, designer and the two editors.

The Merry Wives Of Windsor was published in 1984.

As You Like It by William Shakespeare – For this time around, I chose to read the Oxford School Shakespeare edition, edited by Roma Gill. There is a short piece at the beginning of the book about some of the players in Shakespeare’s company, and about the use of music in the play. There are also descriptions of each of the characters. The description of Jacques includes this note: “He represents the ‘melancholy’ man, a type of person common at the end of the sixteenth century, when it was fashionable to appear sensitive and even neurotic. The melancholy man took a cynical view of the world and society” (p. x). Also in the introductory section there are synopses of each scene, with some critique of the action and characters, along with themes. Regarding Orlando, Gill writes: “He showed moral courage when he defied his brother, and again when he politely refused to change his mind about fighting Charles. The fight has proved his physical strength. We must remember this when Orlando is love-sick in the Forest, because he is danger of appearing weakly romantic” (p. xiv). Regarding Rosalind, Gill writes: “Wit and intelligence were not considered desirable in a lady. As Ganymede, Rosalind is free from social restraint: a theatrical convention of disguise releases her from society’s conventions of behavior” (p. xvii). Later in that section, Gill writes, “The play presents life not as it is, but as we would like it to be” (p. xxiii). Regarding the mix of verse and prose, Gill writes, “In this play it is, broadly speaking, the topic being discussed that decides whether prose or verse should be the medium of discussion: serious matters are spoken of in verse, and prose is used for mundane affairs” (p. xxv). Gill then adds: “Touchstone speaks nothing but prose, and this is appropriate for his practical common sense and the mocking nature of his comedy: the prose expresses these qualities, and underlines them. In the same way, Silvius and Phebe, who speak only verse, are defined by their mode of expression. Jacques speaks both prose and verse. The subjects he talks about often demand the dignity of verse, but the character is himself not poetic, as we see from his comment on Orlando’s blank verse” (p. xxvi). Notes in this edition are presented to the left of the text. Regarding Jacques’ use of the word “stanza” in Act II Scene v, Gill notes, “the modern English is ‘stanza’, but the word was new in England, and Jacques is mocking it” (p. 31). Regarding the name Jacques, Gill notes: “Touchstone pretends to have forgotten the name – or else pretends that he is reluctant to say the word ‘Jacques’; this is pronounced ‘jakes’, which is a word for the lavatory – the English are still shy about asking for this” (p. 59). And regarding Hymen in Act V Scene iv, Gill notes: “When this play is performed, the director must decide whether to have the part of Hymen acted by one of the other characters in the play (under Rosalind’s instructions); the alternative is to allow the god himself to appear, thus suggesting that there is real magic in this happy ending” (p. 95). The book contains a few illustrations, including a depiction of the seven ages of man as described by Jacques. After the play, the book contains sheet music for the song “It Was A Lover And His Lass.” Following that is a section for teachers who use this volume in their classrooms, with subjects and questions for discussion.

As You Like It was originally published in 1977. The revised edition was first published in 1994, and the trade edition in 1996. The copy I read was a reprint from 2000.

A Midsummer-Night’s Dream by William Shakespeare – This edition is all about Arthur Rackham’s fantastic illustrations. In fact, no editor is even listed, and the book contains no introduction or notes on the text. Act and scene divisions are included, but the lines are not numbered. This is an edition simply to be read and enjoyed. It is printed on nice, heavy paper.

A Midsummer-Night’s Dream was originally published in 1908. The copy I read is a reprint published in 1977 by the Viking Press. It was printed and bound in Great Britain by Morrison & Gibb Ltd., London and Edinburgh.

 

 

Measure For Measure by William Shakespeare – Measure For Measure is for me one of Shakespeare’s most intriguing plays, and this time I read the New Cambridge Shakespeare edition, edited by Brian Gibbons. The volume’s introduction contains notes on the role of religion and those pesky Puritans at the time, as well as the influences and sources of the play’s story, including the work of G.B. Giraldi Cinthio and George Whetson. Similarities between Shakespeare’s play and Middleton’s The Phoenix and Marston’s The Malcontent are also detailed in the introduction. Regarding the contrast between the upper and lower social groups in the play, Gibbons writes: “The comic underworld in Measure for Measure is a critical mirror in which we recognise, inverted, the structures and assumptions central to the play’s serious action. But comedy in this play is distorted and strained by the use of the grotesque so that comedy’s jovial, festive, reconciling spirit cannot gain release, its exuberant energies remain disruptive and dark, locked as they are in a struggle for survival, the central action of the play” (p. 26). Part of the introduction deals with language, and the differences in the use of language among the characters. Gibbons points out that Angelo uses sexual terms unconsciously at first, and “Isabella is similarly prone to use, unconsciously, sexually suggestive language” (p. 30), such as “I would to heaven I had your potency.” Regarding the Duke’s disguise, Gibbons writes, “Considering more widely the issue of role-playing, one notes that the Duke is impatient to divest himself of his robes and insignia, and no sooner is he free of them in the first scene than he is seeking out the Friar to don his Friar-disguise, and, with it, the opportunity to revel in the devious plotting that goes with the Friar’s role in Shakespeare, as in Romeo and Juliet or Much Ado” (p. 41). The introduction also offers thoughts on the play’s somewhat difficult ending. Gibbons writes, “Christian doctrine teaches, however, that the highest good is forgiveness for evil, not retribution, and the climax of the play faces Isabella with the choice between asking retribution or forgiveness for Angelo’s crimes” (p. 36). Gibbons also notes: “Isabella acts in response to pressure from outside in her previous appeals; is it therefore certain that in appealing for Angelo’s life she is not once more acting under pressure rather than spontaneously from her heart? Circumstantial evidence could support either view” (p. 47). Also regarding the ending, Gibbons writes: “The Duke seems to have a taste for springing surprises which increases in step with the increasingly risky opportunities presented to him (there is a clear parallel with Angelo here). At the very end of the play it might be plausible to see the Duke, carried away by euphoria at his overwhelming success, overreaching himself by springing one surprise too many in proposing to Isabella” (p. 47). The introduction also provides details of certain productions, focusing on Peter Brook’s 1950 production, and includes photos from different productions of the play. Abundant notes are provided on the text, at the bottom of each page, including definitions of words from the OED. Regarding the word “restraint” at the beginning of Act I Scene 4, Gibbons writes: “The word earlier used of Claudio’s arrest is here used of the discipline of the holy order. Shakespeare indicates the link between brother and sister ironically in this dialogue about rules, restraint, license, strict abstinence” (p. 105). Regarding the line “He hath evermore had the liberty of the prison,” Gibbons notes, “Applying the term ‘liberty’ to Barnardine and prison stresses the thematic function of the prison scenes in the play as an ironic mirror of the whole society of Vienna” (p. 166). At the end of the book is a textual analysis.

Measure For Measure was originally published in 1991. The updated edition was first published in 2006. My copy is a fourth printing, from 2009.

Measure For Measure by William Shakespeare – I decided to read another edition of the play, this time The Signet Classic Shakespeare edition, which was edited by S. Nagarajan. This volume contains prefatory remarks about theatre in Shakespeare’s day, along with some biographical information and notes on the publication of Shakespeare’s works. Then the introduction to the play gets into the works that influenced the plot of Measure For Measure. Regarding the play’s ending, Nagarajan writes: “Presumably she accepts the Duke’s proposal; in Shakespeare’s day, it was perfectly in order for a novice to go back to secular life. Though the play itself is ambiguous on the point, it is attractive to believe that Isabella made the discovery that the ‘prompture of the blood’ could be resolved in the married state also” (p. xxvii). Notes on the text are presented at the bottom of each page. After the play, the book contains notes on the sources, including synopses. Following those notes are several pieces touching on different aspects of Measure For Measure. Regarding the Duke, G. Wilson Knight writes: “The Duke, lord of this play in the exact sense that Prospero is lord of The Tempest, is the prophet of an enlightened ethic. He controls the action from start to finish, he allots, as it were, praise and blame, he is lit at moments with divine suggestion comparable with his almost divine power of foreknowledge, and control, and wisdom” (p. 158). Regarding mercy and justice, Knight writes: “Thus ‘justice’ is a mockery: man, himself a sinner, cannot presume to judge. That is the lesson driven home in Measure for Measure” (p. 160). Regarding the plot, Knight writes, “The scheme is a plot, or trap: a scientific experiment to see if extreme ascetic righteousness can stand the test of power” (p. 164). And regarding Angelo, Knight writes, “Angelo is not a conscious hypocrite: rather a man whose chief faults are self-deception and pride in his own righteousness” (p. 172). The piece on the character of Isabella, written by Marcia Riefer Poulsen, is particularly interesting. Poulsen writes: “But just as Isabella is on the brink of forswearing the company of men, Lucio arrives to pull her back into it. Reluctantly she returns to Vienna, where, gradually, her character dissolves, her spirit erodes, and she becomes an obedient follower of male guidance: an actress in a male-dominated drama” (p. 207). About the troubling character of the Duke, Marcia Riefer Poulsen writes, “His ultimate intention seems to be setting the stage for his final dramatic saving of the day – a day which would not need saving except for his contrivances in the first place” (p. 204). Regarding Claudio, Poulsen writes, “Claudio’s urging Isabella to give up her virginity, understandable as it is from his point of view, compounds her increasing sense of vulnerability and helplessness” (p. 209). And regarding Isabella’s silence at the end of the play, Marcia Riefer Poulsen writes: “With the conclusion of her final speech, Isabella is immediately confronted with a series of overwhelming events: a living Claudio appears, the Duke proposes marriage, and Angelo is pardoned. All of Isabella’s main assumptions – that Angelo was condemned, that the Duke was a committed celibate, that her brother was dead, and that she herself would remain chaste for life – are challenged, if not negated, in the space of five lines. She remains speechless, a baffled actress who has run out of lines. The gradual loss of her personal voice during the course of the play has become, finally, a literal loss of voice” (pages 214-215). This edition – or this printing – is clearly missing some text between page 231 and page 232, and again between page 232 and page 233.

Measure For Measure was published in 1964. This New Revised Edition was published in 1988.