Measure for Measure Act 1, Scene 3.2

26 Sunday Feb 2023

Posted by memoirandremains in Shakespeare

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

King James, Measure for Measure, Puritans, Shakespeare

Friar Thomas

[19] Gladly, my lord.

Duke

[20] We have strict statutes and most biting laws,

[21] The needful bits and curbs to headstrong weeds,

[22] Which for this fourteen years we have let slip,

[23] Even like an o’ergrown lion in a cave

[24] That goes not out to prey. Now, as fond fathers,

[25] Having bound up the threat’ning twigs of birch

[26] Only to stick it in their children’s sight

[27] For terror, not to use—in time the rod

[28] More mocked than feared—so our decrees,

[29] Dead to infliction, to themselves are dead,

[30] And liberty plucks justice by the nose,

[31] The baby beats the nurse, and quite athwart

[32] Goes all decorum.

This section works on a couple of levels. First, it explains the Duke’s motivation leaving. Thus, it continues the exposition.

Second, the language is quite pictureseque. This makes the exposition entertaining:

[20] We have strict statutes and most biting laws,

[21] The needful bits and curbs to headstrong weeds,

[22] Which for this fourteen years we have let slip,

[23] Even like an o’ergrown lion in a cave

[24] That goes not out to prey.

This first passage has an interesting mix of imagery:

The laws are strict and also “bite”. This is matched by the image of the lion who has grown so fat it can longer leave its cave.

The strict statutes and biting laws act curb weeds which are difficult to restraining. This leads to an interesting reversal of the imagery. Weeds are the danger. The laws are the restraint. Weeds become overgrown. The lion is the image of restraint: the lion should come out and hunt its prey. Thus, the lion is parallel to the strict laws. But lazy lion is overgrown. So a fat lion has led to overgrown weeds.

Now, as fond fathers,

[25] Having bound up the threat’ning twigs of birch

[26] Only to stick it in their children’s sight

[27] For terror, not to use—in time the rod

[28] More mocked than feared—so our decrees,

[29] Dead to infliction, to themselves are dead,

[30] And liberty plucks justice by the nose,

[31] The baby beats the nurse, and quite athwart

[32] Goes all decorum.

The second passage is based upon a more coherent image: A parent uses corporal punishment to restrain and train a child. But the “fond father” (fond here means foolish delight, indulgence) holds the stick up only as a threat. After awhile, the threat becomes meaningless because everyone knows it is an idle threat. There should be a balance between liberty and restraint (or justice), which has been lost. Liberty now openly mocks just. “more mocked than feared …. Plucks justice by the nose”.

The baby beats the nurse (the nanny) is a marvelous image.

Third, the passage presents a theory of social order in brief: Laws are enacted to restrain dangers which threaten social order. If the laws are not enforced, they will soon become a joke. The forces of disruption, weeds, untamed liberty, a child, will take advantage of the weakness afforded by a failure to restrain disorder. The result will be chaos: “and quite athwart/Goes all decorum.”

The basic proposition of this exposition: Why are you pretending to be on a trip? Well, I really can’t enforce basic laws because I have been distracted with other things. If I try it now, it will make things worse. I’ve installed a man who is known to be strict. I’ll let him reintroduce order.

Again, the irony of Angelo’s work. Angelo fails to judge the actual work of prostitution. Escalus, in Act II Scene 1 will warn the men to not be involved in this work. It is the man who is otherwise upright, whose sister is a soon to be a nun and how gets his soon to be formally acknowledge wife pregnant

Friar Thomas

[33] It rested in your Grace

[34] To unloose this tied-up justice when you pleased,

[35] And it in you more dreadful would have seemed

[36] Than in Lord Angelo.

Friar Thomas here raises the obvious question: Why didn’t you just enforce the law yourself? It would have been taken more seriously if you had done it yourself.

Duke

[37] I do fear, too dreadful.

[38] Sith ’twas my fault to give the people scope,

[39] ’Twould be my tyranny to strike and gall them

[40] For what I bid them do; for we bid this be done

[41] When evil deeds have their permissive pass

[42] And not the punishment. Therefore, indeed, my

[43] father,

[44] I have on Angelo imposed the office,

[45] Who may in th’ ambush of my name strike home,

[46] And yet my nature never in the fight

[47] To do in slander. And to behold his sway

[48] I will, as ’twere a brother of your order,

[49] Visit both prince and people. Therefore, I prithee

[50] Supply me with the habit, and instruct me

[51] How I may formally in person bear

[52] Like a true friar. More reasons for this action

[53] At our more leisure shall I render you.

[54] Only this one: Lord Angelo is precise,

[55] Stands at a guard with envy, scarce confesses

[56] That his blood flows or that his appetite

[57] Is more to bread than stone. Hence shall we see,

[58] If power change purpose, what our seemers be.

⌜They⌝ exit

We have now come to full explanation of the Duke’s understanding.

[37] I do fear, too dreadful.

[38] Sith ’twas my fault to give the people scope,

[39] ’Twould be my tyranny to strike and gall them

[40] For what I bid them do; for we bid this be done

[41] When evil deeds have their permissive pass

[42] And not the punishment.

The moral logic is that if I (the Duke) tempted the people in thinking it was permissible to engage in this behavior, it would be peculiarly wrong of me to then turn upon them and punish the conduct which I permitted.

Notice the political logic here: He would move from being a rightful ruler to a “tyrant” by such a move. In this sense, the argument has a similar political rational as does the Lex Rex, the Law is King: even the king must be subject to the law.

This also underscores the psychological aspect of political legitimacy. It is a perception in the people ruled that a ruler is legitimate. An illegitimate ruler is one who must keep his position by means of fear and violence. A legitimate ruler has the willing assent of the population, which he would lose.

He has passed his authority to someone who is “precise” (as he will describe Angelo, below). By passing his authority there is a psychological change in the population, they will be willing accept things. Even if the effect is unexpectedly harsh (but they should expect a lot from Angelo), it will not hurt the Duke’s legitimacy.

Therefore, indeed, my

[43] father,

[44] I have on Angelo imposed the office,

[45] Who may in th’ ambush of my name strike home,

[46] And yet my nature never in the fight

[47] To do in slander.

The Duke however is not going to leave his people without his oversight. This shows he is not quite certain either of how Angelo will act or how the people will respond. Why or the extent to which he is concerned with Angelo is unknown. We gain some insight here:

More reasons for this action

[53] At our more leisure shall I render you.

[54] Only this one: Lord Angelo is precise,

[55] Stands at a guard with envy, scarce confesses

[56] That his blood flows or that his appetite

[57] Is more to bread than stone. Hence shall we see,

[58] If power change purpose, what our seemers be.

He is “precise”. This had distinct religious overtones at this time. The Puritans were sometimes referred to by their detractors as “precisionists” or “precisians”.

Because of their concern for preciseness in following out God’s revealed will in matters moral and ecclesiastical, the first Puritans were dubbed ‘precisians’. Though ill-meant and derisive, this was in fact a good name for them. Then as now, people explained their attitude as due to peevish cantankerousness and angularity or morbidity of temperament, but that was not how they themselves saw it. Richard Rogers, the Puritan pastor of Wethersfield, Essex, at the turn of the sixteenth century, was riding one day with the local lord of the manor, who, after twitting him for some time about his ‘precisian’ ways, asked him what it was that made him so precise. ‘O sir,’ replied Rogers, ‘I serve a precise God.’ If there were such a thing as a Puritan crest, this would be its proper motto. A precise God—a God, that is, who has made a precise disclosure of his mind and will in Scripture, and who expects from his servants a corresponding preciseness of belief and behaviour—it was this view of God that created and controlled the historic Puritan outlook.

Packer, J. I. A Quest for Godliness: The Puritan Vision of the Christian Life. Crossway Books, 1990, p. 114.

This raises a peculiar question about the play. The play itself was first performed in 1604 before King James. The relationship between King James and the Puritans was not easy. This wink at the Puritans would not have caused the playwright trouble with the king.

Measure for Measures Act I, Scene 3.1

22 Wednesday Feb 2023

Posted by memoirandremains in Shakespeare

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Measure for Measure, Shakespeare

The previous post on this play may be found here:

Scene 3

Enter Duke and Friar Thomas.

Another expositional scene. The Duke explains why he has made this vacancy of his position. He makes this confession to a friar. Later, the Duke will appear to take confession from the main players in the drama set into motion by his departure

Duke

[1] No, holy father, throw away that thought.

[2] Believe not that the dribbling dart of love

[3] Can pierce a complete bosom. Why I desire thee

[4] To give me secret harbor hath a purpose

[5] More grave and wrinkled than the aims and ends

[6] Of burning youth.

We come upon the pair in mid-conversation. The friar apparently believes that the Duke has left his position to escape the entanglements of love.

The conversation which ensues now works on multiple levels. At one level, the Duke will reveal that has left his position to ensure the reestablishment of a moral order in the dealings of those who are in love (or perhaps the immorality of those who have no love in the case of prostitution. Curiously, it is two engaged men who will be caught up in this moral problem. Perhaps the extended discussion of venereal disease among those who frequent prostitutes is judgment enough for them.

Love is taken as something which has its effects upon “burning youth,” but not upon him. This is an allusion to:

1 Corinthians 7:9 (GB)

9 But if they can not absteine, let thẽ marie: for it is better to marie thẽ to burne.

Or in a slightly more modernized version (not available for Shakespeare):

1 Corinthians 7:9 (KJV)

⁹But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.

The matter of youth is played against his more deliberative and secret purpose which he refers to as grave and wrinkled. That is, of great importance and complex.

At another level, this statement is ironic, because the Duke himself will marry at the end. He does not realize it, but he does not possess “a complete bosom.” The dart of love is not so dribbling as he presumes.

There is another irony here, where he portrays love as both ineffective and burning.

Friar Thomas

[7] May your Grace speak of it?

The friar is a cut-out for the question of the audience. He is asking the question which we would have. That does not mean that one must play him as a complete neutral.

Duke

[8] My holy sir, none better knows than you

[9] How I have ever loved the life removed,

[10] And held in idle price to haunt assemblies

[11] Where youth and cost witless bravery keeps.

[12] I have delivered to Lord Angelo,

[13] A man of stricture and firm abstinence,

[14] My absolute power and place here in Vienna,

[15] And he supposes me traveled to Poland,

[16] For so I have strewed it in the common ear,

[17] And so it is received. Now, pious sir,

[18] You will demand of me why I do this.

We now come upon some depth to the character of the Duke. He has been one who tends to a more solitary life, rather than to the demands of rule. In this respect, he reminds me of Prospero who will be usurped for a while in his rule. Here, the Duke voluntarily sets it aside. And in another irony, it is to a much younger man whom he believes, or at least says, does not burn with passion. Angelo will burn, and will be burned in ways he does not anticipate.

The Duke also is unconcerned with the vanities which he again associates with youth.

Angelo is one he portrays of such rectitude as to be unmoved. This is curious, because the Duke also knows a secret of Angelo which portrays another facet of his character: perhaps not bound by passion but by some other desire. And Angelo will find himself caught by passion.

The Duke intends to obtain a new level of honesty in his realm by means of a deception, which is itself ironic.

He then asks the question at the ends, which permits the exposition to continue.

Shakespeare, Measure for Measure Act 1, Scene 2 (e)

04 Saturday Feb 2023

Posted by memoirandremains in Shakespeare

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Measure for Measure, Shakespeare

The previous post is here.

The remainder of this scene provides the background on Claudio’s crime and also sets up the remaining elements of the plot.

Claudio

[133] What but to speak of would offend again.

Here we have one thematic element of the play: speaking. Claudio is reluctant to speak, because it entails the shame of the offense for himself and for Julietta. Claudio’s potential rescue will come through speaking. Isabel his sister is ready to take a vow that she will no longer speak with men. There is his sister’s plea for his life. Angelo will offer freedom for a terrible price. But when she says she will tell his crime, he says, “Who will believe thee Isabel?” And alone she says, “Did I tell this/who would believe me? O perilous mouths …” When the nighttime meeting with Angelo is arranged, there is to be no speaking. Lucio will speak too much and cause himself grief. The matter of silence and speaking will arise at various points.

Lucio

[134] What, is ’t murder?

Claudio

[135] No.

Lucio

[136] Lechery?

Here is an irony: Lucio is a lecher and free. We have listened to men joke about venereal disease. We have met the principals of a house or prostitution. But Claudio is the one accused.

Claudio

[137] Call it so.

Provost

[138] Away, sir. You must go.

This is a fine emblematic touch: the law is anxious to drag him away.

Claudio

[139] One word, good friend.—Lucio, a word with you.

Speaking

Lucio

[140] A hundred, if they’ll do you any good. Is lechery

[141] so looked after?

Is the law really concerned with this?

This sets up one of the central moral ironies of the play. Claudio was engaged to and desired to marry Julietta. However, her dowry was held by others. They thought that if they spent more time, perhaps if the friends knew Claudio better, she could obtain (all/better?) her dowry. While they were waiting, Claudio got the woman he loved pregnant. We will learn later that Angelo was engaged to a woman and then refused to marry her when her dowry fell through.

The agreement between Claudio and Julietta was a binding, but they were not allowed consummation until after the church ceremony (“outward order”)

Claudio

[142] Thus stands it with me: upon a true contract

[143] I got possession of Julietta’s bed.

[144] You know the lady. She is fast my wife,

[145] Save that we do the denunciation lack

[146] Of outward order. This we came not to

[147] Only for propagation of a dower

[148] Remaining in the coffer of her friends,

[149] From whom we thought it meet to hide our love

[150] Till time had made them for us. But it chances

[151] The stealth of our most mutual entertainment

[152] With character too gross is writ on Juliet.

What they did is obvious, because Julietta is pregnant.

Lucio

[153] With child, perhaps?

Claudio

[154] Unhappily, even so.

[155] And the new deputy now for the Duke—

[156] Whether it be the fault and glimpse of newness,

[157] Or whether that the body public be

[158] A horse whereon the governor doth ride,

[159] Who, newly in the seat, that it may know

[160] He can command, lets it straight feel the spur;

[161] Whether the tyranny be in his place

[162] Or in his eminence that fills it up,

[163] I stagger in—but this new governor

[164] Awakes me all the enrollèd penalties

[165] Which have, like unscoured armor, hung by th’ wall

[166] So long that nineteen zodiacs have gone round,

[167] And none of them been worn; and for a name

[168] Now puts the drowsy and neglected act

[169] Freshly on me. ’Tis surely for a name.

Here we come upon another question: What is Angelo’s motivation? There are two possibilities: First, he is simply ignorant of the power he possesses, he does not realize he is a tyrant.

Whether it be the fault and glimpse of newness,

Or it might be that he enjoys control and domination:

[157] Or whether that the body public be

[158] A horse whereon the governor doth ride,

[159] Who, newly in the seat, that it may know

[160] He can command, lets it straight feel the spur;

He repeats the possibilities:

[161] Whether the tyranny be in his place

[162] Or in his eminence that fills it up,

[163] I stagger in—

He can’t decide between the two.

What Angelo has done. There is a law which has been in place for 19 years but not enforced. It is like old armor unused, which Angelo has taken out and has used against Claudio:

[164] Awakes me all the enrollèd penalties

[165] Which have, like unscoured armor, hung by th’ wall

[166] So long that nineteen zodiacs have gone round,

[167] And none of them been worn; and for a name

[168] Now puts the drowsy and neglected act

[169] Freshly on me.

Claudio then concludes his evaluation of Angelo:

’Tis surely for a name.

Pride and purposeful dominion of others. The question of Angelo’s self-control is a key element of the play. At first, he is merciless to others lack of control because he is so powerfully controlled. Then, when his own lack of self-control is revealed, he seeks to impose his power in a most cruel manner. If he cannot control himself, he will control others. In the end, he will engage in exactly the same conduct (a conjugal relation with the woman to whom he is engaged but not formally married, who lacks her dowry.).

Lucio

[170] I warrant it is. And thy head stands so tickle on

[171] thy shoulders that a milkmaid, if she be in love, may

[172] sigh it off. Send after the Duke and appeal to him.

Your head is not securely on your shoulders. The Duke would save you (speaking again). But no one can talk to the Duke

Claudio

[173] I have done so, but he’s not to be found.

[174] I prithee, Lucio, do me this kind service:

[175] This day my sister should the cloister enter

[176] And there receive her approbation.

[177] Acquaint her with the danger of my state;

[178] Implore her, in my voice, that she make friends

[179] To the strict deputy; bid herself assay him.

[180] I have great hope in that, for in her youth

[181] There is a prone and speechless dialect

[182] Such as move men. Besides, she hath prosperous art

[183] When she will play with reason and discourse,

[184] And well she can persuade.

Since the Duke cannot be found, go find my sister. She is in the process of becoming a nun. Tell her about me. Ask her “in my voice” to speak to Angelo (the strict deputy) and plea for his life. Her speechless dialect is a loaded phrase:

[180] I have great hope in that, for in her youth

[181] There is a prone and speechless dialect

[182] Such as move men.

Claudio has in mind her virtue and grace will apply to the mercy and grace of Angelo. However, it is her beauty which will in fact move men. Angelo’s desire for her is an answer to a “speechless dialect”.

Lucio

[185] I pray she may, as well for the encouragement of

[186] the like, which else would stand under grievous

[187] imposition, as for the enjoying of thy life, who I

[188] would be sorry should be thus foolishly lost at a

[189] game of tick-tack. I’ll to her.

He agrees to go

Claudio

[190] I thank you, good friend Lucio.

It is curious that Claudio and Lucio are friends.

Lucio

[191] Within two hours.

Claudio

[192] Come, officer, away.

Shakespeare would always have to explain a way for the actors to get off the stage.

Measure for Measure Act 1, Scene 2d

14 Saturday Jan 2023

Posted by memoirandremains in Shakespeare

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Measure for Measure, Shakespeare

Enter Lucio and Second Gentleman.

At this point, the scene has run along two rails: First, there was the coarse jesting of Lucio and his friends and the Bawd’s concern about her livelihood. Second, there was the grim scene of a man being paraded mercilessly through public to prison. Here, those two streams will converge and the primary action of the play will commence.

These two streams of actions are two basic forces which have converged in the figure of Claudio and then his sister. They themselves will image different elements of this conflict, we can think of them as excesses of liberty and restraint.

Claudio begins as who has balanced the restraint and desire too much to the side of liberty. He is engaged, but has not formalized his marriage before he consummated. His sister balances the two on the side of excess of restraint in her intention to become a nun. Lucio goes further than Claudio in impregnating a prostitute. Angelo goes further than Isabella. Angelo refused a woman to whom he was engaged. By saying excess, I think I am taking the part of Shakespeare here: Claudio, his sister, Angelo, and Lucio all resolve their situation by marriage. The space for sexual desire and restraint is the confine and freedom of marriage.

Lucio comes to Claudio. Again note that Lucio speaks prose and Claudio poetry.

Lucio

[120] Why, how now, Claudio? Whence comes this

[121] restraint?

Claudio

[122] From too much liberty, my Lucio, liberty.

[123] As surfeit is the father of much fast,

[124] So every scope by the immoderate use

[125] Turns to restraint. Our natures do pursue,

[126] Like rats that raven down their proper bane,

[127] A thirsty evil, and when we drink, we die.

What caused this restraint? An excess of liberty. The alliteration of Lucio and liberty draws these two words together:

[122] From too much liberty, my Lucio, liberty.

Next, Claudio explains his situation in particularly dense and philosophical poetry:

It breaks down into two parallel explanations

[123] As surfeit is the father of much fast,

[124] So every scope by the immoderate use

[125] Turns to restraint. Our natures do pursue,

[126] Like rats that raven down their proper bane,

[127] A thirsty evil, and when we drink, we die.

First, an abstract and philosophical explanation:

[123] As SurFeit is the Father of much Fast,

[124] So every Scope by the immoderate use

[125] Turns to restraint.

The first line is held together by an alliterative F, and S ties the first and second line. The idea here is the excess of Thanksgiving dinner. We eat too much, we are stuffed and refuse more food. When we do too much of a thing, we are too full and so we stop. Excess ends in restraint. One of the forces which motivates the action in the play.

The lines then pick up on the R in restraint and repeats and revises the concept: Excess does not end in restraint, it ends in death. We are like rats which gorge (raven down) poison (proper bane), and our thirst is evil: both because it is immoral and because it will kill us. By gulping our desire we kill ourselves:

Our natures do pursue,

[126] Like rats that raven down their proper bane,

[127] A thirsty evil, and when we drink, we die.

He lodges this trouble in “our natures”. It is the fault of human being. The irrationality which Christianity would term “original sin”. It is bare guilt for a thing, it is an irrational self-destruction. In this respect, Shakespeare is echoing the language of Romans 1 where sexual sin is explained in terms of God giving human beings over to our desire.

This point makes Shakespeare’s play in some manner incomprehensible to our day. We see desires as innate therefor neither good nor bad, just present. If restraining those desires will result in distress, the desire must be given liberty. Restraint is simply archaic foolishness.

Claudio, who is expressing the moral perspective of the play, says unbridled desire is destructive. By we can also see Angelo’s restraint as excessive. In the lines above, Claudio has condemned Angelo’s abuse in lines allusive of Aeschylus. But we could also see Angelo’s desire for power as itself an excessive desire.

Lucio

[128] If I could speak so wisely under an arrest, I

[129] would send for certain of my creditors. And yet, to

[130] say the truth, I had as lief have the foppery of

[131] freedom as the mortality of imprisonment. What’s

[132] thy offense, Claudio?

This is quite funny, because Lucio is calling attention to the fact that Claudio is speaking just elegant poetry. I would send for my creditors, because I could talk myself out of any trouble. And yet, I would prefer the foolishness of freedom “lief have the foppery of freedom” – I’d rather be a free fool—than “morality of imprisonment.” Lucio has a cribbed and wrong understanding of morality. Not having a sense of the moderation of marriage, he looks upon morality as imprisonment. Perversely, so does Angelo. We could even say the Duke himself was out of balance, because he too was not yet married and had let the morality of the law wither

Measure for Measure Act 1 Scene 2c

21 Wednesday Dec 2022

Posted by memoirandremains in Shakespeare

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Aeschylus, Measure for Measure, Prometheus Bound, Shakespeare

⌜Lucio and Gentlemen⌝ exit^[1]

Bawd

[79] Thus, what with the war, what with the sweat,

[80] what with the gallows, and what with poverty, I am

[81] custom-shrunk.

It is an odd scene in many ways. A trio of men have been making crude jokes about venereal disease, one-upping one another by means of insults. We have heard also that Claudio has been arrested for getting his fiancé pregnant.

The woman who runs the house of prostitution is found standing alone on the stage, everyone else having walked off. She then looks to the audience and says she is suffering for business. How do we feel for this woman? Is she sympathetic, because she is facing financial difficulty? Is she to be despised because her work leads to the spread of incurable disease?

Pompey who enters is her “tapster”: he is the one who rounds up clients.

Enter ⌜Pompey.⌝

Bawd

[82] How now? What’s the news with you?

Pompey

[83] Yonder man is carried to prison.

Bawd

[84] Well, what has he done?

He comes in. She wants to know what is happening. He points to someone who has been arrested. While she has heard about Claudio, she apparently does not yet know that it is Claudio.

This exchange is interesting on two levels. First, it repeats the news of Claudio’s arrest but in a comic rather than serious register. Second, it continues with the irreverent word-play.

The opening scene was formal. We then shift to the lower level of society with the gentlemen and Lucio making dirty jokes. We now shift even lower to the purveyors of the vice which Angelo has been enlisted to stamp out.

The trio had been joking about disease. Now we are hearing jokes about pregnancy.

Another level of joke is the distance between the tapster’s name and profession. He is named after a great Roman statesman. He exists at the criminal end of society.

Pompey

[85] A woman.

[What is the crime? Answer an ambiguous joke.]

Bawd

[86] But what’s his offense?

[Okay, we’re playing this game. I get it he “did” a woman. What was illegal?]

Pompey

[87] Groping for trouts in a peculiar river.

[Another joke. Ask for the name of the offense, another joke. He was poaching fish on private property. That is, he was somewhere doing something he should not have been doing.]

Bawd

[88] What? Is there a maid with child by him?

Pompey

[89] No, but there’s a woman with maid by him.

[90] You have not heard of the proclamation, have you?

[She asks for clarification, a third question: Is someone pregnant? Again, we receive a joke answer: He did not get a maid – a virgin – pregnant, but he did make a virgin a “woman”. We then get new information: Have you heard about the proclamation. This begins a new movement in the scene. We are going to get another level of exposition, but it is given as another round of jokes.]

Bawd

[91] What proclamation, man?

Pompey

[92] All houses in the suburbs of Vienna must be

[93] plucked down.

Bawd

[94] And what shall become of those in the city?

Pompey

[95] They shall stand for seed. They had gone down

[96] too, but that a wise burgher put in for them.

We again get a joke, but this one with a bite of hypocrisy. The work will only be half-done. A wise burgher, an important citizen allowed some houses to remain.

Bawd

[97] But shall all our houses of resort in the suburbs

[98] be pulled down?

Pompey

[99] To the ground, mistress.

Bawd

[100] Why, here’s a change indeed in the commonwealth!

[101] What shall become of me?

[What will happen to the city. She sees her work as useful to the common good: what will happen to the commonwealth? She then narrows the focus, to herself.]

Pompey

[102] Come, fear not you. Good counselors lack no

[103] clients. Though you change your place, you need

[104] not change your trade. I’ll be your tapster still.

[105] Courage. There will be pity taken on you. You that

[106] have worn your eyes almost out in the service, you

[107] will be considered.

Pompey picks up on the ironic theme of her service to the common good. He tells her that she will survive, that he will help her. Also, she will be remembered for her service to the common good. There’s a level of irony here about what constitutes the common good. Should the laws be enforced? Is that the common good? Should the law permit this conduct, is that common good?

The main work of these first two scenes has been exposition, commonly a dull element in a play. The first scene was a brief formal installation of Angelo. We then move to the low and then lower still

The first scene provided the exposition as to what was happening at the level of government. It is set forth with an air formality. The change in the city is then marked at the lowest level in a series of jokes.

This moment of extended puns and jokes then turn to something deathly serious and the first true poetry in the play

Enter Provost, Claudio, Juliet, ⌜and⌝ Officers.

Bawd

[108] What’s to do here, Thomas Tapster? Let’s

[109] withdraw.

Pompey

[110] Here comes Signior Claudio, led by the Provost

[111] to prison. And there’s Madam Juliet.

⌜Bawd and Pompey⌝ exit.

Again, we have exposition and explanation. The audience needs to be told who is entering the stage. Their desire to exit the scene also makes internal sense: the law is approaching the lawless.

Claudio ⌜to Provost⌝

[112] Fellow, why dost thou show me thus to th’ world?

[113] Bear me to prison, where I am committed.

Provost

[114] I do it not in evil disposition,

[115] But from Lord Angelo by special charge.

Claudio

[116] Thus can the demigod Authority

[117] Make us pay down for our offense, by weight,

[118] The words of heaven: on whom it will, it will;

[119] On whom it will not, so; yet still ’tis just.

Enter Lucio and Second Gentleman.

Unlike the coarse jesting of the “gentlemen” and Lucio, Clauido and the Provost speak in verse. Claudio then provides the first poetry of the play. The government officials spoke in verse, but were merely functional in their language. The low characters were quite clever in the speech, but to no purpose beyond insulting one-another and making jokes.

Claudio’s first words are in verse, are eloquent and insightful. His speech points beyond the bare functionality of the characters. Up until this point in the play, the speech of the characters has little reference beyond the worlds of the characters. But Claudio makes an observation which is true within the world of the play, but is also true for the audience.

It is worth unpacking his observation:

[116] Thus can the demigod Authority

[117] Make us pay down for our offense, by weight,

[118] The words of heaven: on whom it will, it will;

[119] On whom it will not, so; yet still ’tis just.

Authority has the power of a god. By referring to the one who exercises the authority of the law as a demigod, Claudio alludes to John 10:35. If we cross the law, the one in authority can make us pay the entire debt incurred by transgression: by weight, the value of the infraction. The law comes down like the words of heaven.

The enforcement of the law can be arbitrary; “on whom it will, it will.”

But one suffers the enforcement of the law cannot complain. It is just if I have broken the law.

But there is something else in these lines. The enforcement does seem extreme and unjust. Consider the opening:

Claudio ⌜to Provost⌝

[112] Fellow, why dost thou show me thus to th’ world?

[113] Bear me to prison, where I am committed.

Provost

[114] I do it not in evil disposition,

[115] But from Lord Angelo by special charge.

Lord Angelo, in his new authority is imposing an excessive sentence. Claudio is not merely punished but is also shame.

In this respect I hear an echo of the Hephaestus in the first scene of Prometheus Bound by Aeschylus. Zeus has just gained authority among the gods and enacts a peculiarly harsh penalty upon Prometheus:

“Therefore, on this joyless rock you must stand sentinel, erect, sleepless, your knee unbent. And many a groan and unavailing lament you shall utter; for the heart of Zeus is hard, [35] and everyone is harsh whose power is new.”

Aeschylus. Aeschylus, with an English Translation by Herbert Weir Smyth, Ph. D. in Two Volumes. 1. Prometheus Bound. Edited by Herbert Weir Smyth, Harvard University Press, 1926.

This is precisely how Lord Angelo is portrayed in the play. The one who has just gained authority is anxious to impose his will make his authority known. It thus common for such authority to exact the law without wisdom or remorse.

Measure for Measure, Act 1, Scene 2b

07 Wednesday Dec 2022

Posted by memoirandremains in Shakespeare

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Measure for Measure, Play analysis, Poetry Analysis, Shakespeare

We now come to a woman who runs a house of prostitution and thus is a vector for such disease. A “bawd” is a woman how manages prostitutes.

When she appears on stage, she has yet to be identified. Therefore, the characters must introduce us to her, seeing as she will be a character in a subplot. However, to just say she is a “bawd” would be terrible writing. Therefore, we come to know here by the characters doubling down of their puns about disease and Lucio’s ridicule of the First Gentlemen.

Enter ⌜Mistress Overdone, a⌝ Bawd.

Lucio

[44] Behold, behold, where Madam Mitigation

[45] comes! I have purchased as many diseases under

[46] her roof as come to—

Lucio tells us who she is. Madam Mitigation is somewhat ambiguous, but her trade is plain with the statement that he has purchase diseases from her. But by saying that he has purchased disease, Lucio opens himself up to a return of the attacks he has been leveling on the other two. Second Gentlemen goes for the attack:

Second Gentleman

[47] To what, I pray?

Lucio

[48] Judge.

Second Gentleman

[49] To three thousand dolors a year.

Dolors is a pun on dollars (money) and dolor (sorrow, pain). Lucio has been accused of spending a great deal on prostitutes and disease. The First Gentlemen seeks to join in on the attack upon Lucio

First Gentleman

[50] Ay, and more.

Lucio turns the attack upon the First Gentlemen:

Lucio

[51] A French crown more.

A French crown would be money (a crown), a crown for a king, and to the point, the loss of hair from venereal disease. Lucio must have made some sort of gesture with these lines which would steer the direction away from himself.

First Gentleman

[52] Thou art always figuring diseases in

[53] me, but thou art full of error. I am sound.

The First Gentlemen is a poor player when it comes to abuse and jibes. He cannot turn it back on Lucio, but rather tries to defend himself. Lucio seeing weakness, lands his final blow:

Lucio

[54] Nay, not, as one would say, healthy, but so sound

[55] as things that are hollow. Thy bones are hollow.

[56] Impiety has made a feast of thee.

A few things happen here: Lucio has gone from being the potential victim to the victor of the attacks. We also learn that Lucio has a vicious tongue and is willing to slander and attack for his own entertainment.

Thematically a couple of things happen here. First, the discussion of bones being hollow is again a reference to disease. By saying he is the victim of a feast, we have the image of worms who make a feast of one at death.

Second, we have been introduced to the horror of disease from a lack of chastity, but it has been done as a joke until this point.

Finally, Lucio returns another concept: Impiety. The scene began with the pirate who scratched on one of the Ten Commandments. They had given themselves the scratched commandment of thou shalt not murder, because they would engage in war for profit.

Lucio brings up the commandment which will be at issue in the play: Thou shalt not commit adultery, which would cover all sexual sin By breaking that commandment, the man has destroyed himself.

Lucio intends this as a joke and an insult. But that commandment’s breach is going to immediately lead to friend being held for execution for breach of that commandment. Thus, his friend will be not a feast for disease but for worms.

First Gentleman, ⌜to Bawd⌝

[57] How now, which of your

[58] hips has the most profound sciatica?

He wants to insult her. It is unlikely he intends any good. She will not play along

Bawd

[59] Well, well. There’s one yonder arrested and

[60] carried to prison was worth five thousand of you all.

She turns the conversation and the play into a new direction. Notice that this exposition comes naturally into the course of the telling. She is the only character who knows the fact. She tells them something they do not know – and we do not know. She speaks in a way natural to her situation. They do not respect her. She has little respect for them. But the man she points out has nothing to do her and her trade.

Second Gentleman

[61] Who’s that, I pray thee?

Bawd

[62] Marry, sir, that’s Claudio, Signior Claudio.

First Gentleman

[63] Claudio to prison? ’Tis not so.

Bawd

[64] Nay, but I know ’tis so. I saw him arrested, saw

[65] him carried away; and, which is more, within these

[66] three days his head to be chopped off.

This is straight exposition, usually the dullest part of a story. But here, the exposition, being new to us and to the characters moves the story along. It also ends with the most dramatic element: The certain death of Claudio.

Lucio

[67] But, after all this fooling, I would not have it so!

[68] Art thou sure of this?

Lucio’s response does two things. First, it shows us that Lucio has some peculiar interest in the matter. The “gentlemen” don’t believe it. Lucio shows some emotion beyond surprise. Moreover, by challenging her truthfulness, it drags out more exposition

Bawd

[69] I am too sure of it. And it is for getting Madam

[70] Julietta with child.

We now know the event which will drive the main plot: Claudio, an upstanding man, has gotten his girl friend, an upstanding woman (“Madam Julietta”) pregnant. He has been arrested (to the surprise of everyone) and will executed in three days.

A less skilled writer would have the Bawd merely blurt out: Look there is Claudio, he has been arrested for …. By William draws out these details in a natural conversation which is both gossipy and shocking.

At the beginning of this scene, Lucio was indistinguishable from his companions, except that he had better trained sense of insult. But now, with the news of Claudio’s arrest, Lucio direction has changed.

Lucio

[71] Believe me, this may be. He promised to meet

[72] me two hours since, and he was ever precise in

[73] promise-keeping.

Lucio praising Claudio. The only reason Lucio has been standing around talking smack with these two is he was waiting for Claudio. We also learn that Claudio has an honest character: He keeps his promises. Claudio’s crime will be against the woman (or with the woman) he had promised to marry.

Second Gentleman

[74] Besides, you know, it draws something

[75] near to the speech we had to such a purpose.

First Gentleman

[76] But most of all agreeing with the

[77] proclamation.

Lucio

[78] Away. Let’s go learn the truth of it.

This last beat tells us there had been a general proclamation. We don’t know that there has been such an announcement or that Angelo has actually done anything yet. This last beat does move the action along, particularly with Lucio calling them to go. But I’m not sure it helps much. Lucio would natural go to see what happened to his. We will soon discover what happened from Claudio. We could probably drop these lines and if need be add Lucio’s call to move to the end of his previous lines. ⌜Lucio and Gentlemen⌝ exit

Measure for Measure, Act 1, Scene 2a

30 Wednesday Nov 2022

Posted by memoirandremains in Shakespeare

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Literature, Measure for Measure, Poetry Analysis, Shakespeare

Scene 2

Enter Lucio and two other Gentlemen.

This scene continues with the exposition: the purpose of this second scene is set in motion the primary conflict of the play. The Duke has left and put Angelo, the seemingly untemptable paragon of perfect virtue over the city. That understanding of Angelo will undergo revision during the play.

Having looked at the situation from the highest level of society, Shakespeare now turns to lowest. Their conversation will perform certain functions. The first then it does is let us know that the something is up with the Duke. It also tells the audience that Lucio speaks confidently about things he knows nothing about. Shakespeare does not belabor the point, it is only a few lines but it does paint some of this character.

Lucio

[1] If the Duke, with the other dukes, come not to

[2] composition with the King of Hungary, why then all

[3] the dukes fall upon the King.

First Gentleman

[4] Heaven grant us its peace, but not

[5] the King of Hungary’s!

Second Gentleman

[6] Amen.

The conversation moves quickly from politics generally to a moral observation, based upon their political position. It seems that these men would be comfortable with their being a war. However, a war would arguably violate the Sixth of Ten Commandments, namely, “Thou shalt not kill.” They are happy to keep the commandments which do not interfere with their mode of life.

The make this observation by means of a joke about a pirate:

Lucio

[7] Thou conclud’st like the sanctimonious pirate

[8] that went to sea with the ten commandments but

[9] scraped one out of the table.

Second Gentleman

[10] “Thou shalt not steal”?

Lucio

(FTLN 0101) [11] Ay, that he razed.

Razed: removed. The pirate would keep the rest, but lose this commandment. This joke actually underscores one of the moral arguments of the play. We are very certain of the importance, and are willing to sharply enforce those commandments which we ourselves do not experience temptation to violate. The pirate was not worried about idolatry, as long as he could steal.

First Gentleman

[12] Why, ’twas a commandment to command

[13] the Captain and all the rest from their functions!

[14] They put forth to steal. There’s not a soldier of

[15] us all that in the thanksgiving before meat do relish

[16] the petition well that prays for peace.

This character has the insight to realize that he is like the pirate: he would be pleased with a war, presumably because it would provide him employment.

Second Gentleman

[17] I never heard any soldier dislike it.

This next jibe lets us know more about Lucio. The two men have engaged in honest introspection. But Lucio can only make a crass insult. This moves us into another phase of the scene.

Lucio

[18] I believe thee, for I think thou never wast where

[19] grace was said.

Second Gentleman

[20] No? A dozen times at least.

The Second Gentleman rolls with the insult.

First Gentleman

[21] What? In meter?

Lucio

[22] In any proportion or in any language.

First Gentleman

[23] I think, or in any religion.

Lucio continues advance this conversation in a degrading direction. He is the one who is moving this conversation in continually more insulting directions.

Lucio

[24] Ay, why not? Grace is grace, despite of all

[25] controversy; as, for example, thou thyself art a

[26] wicked villain, despite of all grace.

At the time Shakespeare’s plays, the controversy between Roman Catholics and Protestants, and among various groups outside of both and within both led to extremely sharp conflict and even war where the religious conflicts could also command a political hearing. Lucio finds the religious distinctions unimportant. “Grace is grace.” This makes his insult that the other man is a “wicked villian” ironic. Lucio would be wicked under any Christian variant.

First Gentleman

[27] Well, there went but a pair of shears

[28] between us.

There is no difference between us.

Lucio

[29] I grant, as there may between the lists and the

[30] velvet. Thou art the list.

First Gentleman

[31] And thou the velvet. Thou art good

[32] velvet; thou ’rt a three-piled piece, I warrant thee. I

[33] had as lief be a list of an English kersey as be piled,

[34] as thou art piled, for a French velvet. Do I speak

[35] feelingly now?

The First Gentleman has now finally responded with a very sharp retort. Without unpacking every element of the insult, he has accused Lucio of having syphilis, which would be the result of sexual indiscretion. The insults have now found their way to razed commandment of the play: how do we think of sexual immorality? A great irony, which is underscored by the way in which Shakespeare here introduces the main conflict is that these profane sexually immoral men will not be the ones who face the criminal sanctions for out of wedlock sexual contact.

The “crime” which jolts the conflict into motion is a man who impregnates a woman he is going to marry. They were merely waiting for her dowry before they made the match official. This violation of the law is nothing like the prostitution marks the world of Lucio and his companions. But there will be no actual prosecution of anyone for prostitution, only post engagement, before formal ceremony pregnancy.

Lucio

[36] I think thou dost, and indeed with most painful

[37] feeling of thy speech. I will, out of thine own

[38] confession, learn to begin thy health, but, whilst I

[39] live, forget to drink after thee.

Lucio jokes about the pain resulting from chancres on the man’s mouth: that is why he won’t use a cup after him.

First Gentleman

[40] I think I have done myself wrong,

[41] have I not?

The insults have moved beyond jokes and jibes to actual descriptions. This man has outed himself as being infected.

Second Gentleman

[42] Yes, that thou hast, whether thou

[43] art tainted or free.

Tainted by disease or without disease, the conversation has turned vicious.

What then does this do: First, it comic, but it is not a light comedy. This creates a distinction between the very formal movement of the first scene and the fearful, desperate tone of the remainder of this scene. This allows the play to change its tone and give is some alteration.

Second, raises the questions of sexual immorality three ways. (1) It raises as a razed commandment. We are willing to obey all the Commandments, except for the one which crosses our personal desires.

(2) It raises the issue in a serious, though weirdly comic manner. Everyone knew that venereal disease was spread by sexual contact and that the disease was deadly serious. Laws prohibiting sexual immorality would have the effect of lessening the spread of disease. While such laws (and any other related public health law) are famously inefficient, they do have some good effect in limiting some dangerous behavior.

(3) It creates a level of irony that the most egregious violations will go unpunished while the technical violation will result in a death sentence (which will then be raised to torture and execution).

(4) It creates a great contrast with the seriousness which other characters will take chastity .

Measure for Measure Act I, Scene 1b.

18 Friday Nov 2022

Posted by memoirandremains in Shakespeare

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Literary analysis, Measure for Measure, Poetry Analysis, Shakespeare

Enter Angelo.

Duke

[26] Look where he comes.

Angelo

[27] Always obedient to your Grace’s will,

[28] I come to know your pleasure.

Duke

[29] Angelo,

[30] There is a kind of character in thy life

[31] That to th’ observer doth thy history

[32] Fully unfold. Thyself and thy belongings

[33] Are not thine own so proper as to waste

[34] Thyself upon thy virtues, they on thee.

[35] Heaven doth with us as we with torches do,

[36] Not light them for themselves; for if our virtues

[37] Did not go forth of us, ’twere all alike

[38] As if we had them not. Spirits are not finely touched

[39] But to fine issues, nor nature never lends

[40] The smallest scruple of her excellence

[41] But, like a thrifty goddess, she determines

[42] Herself the glory of a creditor,

[43] Both thanks and use. But I do bend my speech

[44] To one that can my part in him advertise.

[45] Hold, therefore, Angelo.

[46] In our remove be thou at full ourself.

[47] Mortality and mercy in Vienna

[48] Live in thy tongue and heart. Old Escalus,

[49] Though first in question, is thy secondary.

[50] Take thy commission.

⌜He hands Angelo a paper.⌝

Angelo

[51] Now, good my lord,

[52] Let there be some more test made of my mettle

[53] Before so noble and so great a figure

[54] Be stamped upon it.

Duke

[55] No more evasion.

[56] We have with a leavened and preparèd choice

[57] Proceeded to you. Therefore, take your honors.

[58] Our haste from hence is of so quick condition

[59] That it prefers itself and leaves unquestioned

[60] Matters of needful value. We shall write to you,

[61] As time and our concernings shall importune,

[62] How it goes with us, and do look to know

[63] What doth befall you here. So fare you well.

[64] To th’ hopeful execution do I leave you

[65] Of your commissions.

Angelo

[66] Yet give leave, my lord,

[67] That we may bring you something on the way.

Duke

[68] My haste may not admit it.

[69] Nor need you, on mine honor, have to do

[70] With any scruple. Your scope is as mine own,

[71] So to enforce or qualify the laws

[72] As to your soul seems good. Give me your hand.

[73] I’ll privily away. I love the people,

[74] But do not like to stage me to their eyes.

[75] Though it do well, I do not relish well

[76] Their loud applause and aves vehement,

[77] Nor do I think the man of safe discretion

[78] That does affect it. Once more, fare you well.

Angelo

[79] The heavens give safety to your purposes.

Escalus

[80] Lead forth and bring you back in happiness.

Duke

[81] I thank you. Fare you well.

He exits.

Escalus, ⌜to Angelo⌝

[82] I shall desire you, sir, to give me leave

[83] To have free speech with you; and it concerns me

[84] To look into the bottom of my place.

[85] A power I have, but of what strength and nature

[86] I am not yet instructed.

Angelo

[87] ’Tis so with me. Let us withdraw together,

[88] And we may soon our satisfaction have

[89] Touching that point.

Escalus

[90] I’ll wait upon your Honor.

They exit

Notes

The Duke begins an extended speech Angelo is a man of much virtue and that such virtues should not be shut up, but rather should be put to use in the wider world:

[29] Angelo,

[30] There is a kind of character in thy life

[31] That to th’ observer doth thy history

[32] Fully unfold. Thyself and thy belongings

[33] Are not thine own so proper as to waste

[34] Thyself upon thy virtues, they on thee.

[35] Heaven doth with us as we with torches do,

[36] Not light them for themselves; for if our virtues

[37] Did not go forth of us, ’twere all alike

[38] As if we had them not.

This is not the end of the speech, but it is a good place to make an observation: the structure of the argument is that your excellence is not merely for you alone, but it should be continued and made further use of.

This is an argument which marks some Shakespeare’s sonnets, such as sonnet 3:

[1] Look in thy glass and tell the face thou viewest

[2] Now is the time that face should form another,

[3] Whose fresh repair if now thou not renewest,

[4] Thou dost beguile the world, unbless some mother.

It would be a waste if you did not have children. Or Sonnet 1:

[1] From fairest creatures we desire increase,

[2] That thereby beauty’s rose might never die,

[3] But, as the riper should by time decease,

[4] His tender heir might bear his memory.

[5] But thou, contracted to thine own bright eyes,

[6] Feed’st thy light’s flame with self-substantial fuel,

[7] Making a famine where abundance lies,

[8] Thyself thy foe, to thy sweet self too cruel.

Excellent things should not be kept to themselves. The analogy may at first be seem strained, because the Duke is not telling Angelo to have children, but rather is encouraging him to be involved in public life of governance.

But, the effect of the Duke bringing Angelo into the public is that Angelo will be forced to marry and presumably have a child. Perhaps this is being too clever by half, the comparison of the structure of the argument (excellence should be shared) and the ironic plays upon sex and pregnancy which form the basis of the play suggest that perhaps the Bard did think of his earlier poems.

If that reading is correct, then it makes the next movement of the Duke’s argument even more ironic:

Spirits are not finely touched

[39] But to fine issues, nor nature never lends

[40] The smallest scruple of her excellence

[41] But, like a thrifty goddess, she determines

[42] Herself the glory of a creditor,

[43] Both thanks and use.

The language of “spirits” suggests something beyond the physical which is at play here. Angelo indeed seems to think of himself as some disembodied perfection, which will lead to his coming down to earth.

Nature is careful to waste nothing: if excellence is given, it is for use.

But I do bend my speech

[44] To one that can my part in him advertise.

[45] Hold, therefore, Angelo.

[46] In our remove be thou at full ourself.

[47] Mortality and mercy in Vienna

[48] Live in thy tongue and heart. Old Escalus,

[49] Though first in question, is thy secondary.

[50] Take thy commission.

⌜He hands Angelo a paper.⌝

Here is a curious point. The exposition is necessary for the characters, Angelo needs to learn from the Duke what he must do. There is a casual reference that this is in Vienna. The curious point is the last element in the speech: Escalus is more senior – and we know from the earlier speech to Escalus, he is better suited to government. The Duke says Escalus knows more than even the Duke of the practical management of the state.

Why then this jumping over the better suited for the lesser? Escalus takes the news with poise. Does Angelo see anything here?

Angelo

[51] Now, good my lord,

[52] Let there be some more test made of my mettle

[53] Before so noble and so great a figure

[54] Be stamped upon it.

If Angelo were truly humble on this point, why doesn’t he suggest the obvious choice? Escalus. Instead, Angelo says, you should probably test me first. But he does not suggest Escalus. In this begging-off, there is no alternative to Angelo.

There is also a hint here of Paul’s direction to Timothy on choosing leadership: “And let them also be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless.” 1 Timothy 3:10 (ESV)

The Duke has set his trap and now he must hurry away. Angelo did not find the proper evasion even when offered to him. This next bit is perfunctory and partly untrue.

Notice also the language used at the end. The commission will be ‘executed.’ This is a perfectly appropriate word, but it is not the only word which could have been used here. That Angelo will use his power to “execute” the commission has a double meaning. In this we see that even perfunctory elements of the exposition do extra work and do not merely fill out the speech.

Duke

[55] No more evasion.

[56] We have with a leavened and preparèd choice

[57] Proceeded to you. Therefore, take your honors.

[58] Our haste from hence is of so quick condition

[59] That it prefers itself and leaves unquestioned

[60] Matters of needful value. We shall write to you,

[61] As time and our concernings shall importune,

[62] How it goes with us, and do look to know

[63] What doth befall you here. So fare you well.

[64] To th’ hopeful execution do I leave you

[65] Of your commissions.

Angelo offers to walk the Duke out of town. Is this to hurry him on his way or to show respect? The point is ambiguous, but the Duke has other plans:

Angelo

[66] Yet give leave, my lord,

[67] That we may bring you something on the way.

Duke

[68] My haste may not admit it.

[69] Nor need you, on mine honor, have to do

[70] With any scruple. Your scope is as mine own,

[71] So to enforce or qualify the laws

[72] As to your soul seems good. Give me your hand.

[73] I’ll privily away. I love the people,

[74] But do not like to stage me to their eyes.

[75] Though it do well, I do not relish well

[76] Their loud applause and aves vehement,

[77] Nor do I think the man of safe discretion

[78] That does affect it. Once more, fare you well.

Notice the insistence of the Duke:

Your scope is as mine own,

[71] So to enforce or qualify the laws

[72] As to your soul seems good.

Of everything which he could have mentioned, it raises “enforce or qualify the law.” The warning is not toward the execution of the law, but rather to avoid merely playing for the applause of the people.

This is no temptation to Angelo. He strikes me as too arrogant to want public applause. It is a warning for a temptation which will not take Angelo.

Now we close out the scene:

Angelo

[79] The heavens give safety to your purposes.

Escalus

[80] Lead forth and bring you back in happiness.

Duke

[81] I thank you. Fare you well.

He exits.

Escalus, ⌜to Angelo⌝

[82] I shall desire you, sir, to give me leave

[83] To have free speech with you; and it concerns me

[84] To look into the bottom of my place.

[85] A power I have, but of what strength and nature

[86] I am not yet instructed.

Angelo

[87] ’Tis so with me. Let us withdraw together,

[88] And we may soon our satisfaction have

[89] Touching that point.

Escalus

[90] I’ll wait upon your Honor.

They exit

Angelo’s reference to the “heavens” (79) could be perfunctory. Every Elizabethan would have believed that stars and planets had real influence in human affairs (like gravity or radiation would seem to us).

Of all things, Angelo wishes “safety” upon the Duke. The Duke will have to act to bring safety to his purpose and to save a man’s life from Angelo’s rule.

Escalus’ wish will come true, the Duke will gain happiness.

It then ends with Angelo asking Escalus, what power do I have and how do I execute it. Again, this underscores Escalus being the better choice. Although it is not yet disclosed, the question would be, Why choose Angelo when a better is present and available?

Measure for Measure Act 1, Scene 1a

17 Thursday Nov 2022

Posted by memoirandremains in Shakespeare

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Measure for Measure, Play analysis, poem, Shakespeare

Measure for Measure has provoked a rather mixed appraisal among critics. While the play hinges on a very improbable plot point, it raises questions of morality in a rather pointed manner. I have been fascinated by this play and want to think it through

Scene 1

Enter Duke, Escalus, Lords, ⌜and Attendants.⌝

Duke

[1] Escalus.

Escalus

[2] My lord.

Duke

[3] Of government the properties to unfold

[4] Would seem in me t’ affect speech and discourse,

[5] Since I am put to know that your own science

[6] Exceeds, in that, the lists of all advice

[7] My strength can give you. Then no more remains

[8] But that, to your sufficiency, as your worth is able,

[9] And let them work. The nature of our people,

[10] Our city’s institutions, and the terms

[11] For common justice, you’re as pregnant in

[12] As art and practice hath enrichèd any

[13] That we remember. There is our commission,

⌜He hands Escalus a paper.⌝

[14] From which we would not have you warp.—Call

[15] hither,

[16] I say, bid come before us Angelo.

⌜An Attendant exits.⌝

[17] What figure of us think you he will bear?

[18] For you must know, we have with special soul

[19] Elected him our absence to supply,

[20] Lent him our terror, dressed him with our love,

[21] And given his deputation all the organs

[22] Of our own power. What think you of it?

Escalus

[23] If any in Vienna be of worth

[24] To undergo such ample grace and honor,

[25] It is Lord Angelo.

This introductory scene is all exposition, typically the dullest part of a story. Let us consider how Shakespeare handles this.

First, the entry of the characters.

Duke

[1] Escalus.

Escalus

[2] My lord.

We would have the advantage of seeing the way the men are dressed. But the costumes alone would only convey a limited amount of information. This interaction is necessary in any conversation, the two people acknowledge one-another.

We also learn that one character is named “Escalus” and the other character is more important, he is address, “My lord.”

The Duke (we do not necessarily know exactly what his status before this speech):

Duke

[3] Of government the properties to unfold

[4] Would seem in me t’ affect speech and discourse,

[5] Since I am put to know that your own science

[6] Exceeds, in that, the lists of all advice

[7] My strength can give you. Then no more remains

[8] But that, to your sufficiency, as your worth is able,

[9] And let them work. The nature of our people,

[10] Our city’s institutions, and the terms

[11] For common justice, you’re as pregnant in

[12] As art and practice hath enrichèd any

[13] That we remember.

Details

[3] Of government the properties to unfold

[4] Would seem in me t’ affect speech and discourse,

There is no need for me to explain [unfold] how our government works. To explain that to you would be an affectation.

[5] Since I am put to know that your own science

[6] Exceeds, in that, the lists of all advice

[7] My strength can give you.

Your “science” is your knowledge. You already know more about the government than I could tell you. This particular element is not a significant point in the remainder of the play, so one could see this as perhaps a slight misstep. On the other hand, the Duke is about to put someone else in charge of the state while the Duke leaves. Perhaps we can understand this as flattery meant to soften the fact that another will be given the reigns and not Escalus.

Then no more remains

[8] But that, to your sufficiency, as your worth is able,

[9] And let them work. The nature of our people,

[10] Our city’s institutions, and the terms

[11] For common justice, you’re as pregnant in

[12] As art and practice hath enrichèd any

[13] That we remember.

He continues on with the praise of Escalus. But here we have our first pun –which is not apparent on the first encounter as it will be later. Escalus is “pregnant/in art and practice.” This play will turn upon the question of pregnancy, art (skill) and practice. Also, Escalus is “enriched” in this knowledge. And to “know” something also has double meaning.

The Duke continues:

There is our commission,

⌜He hands Escalus a paper.⌝

[14] From which we would not have you warp.—Call

[15] hither,

[16] I say, bid come before us Angelo.

The Duke gives instruction to Escalus and tells him he may not vary anything in the direction. The irony here is the question of varying from the strict application of the law is the main moral quandary of this play. Escalus reads the paper and the Duke continues:

⌜An Attendant exits.⌝

[17] What figure of us think you he will bear?

[18] For you must know, we have with special soul

[19] Elected him our absence to supply,

[20] Lent him our terror, dressed him with our love,

[21] And given his deputation all the organs

[22] Of our own power. What think you of it?

This information which Escalus does not have and which he needs. Also, this is all we need to know about the circumstance to permit the play to get going. The Duke asks Escalus whether he agrees with this decision. This allows us to learn this point of exposition, but it is not given mere talk so the play can get going.

It also sets up a dramatic question which underlies the remainder of the play, Is Angelo able to handle this power.

We then here the answer:

Escalus

[23] If any in Vienna be of worth

[24] To undergo such ample grace and honor,

[25] It is Lord Angelo.

There is an interesting ambiguity here. If any be worthy is Angelo. Does this mean that Angelo is the best or that no one is worthy.

Measure for Measure, Human Nature, and Original Sin

26 Friday Feb 2021

Posted by memoirandremains in Shakespeare

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

39 Articles, Measure for Measure, Original Sin, poem, Poetry, Rhetoric, Shakespeare, Theology

Claudio to Lucio

From too much liberty, my Lucio, liberty.

As surfeit is the father of much fast,

So every scope by the immoderate use

Turns to restraint. Our natures do pursue,

Like rats that ravin down their proper bane,

A thirsty evil, and when we drink, we die.

Measure for Measure, Act I, ii, 122-127.

These lines are fascinating from a few perspectives. First, they present a theme (perhaps the theme) of the play. But I am interested in the structure of this short argument, and it works both make a logical case and an affective case. It would be hard to make such a compressed and persuasive argument in such few words.

Background on the lines.

Claudio is being led through the street as a prisoner. Lucio, a friend, sees him and asks what he has done. Lucio has been making sexually charged jokes about prostitutes and disease with some acquaintances and with a pimp and a madam.

Claudio has been arrested for fornication. He got his fiancée pregnant (they were holding off on a dowery increase). The very strict and straightlaced interim ruler has enforced a law which the Duke (now “absent”) had allowed to go unheeded.

Claudio has been taken for the excess of his sexual behavior. Interestingly, Angelo, the interim ruler will face his own sexual politics and will be caught in the same vein as Claudio.

This short speech consists of three elements: First, a direct, albeit cryptic answer:

From too much liberty, my Lucio, liberty.

Second: an observation of the general movement of human life. This is the pattern I followed to be destroyed:

As surfeit is the father of much fast,

So every scope by the immoderate use

Turns to restraint.

Third: an explanation of the psychological process which gives rise to the pattern of human behavior.

Our natures do pursue,

Like rats that ravin down their proper bane,

A thirsty evil, and when we drink, we die.

First, the answer:

Question (Lucio):

Why, how now, Claudio? Whence comes this restraint?

Answer:

From too much liberty, my Lucio, liberty.

Lucio does not know what this means and will directly ask if it was murder.

The line is well constructed:

From too much LIBerty, my LUcio, LIBerty.

I’m not sure what to do with the other syllables: The accent could fall any of the other words, thus giving a different nuance of meaning. Why is clear is the alliteration on the L (and m: much, my). The L will drop out of the rest of the speech underscoring the use here.

The answer is ironic: he speaks of liberty and that is precisely what he does not have. The nature of the liberty is unclear.

The characters have just been speaking of the bawdy houses being torn down, so the background of liberty and immorality in play. Liberty and constraint will be a theme which will work out.

In the next scene, the Duke will explain himself to a friar. There were many laws which the Duke had failed to enforce. He has left his position so that Angelo can reinstate and apply those laws. He explains the effect his failure to enforce laws has had:

For terror, not to use – in time the rod

More mocked than feared – so our decrees,

Dead to infliction, to themselves are dead,

And liberty plucks justice by the nose,

The baby beats the nurse, and quiet athwart

Goes all decorum

I.3. xxvii-xxxii.

So a liberty which counters order and justice is an issue which the play will consider.

Second, the observation:

This is stated in the form of a natural law, like gravity:

As surfeit is the father of much fast,

So every scope by the immoderate use

Turns to restraint.

Claudio notes a principle of human life: an excess ends in its opposite so as to bring balance. This principle of balance is a theme throughout Shakespeare and takes its origin from the Galen theory of humors and the need to balance humors in the body.

The physician’s task was to diagnose which humor was out of balance; treatment then focused on restoring equilibrium by diet or by reducing the offending, out-of-balance humor by evacuating it.

(For the theory in Shakespeare see here: ):

This statement of a natural principle and pattern is exactly 2.5 lines long. It will be matched by another line of 2.5 lines.

There is a light alliteration which holds the lines together: S & F: Surfeit, Scope, Father- Fast. The R in the final word will tie these lines to the following.

The use of the word father is ironic: Claudio’s “fast”, his imprisonment is because he is a father.

And so far we have moral principle: excessive liberty leads to restraint. A principle of medicine and psychology: when one aspect of human life (a humor) is in excess, a contrary principle must be put into place to bring balance.

This leads to a question: If balance and order are the good which we should seek to achieve, then what would bring a human being to act beyond moderation?

Third: The psychological process:

Our natures do pursue,

Like rats that ravin down their proper bane,

A thirsty evil, and when we drink, we die.

This is a deeply Christian observation. It has to do with the concept of original sin. Original sin is often reduced to, guilt for a wrong I did not commit. (See, Finnegans Wake). Article 9 of the 39 Articles of the Church of England reads:

Original sin is not found merely in the following of Adam’s example (as the Pelagians foolishly say). It is rather to be seen in the fault and corruption which is found in the nature of every person who is naturally descended from Adam. The consequence of this is that man is far gone from his original state of righteousness. In his own nature he is predisposed to evil, the sinful nature in man always desiring to behave in a manner contrary to the Spirit. In every person born into this world there is fund this predisposition which rightly deserves God’s anger and condemnation. This infection within man’s nature persists even within those who are regenerate. This desire of the sinful nature, which in Greek is called fronema sarkos and is variously translated the wisdom or sensuality or affection or desire of the sinful nature, is not under control of God’s law. Although there is no condemnation for those that believe and are baptized, nevertheless the apostle states that any such desire is sinful.

Look back at Claudio’s explanation: the fault springs from our “nature”. Now consider carefully the article:

It is rather to be seen in the fault and corruption which is found in the nature of every person who is naturallydescended from Adam. The consequence of this is that man is far gone from his original state of righteousness. In his own nature he is predisposed to evil, the sinful nature in man always desiring to behave in a manner contrary to the Spirit…. This infection within man’s nature persists even within those who are regenerate. This desire of the sinful nature,

Our “natures pursue” their own destruction by a compulsion “man is always desiring”.

Our nature is like a rat – which is a striking image – that ravin: ravin is an act of rapine, it is a greedy, thoughtless criminal desire and action – ravin down poison: a “proper bane,” that is, my own poison, the poison that is “proper” to me. It is a “thirsty evil”: it is never satisfied, never quenched. Moreover, this desire is such that fulfilling it brings its own destruction:

When we drink, we die.

Musically, the lines are held together by the use of R which picks up the R in restraint found in Lucio’s question and in the middle of Claudio’s answer:

Restraint – restraint – rats that ravin.

We have pursue-proper. And finally, drink-die.

The use of this imagery to illustrate and explain the psychological process which leads to self-destruction is very effective. It would have even more to the point for the original audience, who were faced constantly with the menace and evil of filthy rats.

There is one final point in this observation: Shakespeare is condemning the audience along with the character’s self-condemnation. He is making a categorical statement about humanity: Our nature. When we drink, we die.

Which means that as we read this, we are drawn into the scope of the play. It is our nature, our drinking, our death.