Use these links to go
[CHAPTER FIVE
THE DARK COMEDIES
All's Well That Ends Well
and
Measure for Measure]
- 254 -
- - - II - - -
If the ending of All's Well That Ends Well is not as emphatically happy and optimistic as could be wished for in a comedy, the play does at least show a clear movement from death to regeneration and from disorder to order, with Bertram's sterile, unproductive sexual promiscuity being brought under control. Disorder and sexual licence are also important in Measure for Measure, but the tenor of this play is even further from the comic norm than that of All's Well That Ends Well: Coleridge thought that the 'comic and tragic parts equally border on the μίσητόν, - the one being disgusting, the other horrible', 5.51 and Brook sees this as an essential aspect of the play's staging:
This is the disgusting, stinking world of medieval Vienna. The darkness of the world is absolutely necessary to the meaning of the play: Isabella's plea for grace has far more meaning in this Dostoevskian setting than it would in lyrical comedy's never-never land. When this play is prettily staged, it is meaningless - it demands an absolutely convincing roughness and dirt. 5.52
While I agree that the unpleasant features of the play must not be
- 255 -
ignored, they should not be so stressed as to distort the resolution: as in All's Well That Ends Well, the sexually disordered state of the play's community moves towards order in the final scene, with the marriages of Claudio, Angelo and Lucio bringing at least a facade of order to previous sexual licence. Nevertheless, the mercy which Vincentio dispenses as the play draws to a close could also be construed as self-defeating, taking us back to the play's opening scenes, where, through lack of enforcement, the law is 'More mock'd, then fear'd' (I.iii.27). 5.53 The central concern of the play, the conflict between mercy and justice, is suggested by its title alluding to the gospels: as observed by Brennan, 'In almost every scene of the play appeals for mercy are juxtaposed with definitions of the nature of justice', 5.54 and so despite their disregarding the need for law enforcement delineated earlier, the Duke's judgements at the end should be seen as a triumph of mercy over justice, the play's crowning glory. This victory has not been lightly won, and I must agree with Westlund that in Measure for Measure there is 'conflict of an intensity never found in the other comedies, and rarely surpassed in other of Shakespeare's dramas'. 5.55
'Measure for measure' is an ambiguous phrase, since it can be associated with the application of strict justice in the Mosaic law:
Therefore thine eie shal haue no cõpassion (but) life for life, eie for eie, tothe for tothe, hand for hand, fote for fote,
(Deuteronomy 19:21)
while also being an exhortation to mercy in the New Testament:
Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful. Iudge not, and ye shal not be iudged .... Giue, and it shalbe giuen vnto you: a good measure, pressed downe, shaken together & running ouer shal men giue ĩto your bosome for with what measure ye mette, with the same shal men mette to you againe.
(Luke 6:36-38)
Although this maxim, 'Iudge not, and ye shal not be iudged', had a general validity, Shakespeare's particular concern in Measure for Measure was its application to those in authority rather than to οί πολλοί. The play's opening scene makes its concern with government, justice and mercy obvious: we learn that, for reasons not disclosed, the Duke of Vienna is to leave his state in the hands of his deputy, Angelo, who is given absolute power:
Mortallitie and Mercie in Vienna
Liue in thy tongue, and heart ....
- 256 -
...
... your scope is as mine owne,
So to inforce, or qualifie the Lawes
As to your soule seemes good ....
(I.i.44-45 and 64-66)
The choice of Angelo is a curious one, for although the Duke expresses his utmost confidence in Escalus -
Of Gouernment, the properties to vnfold,
Would seeme in me t'affect speech & discourse:
...
... The nature of our People,
Our Cities Institutions, and the Termes
for Common Iustice, y'are as pregnant in
As Art, and practise, hath inriched any
That we remember ...
(I.i.3-4 and 9-13)
- he is more reserved about Angelo, of whom he asks Escalus,
What figure of vs thinke you, he will beare.
For you must know, we haue with special soule
Elected him our absence to supply;
Lent him our terror, drest him with our loue,
And giuen his Deputation all the Organs
Of our owne powre: What thinke you of it?
(I.i.16-21)
Escalus, naturally, supports his Duke's choice of deputy, but with this seed of doubt once sown, the audience has little cause for optimism when Angelo attempts to pass up his commission:
Let there be some more test, made of my mettle,
Before so noble, and so great a figure
Be stamp't vpon it.
(I.i.48-50)
Vincentio's departure leaves a gap at the top of the Viennese hierarchy, a sure formula for the creation of disorder because, however much he may extol Angelo's virtues, authority cannot simply be passed from one man to the next: a deputy will always have to establish authority in his own right. When Escalus and Angelo leave the stage at the end of the scene, they are still unsure of themselves:
[Esc.]
A powre I haue, but of what strength and nature,
I am not yet instructed.
Ang.
'Tis so with me: Let vs with-draw together,
And we may soone our satisfaction haue
Touching that point.
(I.i.79-83)
- 257 -
Shakespeare could as well have addressed the Duke's question, 'What thinke you of it?', to the audience: the possibility that Angelo will fail to meet the exacting standard required of a ruler has been strongly suggested. Such a situation in a play called Measure for Measure, with an inexperienced deputy having the dispensation of 'Mortallitie and Mercy', and the power 'to inforce, or qualifie the Lawes', brings Angelo to the centre of attention, with his every move being watched.
Claudio refers to Angelo as 'the demy-god (Authority)' (I.ii.112), and Lever remarks that 'No sarcasm need be inferred' in this description, 5.56 since those in authority 'were considered to function as deputies of God on earth'. 5.57 As such, rulers were entrusted with the keeping of public order and morality, and in so doing they would have the right to administer justice or mercy as they saw fit - a point made by Vincentio when telling Angelo 'to inforce, or qualifie the Lawes | As to your soule seemes good'. The incredulous reaction of Pompey, Overdone and Lucio to Angelo's decrees verges on defiance, making them agents of disorder in Viennese society: Pompey, despite the proclamation, assures Overdone, 'you neede not change your Trade' (I.ii.99-100), and Lucio makes it his business to see that Claudio's life should not 'bee thus foolishly lost, at a game of ticke-tacke' (I.ii.180-181). In their initial conflicts with authority in Vienna, Pompey and Overdone are comic figures, incorrigible in their vices, while Lucio serves as an ironic commentator, seeing the bad in others but incapable of seeing it in himself. Claudio, by way of contrast, is uncritical, submissive to his fate, accepting Angelo's sentence as authoritative and just:
The words of heauen; on whom it will, it will,
On whom it will not (soe) yet still 'tis iust.
(I.ii.114-115)
This dissociates Claudio from the forces of disorder in the play, making his present plight a travesty of justice, since Pompey, Overdone and Lucio, all of whom advocate sexual promiscuity, are still free to ply their trade. The condemnation of Claudio is seen to be even more unjust when it is realised that far from being promiscuous, he was faithful to his intended wife, and that although their marriage lacked the ceremony 'Of outward Order' (I.ii.138), it was legally recognised as binding, a sponsalia per verba de praesenti, 5.58 as indicated in Claudio's description, 'vpon a true contract | I got possession of Iulietas bed' (I.ii.134-135). The precise nature of the contract is important, because
- 258 -
it determines our attitude towards Claudio and also Angelo, the man responsible for apprehending him. Claudio's conflict with authority is based on an incorrect reading of ecclesiastical law which could lead to his being executed. This places the audience firmly on the side of mercy in the rapidly developing conflict with justice.
Claudio suggests that Angelo's insistence on justice may be 'the fault and glimpse of newnes' (I.ii.147), or to show that 'He can command' (I.ii.151), or perhaps it is merely 'for a name' (I.ii.158), to establish himself in authority. All of these suggestions obliquely hint at Angelo's inadequacy as a ruler, but miss the true motive for his unreasonable stance, revealed by the Duke: Vienna is in its present state of disorder because the 'strict Statutes, and most biting Laws' (I.iii.19) have long ceased to be enforced, so that
... libertie, plucks Iustice by the nose;
The Baby beates the Nurse, and quite athwart
Goes all decorum.
(I.iii.29-31)
In these images of disorder the use of the word 'libertie' recalls Claudio's description of his crime to Lucio, 'too much liberty' (I.ii.117), and this provides a link between the sexual liberty witnessed in the second scene and what the Duke considers to be the principal manifestation of disorder in his state. The attack on sexual offenders is an attempt to bring the Viennese populace under control, restoring order. It is on these grounds that Angelo's violent proclamation, 'All howses in the Suburbs of Vienna must bee pluck'd downe' (I.ii.88-89), has to be justified, and, indeed, the sentence passed on Claudio. If the audience has not already had its attention fixed on Angelo, the Duke now ensures that he will be the centre of focus by revealing that he is to be the subject of an interesting experiment:
... Lord Angelo is precise,
Stands at a guard with Enuie: scarce confesses
That his blood flowes: or that his appetite
Is more to bread then stone: hence shall we see
If power change purpose: what our Seemers be.
(I.iii.50-54)
This description of Angelo has a puritanical ring about it, and it amplifies what the Duke said earlier:
There is a kinde of Character in thy life,
- 259 -
That to th' observer, doth thy history
Fully vnfold ....
(I.i.28-30)
Lucio is one such observer, and his description to Isabella of the new deputy is further corroboration of Angelo's strict moral conduct, particularly in sexual matters, emphasised by an echo of the Duke's reference to his blood:
... Lord Angelo; A man, whose blood
Is very snow-broth: one, who neuer feeles
The wanton sting, and motions of the sence;
But doth rebate, and blunt his naturall edge
With profits of the minde: Studie, and fast.
(I.iv.57-61)
Angelo, from the descriptions so far provided, seems the ideal man to restore order to Vienna, since his austere life and his apparent lack of sexuality make it most unlikely that he will fall into the Duke's error of showing too much mercy to his libidinous subjects.
The position Angelo is forced to adopt in governing Vienna in the Duke's absence brings him into conflict with almost all of his subjects. the Duke's estimation of Angelo's character is an accurate one, for despite the substantial opposition to his decrees, the deputy remains firm in his resolve to have Claudio executed. He is motivated by a profound belief in the necessity of seeing the law rigorously upheld if order is to be maintained - something he had, no doubt, learnt from the Duke's rule of leniency:
We must not make a scar-crow of the Law,
Setting it vp to feare the Birds of prey,
And let it keepe one shape, till custome make it
Their pearch, and not their terror.
(II.i.1-4)
This is Angelo's opening gambit in the first major confrontation between justice and mercy in the play; there is no answer to the argument, but Escalus suggests moderation be exercised, firstly on the grounds of Claudio's 'most noble father' (II.i.7), that is, his respected position in society; and secondly he invokes the biblical maxim quoted earlier, 'Iudge not, and ye shal not be iudged' - all men are sinners and even the judge may be guilty of the offence he judges. Edward Forset made the same point, couched in terms particularly appropriate to Angelo, in A Comparative Discourse of the Bodies Natural and Politique (1606):
- 260 -
... Soveraignes through their naturall frailties, are subject as well to the imbecillitie of judgement, as also to sensuall and irrationall mocions, rising out of the infectious mudd of flesh and bloud .... 5.59
The argument holds no water: the judge's guilt is not the issue, and Angelo's reply is almost prophetic, as it turns out:
'Tis one thing to be tempted (Escalus)
Another thing to fall ....
...
You may not so extenuate his offence,
For I haue had such faults; but rather tell me
When I, that censure him, do so offend,
Let mine owne Iudgement patterne out my death,
And nothing come in partiall. Sir, he must dye.
(II.i.17-18)
The confrontation with Escalus shows us a man confident not only in the validity of his dispensation of justice, but also in his own virtue - a radical change from the Angelo of the first scene. Does 'power change purpose' here? I think not: Angelo's latent ability to rule had been noted by Vincentio, although Angelo himself was unaware of it; and as for the 'purpose', Angelo is doing no more than fulfil his commission, to 'strike home' (I.ii.41), restoring order where Vincentio had encouraged dissension by being lenient.
Angelo's puritanical outlook on life dictates his response to every situation: in his conflict with Escalus he is unbending in the major issue involving Claudio's life, but he is equally intolerant in small matters such as the deficiencies of Elbow, whose comic misuse of words forms 'an ironic commentary on Angelo's principles'. 5.60 Elbow is, in fact, a humorous parody of law enforcement. He refers to Pompey and Froth as 'precise villaines ... void of all prophanation in the world' (II.i.54-55), with the word 'precise' recalling the Duke's description of Angelo, who is indeed 'void of all prophanation'. The conflicting sense of the words applied to the prisoners, however, is comic: we detect an element of truth in the judgement that they are 'precise villaines', although the condemnation implied is overbearing in view of the crimes which have been committed. This is typical of Elbow's attitude to his charges: like Dogberry, he is fired with righteous indignation at any suggestion which might corrupt his own image, and he is outspoken in his censure of faults in others. His intolerance of the petty crimes of Froth and Pompey is an echo of Angelo's reaction to Juliet's pregnancy: all crimes must be rigorously sought out and punished. Despite the
- 261 -
similarity in their attitudes to sexual offences, Angelo and Elbow cannot communicate effectively, and while Escalus is amused by, and humours, the confused and incompetent Elbow, Angelo is merely impatient, dismissing Escalus' good natured aside abruptly:
Esc.
This comes off well: here's a wise Officer.
Ang.
Goe to: what quality are they of?
(II.i.57-58)
Angelo insists on a clarification of the case brought before him. Probably exasperated when this is not forthcoming, he stands by while Escalus continues the examination - but making his disapproval obvious when Escalus, still enjoying his patronage of Elbow, remarks 'Doe you heare how he misplaces?' (II.i.87), which meets with a rebuking silence from Angelo. This nagging conflict between Escalus and the deputy, their lack of common ground, points their different positions in the conflict between mercy and justice, making plain the stance we can expect from Angelo when he deals with the weightier issue of Claudio's guilt. Angelo's parting remark expresses the hope that Escalus will 'finde good cause to whip them all' (II.i.136) in his administration of justice. This is ignored by Escalus, who proceeds to dispense mercy, much to the comic satisfaction of Elbow, who once again provides a parodic comment:
Marry I thanke your worship for it: Thou seest thou wicked varlet now, what's come vpon thee. Thou art to continue now thou Varlet, thou art to continue.
(II.i.186-189)
Continuing in his trade is exactly what Pompey proposes to do:
I thanke your Worship for your good counsell; but I shall follow it as the lash and fortune shall better determine.
(II.i.249-251)
The open flouting of Escalus' authority is one of many levels at which conflict operates in this scene. The central issue is the conflict between mercy and justice, with justice represented by Angelo and Elbow, while mercy is espoused by Escalus. Throughout the scene the audience is invited to assess the relative merits of the arguments on both sides, inadvertently questioning their own attitudes as well. The position of Escalus in the conflict between mercy and justice is anomalous, since his function should be to support Angelo in enforcing the law. The disagreement between these two officials is all-embracing, manifesting itself not only in the serious issue of Claudio's execution, but also in
- 262 -
the lighter matter of Pompey and Froth. Elbow, although of limited capacity intellectually, is more aware than Escalus of the damage done to Viennese society by the loose morals it adopts, which introduces another level of conflict with humorous overtones - that between Elbow and his charges. Although the case presented by Elbow is obviously related to prostitution, Pompey's defence is so prolix as to obscure completely what little evidence is put forward, and the quest for justice is thwarted. There are some obvious parallels with Claudio's case, which this burlesques in its culminating accusation, 'Sir, she was respected with him, before he married her' (II.i.167-168). Confusion at this stage is several layers deep, but the irony shows through: while Pompey and his trade are not respected, Claudio is; and Pompey's defiant proposal of his solution to the problem of prostitution, 'to geld and splay all the youth of the City' (II.i.227-228), contrasts in its crudity of expression with Claudio's submissive attitude to justice. The conflict between the law and Pompey is reduced to an absurdity, but at the same time comparison is invited of Angelo's treatment of Claudio, with Escalus' treatment of Pompey, both defective, the one too strict, the other too lax.
Once Angelo has taken office as Vincentio's deputy he controls the affairs of state: by emphasising his puritanical stance, Shakespeare has provided a sound and credible basis on which to build the character of a stern, uncompromising judge. He is quite unmoved by both Escalus and the Provost in their pleas for Claudio to be spared, and this makes the death sentence the more terrible, because the more likely to be carried out. Angelo's confrontation with Isabella, then, will be keenly observed by the audience, since it must determine Claudio's fate. The outcome of the interview is unexpected: instead of the desired pardon, or what appears more likely, the confirmation of guilt and sentence, we see Angelo's resolve falter and his integrity crumble. The cause of this remarkable change in one of the central figures of the comedy needs to be examined.
Two things should strike us about Isabella when she first appears on the stage: firstly that she, like Angelo, lives by strict moral principles; and secondly that, unlike Angelo, she has a certain warmth and understanding, a sympathy for her fellow men. Her moral character is suggested by her intention of joining the 'Votarists of Saint Clare' (I.iv.5), as well as her indignant reaction when she thinks Lucio is ridiculing her: 'You doe blaspheme the good, in mocking me' (I.iv.38), while her generosity and warmth are evidenced in the 'vaine, though apt affection' (I.iv.48) she shows for her 'cousin' Juliet, and her
- 263 -
forthright solution to Claudio's problem, 'Oh, let him marry her' (I.iv.49). These two characteristics make her the ideal person to plead the cause of mercy before Angelo on Claudio's behalf. Another factor which influences the audience's expectations of how Isabella will cope in her interview with Angelo is her lack of confidence, which Lucio tries to minimise:
Isa.
My power? alas, I doubt.
Luc.
Our doubts are traitors
And makes vs loose the good we oft might win,
By fearing to attempt ....
(I.iv.77-79)
At the start of the interview Lucio provides the encouragement Isabella needs to continue her plea after Angelo's initial rebuff:
Giue't not ore so: to him againe, entreat him,
Kneele downe before him, hang vpon his gowne,
You are too cold ....
(II.ii.43-45)
After this she warms to her theme, and I disagree with editors who would have Lucio address the remainder of his remarks scattered through the scene to Isabella directly; they should rather be spoken as comic asides, since Isabella needs no further encouragement. We see her growing confidence expressed in her increasingly outspoken statements of her case after Lucio's first prompting:
Isab.
Must he needs die?
Ang.
Maiden, no remedie.
Isab.
Yes: I doe thinke that you might pardon him,
And neither heauen, nor man grieue at the mercy.
Ang.
I will not doe't.
(II.ii.48-51)
As the dialogue continues there is growing impatience on Angelo's part, and less cowering by Isabella:
Isab.
But can you if you would?
Ang.
Looke what I will not, that I cannot doe.
Isab.
But might you doe't & do the world no wrong
If so your heart were touch'd with that remorse,
As mine is to him?
Ang.
Hee's sentenc'd, tis too late.
(II.ii.51-55)
It is at this point that Lucio says, 'You are too cold' (II.ii.56), but, if he does address these words to Isabella, they are unnecessary, for
- 264 -
(I maintain), without pausing, she continues her attack, having detected the weakness of Angelo's unconvincing reply,
Too late? why no: I that doe speak a word
May call it againe ...,
(II.ii.57-58)
after which she proceeds with mounting passion to argue her case.
When Isabella first approaches Angelo, her high moral principles oblige her to justify her suit, and the conflict between her disapproval of Claudio's sin and her sisterly love is evident:
There is a vice that I most doe abhorre,
And most desire should meet the blow of Iustice;
For which I would not plead, but that I must,
For which I must not plead, but that I am
At warre, twixt will, and will not.
(II.ii.29-33)
This is a feeble opening, but worse is to follow, when she suggests that Angelo 'Condemne the fault, and not the actor of it' (II.ii.37); 5.61 and we may wonder at her lack of feeling for her brother when, with her trivial proposal trivially dismissed, she prepares to leave without further argument in his defence. Brown condemns Isabella on this point, saying she is 'a study in the repression of natural instinct in pursuit of a higher order of existence', 5.62 but this unsympathetic view ignores the inner conflict experienced by the aspiring nun, and it is precisely because Isabella's warmth, her understanding of humanity, holds sway that her natural instinct is not repressed, and she pleads for her brother despite and in contradiction of her 'pursuit of a higher order of existence'. She is no longer the submissive novice, but, angered by Angelo's high-handed, stubborn refusal even to contemplate the repealing of Claudio's sentence, her sympathy for the human condition displaces her high moral principles, and she argues the case for mercy cogently.
Angelo, unable to answer her argument directly, takes refuge behind the law: 'It is the Law, not I, condemne your brother' (II.ii.80). This removes the burden of showing mercy from Angelo to the law - or, as Skulsky puts it, 'submission to the tyranny of law means freedom from the caprice of tyranny'; 5.63 and then Angelo is quick to point out that the law can know no mercy if it is to serve the purpose for which it was ordained, keeping social order:
Isab.
Yet shew some pittie.
- 265 -
Ang.
I shew it most of all, when I show Iustice;
For then I pittie those I doe not know
Which a dismis'd offence, would after gaule
And doe him right, that answering one foule wrong
Liues not to act another.
(II.ii.100-105)
This is yet another statement of Angelo's guiding principle, that offences must be punished to maintain order, but Isabella finds the arbitrary nature of the process of justice galling, and cannot accept that it must be her brother who is to die for the benefit of society. So, in another attempt to sway Angelo, she unleashes with considerable vehemence a scathing attack on authority:
... man, proud man,
Drest in a little briefe authoritie,
Most ignorant of what he's most assur'd,
(His glassie Essence) like an angry Ape
Plaies such phantastique tricks before high heauen,
As makes the Angels weepe ....
(II.ii.118-123)
Angelo is taken aback by this outburst - 'Why doe you put these sayings vpon me?' (II.ii.134) is his petulant response - and Isabella crowns it with a peremptory demand:
... aske your heart what it doth know
That's like my brothers fault: if it confesse
A naturall guiltiness, such as is his,
Let it not sound a thought vpon your tongue
Against my brothers life.
(II.ii.138-142)
This is a much more forceful statement of the point she had made earlier at II.ii.63-66 (the possible guilt of the judge annulling his right to pass sentence), and we may attribute Isabella's change of tone to her warming to the theme of her conflict with Angelo. This is an important point: Escalus, before Isabella's entry, had put exactly the same argument to Angelo (at II.i.8-16), but neither this nor Isabella's first statement of it had influenced him in any way. It is Isabella's angry outburst, the result of her conflict with Angelo, that has made the impact on him because it reveals her depth of feeling, and the intensity of her emotion arouses his dormant or suppressed sexuality:
Shee speakes, and 'tis such sence
That my Sence breeds with it ...
(II.ii.142-143)
- 266 -
Angelo is moved not so much by what Isabella has said - he has heard it all before - as by the utmost passion with which she now puts her case.
The conflict between Isabella and Angelo centres on the dispensation of justice and mercy, and the responsibility resting on those in authority for achieving the correct balance between the two. Angelo's reaction at the close of their first meeting leaves Lucio and Isabella satisfied that their point has been made, while in fact, the conflict has only been deepened by the addition of a third, sexually motivated dimension. The confrontation opens with Isabella struggling to overcome her sexual scruples in taking Claudio's part, and ends with Angelo in conflict with his sexual urges: the antagonists have inner, repressed aspects of their characters brought to the surface during their meeting. The layers of 'chastity and self-control', behind which Aronson suggests they have been hiding 'their incomplete, crippled personalities', 5.64 have been removed: we should not see them as inconsistently or ambiguously portrayed, but rather as people trying to come to terms with their instinctual drives. Angelo's attitude towards sex is perverted. Lucio must be placed with Pompey as an agent of disorder because of his immoral attitude to sex, but even he can see the beauty of a sexual relationship and describe the wonders of procreation in a passage of fine imagery:
Your brother, and his louer haue embrac'd;
As those that feed, grow full: as blossoming Time
That from the seednes, the bare fallow brings
To teeming foyson: euen so her plenteous wombe
Expresseth his full Tilth, and husbandry.
(I.iv.40-44)
There is an unmistakable linking in this speech of sexual activity - Claudio's with Juliet in particular - to fecundity and regeneration: 'blossoming Time' and 'seednes' result in the 'teeming foyson' of Nature's 'plenteous wombe'. Angelo does not understand this aspect of procreation. To him, by contrast, Juliet is merely 'the Fornicatresse' (II.ii.23) and her relationship with Claudio is 'foule wrong' (II.ii.104), illicit sex in general being 'filthy vices' (II.iv.42). In keeping with this, Angelo's sexual attraction for Isabella is seen by him as something evil, to be repressed, rather than something beautiful, to be pursued in an open, honest manner:
... oh fie, fie, fie:
What dost thou? or what art thou Angelo?
Dost thou desire her fowly, for those things
That make her good? ...
- 267 -
...
... most dangerous
Is that temptation, that doth goad vs on
To sinne, in louing vertue ....
(II.ii.172-175 and 181-183)
Ironically it is Angelo's moral rigour in the case of Claudio that forces him to behave immorally: he cannot countenance mercy and so he cannot woo Isabella as a lover, although his sexual craving for her still demands gratification. His need is overpowering:
... oh, heauens
Why doe's my bloud thus muster to my heart,
Making both it vnable for it selfe,
And dispossessing all my other parts
Of necessary fitnesse?
(II.iv.19-23)
Angelo is well aware of the conflict between his outward moral appearance - 'idle plume', 'false seeming' (II.iv.11 and 15) - and his inner sexual urges, but he is not prepared to abandon either:
Blood, thou art blood,
Let's write good Angell on the Deuills horne
'Tis not the Deuills Crest ....
(II.iv.15-17)
The imagery here perfectly conveys the conflicting aspects of Angelo's situation: his reference to blood directly contradicts Lucio's early assessment of his sexual drive - his 'blood | Is very snow-broth' - and provides the motivation for his proposed course of action, to give the external appearance of a 'good Angell', while hiding beneath this his evil nature, his 'Deuills horne'. The latter is not merely 'the part unmistakably revealing the devil's identity', 5.65 but it is also phallic, an image of Angelo's sexual urges. Angelo, by failing to respond to Isabella's plea for mercy, has brought himself into open conflict with her on the abstract level of justice versus mercy. His inability to deal satisfactorily with the conflict between his moral exterior and his immoral inner desires intensifies the conflict with Isabella, reducing it to the concrete level of a desire for physical gratification on one side, opposed to a strong repugnance to this on the other.
When Angelo confronts Isabella with his proposition, both are forced to jeopardise their former positions in the conflict between justice and mercy. On Angelo's part the reversal stems from a deliberate inconsistency, in that while he condemns Claudio to death for fornication, he
- 268 -
is prepared to commit the same offence himself:
Ang.
Plainlie conceiue I loue you.
Isa.
My brother did loue Iuliet,
And you tell me that he shall die for't.
Ang.
He shall not Isabell if you giue me loue.
(II.iv.140-143)
Whereas Angelo defiantly asserts his inconsistency, Isabella, aware of the conflicting demands being made on her, tries to reconcile her plea for mercy with her rejection of Angelo's bribe, the acceptance of which would save Claudio's life:
Isa.
Ignominie in ransome, and free pardon
Are of two houses: lawfull mercie.
Is nothing kin to fowle redemption.
Ang.
You seem'd of late to make the Law a tirant,
And rather prou'd the sliding of your brother
A merriment, then a vice.
Isa.
Oh pardon me my Lord, it oft fals out
To haue, what we would haue, We speake not what we meane;
I something do excuse the thing I hate,
For his aduantage that I deerly loue.
(II.iv.111-120)
Isabella does not approve of what Claudio has done, and if we had not deduced it before, she now declares that her motivation for pleading his case is her love for him. Her demanding mercy does not condone sexual licence, and so her position, that of both pleading for Claudio and rejecting Angelo's sexual advances, is not, in fact, inconsistent. What Isabella has to justify, what she desperately needs to believe, is the precept which dictates her response to Angelo: 'More then our Brother, is our Chastitie' (II.iv.184), which brings to the surface the conflict between her high moral principles, demanding sexual purity, and her sympathy for erring humanity. Isabella's solution to this dilemma is to transfer the conflict, and hence the dramatic interest, from Angelo to Claudio: because she loves her brother she seeks his approval of her actions, since she will be indirectly responsible for his death. She invites Claudio to endorse her decision.
Her confrontation with Claudio brings the conflict between mercy and justice to a climax. At first, Claudio is prepared to accept death rather than see his sister defiled, and we may attribute his initial fortitude to the Duke's advice to him, 'Be absolute for death' (III.i.5), which enables him to declare,
- 269 -
If I must die,
I will encounter darknesse as a bride,
And hugge it in mine armes.
(III.i.82-84)
This is the response Isabella expected from Claudio when she revealed to him Angelo's conditional offer of mercy: his firm 'Thou shalt not do't' (III.i.102) removes from her the responsibility for declining the offer, a weight too great for her to bear. When, after a few moment's contemplation of the 'restlesse violence' (III.i.124) to which a departed soul may be subjected, Claudio is reduced to begging for his life, Isabella responds with utmost vehemence:
Oh you beast,
Oh faithlesse Coward, oh dishonest wretch,
Wilt thou be made a man, out of my vice?
...
Ile pray a thousand praiers for thy death,
No word to saue thee.
(III.i.135-137 and 145-146)
The sight of Claudio reduced to pleading for his life is unpleasant, but this heartless tirade from his sister is more so. The cost of showing mercy - the sacrifice of her chastity - is too dear for Isabella; she now sides with justice in calling for her brother's death, not because of his fornication, but because of his cowardice. Isabella cannot cope with the conflict between justice and mercy when it makes particular demands on her, and her reaction is this hysterical rejection of her brother; Claudio cannot cope with the demand that he sacrifice his life for his sister's chastity and this precipitates his conflict with her; Angelo cannot cope with the conflicting demands of his moral exterior and his inner, immoral sexual urges. In each case the main function of conflict has been to reveal for the audience the worst side of the principal characters, Angelo, Isabella and Claudio; and we may note that all of these many-sided conflicts revolve around the underlying motif of disorder in the play.
The premise of Claudio's reasoning is that Angelo, 'being so wise' (III.i.112), would not commit a serious crime, and so what he proposes to Isabella must be a reasonable course of action:
Has he affections in him,
That thus can make him bite the Law by th' nose,
When he would force it? Sure it is no sinne,
Or of the deadly seuen it is the least.
(III.i.107-110)
- 270 -
The fault in this argument is that Angelo is not 'so wise': he is not the ideal head of state found in a romantic comedy, and he is implicated in the consequences of his over-zealous attempt at re-establishing order in Vienna. Claudio sees Angelo 'bite the Law by th' nose', a deliberate recalling on Shakespeare's part of the Duke's earlier reference to disorder in the state - 'libertie, plucks Iustice by the nose' - and so we find that Angelo, far from restoring order, has only intensified disorder. Although overt sexual activity in the stews and brothels may have been curbed by imprisoning Overdone, this is not a permanent solution; but more seriously, Angelo himself has become an agent of disorder, and his example influences Claudio's moral judgements.
Rossiter remarks that 'the Duke's absconding from office must be taken as symbolic shorthand for the abrogation of 'degree' and order', 5.66 and this is exactly why Angelo's attempts at governing are doomed to failure. The maintenance of law and order is the Duke's responsibility, and he refuses to accept this once he has lost control; instead, he hands over power to an inexperienced deputy at precisely the time when his own experience and judgement are most needed to bring a chaotic situation under control. Worse than this, the Duke indicates that he is aware that Angelo is not the ideal man to act as his deputy, and that his handing over of power is to be a test for Angelo; furthermore, the Duke is aware of Angelo's unjust behaviour towards Mariana in not honouring their marriage contract. 5.67 The blame for the disorder in Vienna at large, and also in the relationships between Angelo, Isabella and Claudio, must lie with the Duke: he is not the perfect figurehead of romantic comedy any more than Angelo is. Despite his faults, however, he remains the ultimate power in Vienna, and when he sees how badly awry his plan to test Angelo has gone, he must step in to recover control.
According to Brennan, 'Vienna is such a society of extremes that hardly any character occupies by nature that middle ground which was for Shakespeare the source of harmony and fertility'. 5.68 Exceptions to this cautious statement are the Provost and Escalus, always conscious of their obligation to authority and to humanity in general. Claudio and Juliet are the closest we come to 'harmony and fertility' among the remaining characters, but their condemnation by Angelo negates their procreative function and destroys the harmony of their relationship. Angelo, Isabella. Lucio and the bawds all have extreme views on sexual matters - either excessively puritanical or licentious. In a community like this harmony does not come easily, but has to be imposed by force, and it is
- 271 -
only once the Duke sees that Claudio's life is likely to be forfeited in vain that he shoulders his responsibility and takes decisive action to restore order in Vienna. This immediately brings him into conflict with the forces of disorder, Pompey and Lucio, who stand for sexual liberty. The consequences of their attitude is a proliferation of immorality in the suburbs of Vienna, but their openness in sexual matters is a refreshing contrast to the inhibited behaviour of Angelo and Isabella, particularly as Shakespeare's treatment of the former is comic, the latter serious.
Despite their more healthy approach to sex, the Duke cannot allow the bawds of Vienna to continue their practice of 'filthie vice' (III.ii.22) if order is to be restored; but his condemnation of Pompey is qualified:
Take him to prison Officer:
Correction, and Instruction must both worke
Ere this rude beast will profit.
(III.ii.30-32)
The Duke's punishment is to be constructive, aiming at the rehabilitation of the criminal: for the first time in the play we see a possible resolution of the conflict between justice and mercy - justice seasoned with mercy in such a way that justice does not lose its hold on offenders, as it did during Vincentio's years of lenient rule. Escalus, on the other hand, has learnt from the intransigence of Pompey that his former merciful approach to offenders will not do, since 'Double, and trebble admonition' (III.ii.187) have had no effect. He is won over to Angelo's point of view, at least in Overdone's case: 'This would make mercy sweare and play the Tirant' (III.ii.188-189); instead of mercy, Overdone now experiences the harshness of law and is sent to prison for her crimes. She is not heard of again, and we must assume that no pardon for her is forthcoming; Pompey, on the other hand, is seen to be penitent and so benefits from the mercy shown to him, to such an extent that he abandons the forces of disorder and crosses to the side of the law, becoming Abhorson's assistant.
The case of Lucio is not so simple. To some extent, Pompey's ignorance and low status in society mitigate his crimes, but Lucio, as we may judge by the language he uses, is a more educated man and ought to know better. He has committed a crime similar to Claudio's: 'Mistris Kate Keepe-downe was with childe by him in the Dukes time, he promis'd her marrage' (III.ii.193-194). Unlike Claudio, however, Lucio deepens his conflict with the law and increases his guilt by refusing to marry Kate, a comic parody of Angelo's affair with Mariana. His actions are
- 272 -
irresponsible: we know from what he has said when informing Isabella about Claudio's affair with Juliet that he is aware of the beauties inherent in sexual relationships, and this makes him more culpable. In his conversations with the disguised Duke he refuses to acknowledge the higher purpose of generation, and comically slanders the ruler in an effort to reduce virtue to his own level of vice:
He had some feeling of the sport, hee knew the seruice, and that instructed him to mercie.
(III.ii.115-117)
Both in his capacity as the Duke, and in his disguise as a friar, Vincentio is an advocate of law and order, a fact ignored by Lucio, who refers to Claudio's crime in terms which leave no doubt that he sees no crime at all - 'the rebellion of a Cod-peece', 'filling a bottle with a Tunne-dishe', and 'vntrussing' (III.ii.110, 166 and 173), all calculated insolence when spoken to a representative of the church, which must disapprove of such actions. He even boasts of his own sexual exploits:
Lucio.
I was once before him for getting a Wench with childe
Duke.
Did you such a thing?
Luc.
Yes marrie did I; but I was faine to forswear it, They would else haue married me to the rotten Medler.
(IV.iii.167-172)
The irony of Lucio's position makes his belligerent assertion of his sexual crimes, which parallel those of Angelo and Claudio, comic: he boasts unwittingly to the very man who has the power to punish him. It is this type of attitude and behaviour that the law cannot afford to ignore if harmony and order are to be maintained in the state, and so Lucio is finally punished for his offences, whereas Claudio and Angelo, both of whom are repentant, are forgiven.
The final scene of the play brings various conflicts to a head: Isabella gets her chance to confront Angelo with his corruption in public, and once guilt has been irrefutably established, mercy and justice are made to unite in dealing with the offenders. Having seen the way Angelo has behaved while power was his, the audience eagerly anticipates the moment when the true figurehead of authority, Vincentio, resumes his role as Duke of Vienna; this might be expected to herald the return of order and justice to the community. Angelo, naturally enough, refutes the claims made against him by Isabella: the Duke could, at this stage, reveal his own side of the story and proceed to pronounce
- 273 -
judgement. Instead, he persists in his trial of the character of Angelo, handing power back to him:
... Come cosen Angelo,
In this I'll be impartiall: be you Iudge
Of your owne Cause ....
(V.i.167-169)
This move of the Duke's heightens dramatic tension, for the audience's expectations of justice are thwarted just when they are most intense; and worse than this, Angelo falls further and further into degradation: knowing his guilt, he plans to use his position as judge in his own case to conceal it:
[Ang.]
Let me haue way, my Lord
To finde this practise out.
Duke.
I, with my heart,
And punish them to your height of pleasure.
(V.i.237-239)
The handing of power back to Angelo to deal with the claims made against him creates a situation not allowed in law, a fact emphasised by the Duke's ironical remark, 'In this I'll be impartiall', as he relinquishes his authority to Angelo. Yale identifies the problem for us: 'the proposition that a man may not judge his own case is a principal ingredient of the basic idea of justice'. 5.69 This was recognised in Shakespeare's time, being stated as a maxim by a contemporary lawyer, Coke: aliquis non debet esse iudex in propria causa, 5.70 and I think it safe to assume that Shakespeare's original audience would have spotted the impossibility of letting Angelo take charge. The implications of such a move serve to add to the suspense, since Angelo has already proved he is incapable of exercising rational judgement, and apart from the fact that his presiding over his own case is a contradiction of good order, he cannot be expected to resolve the issues before him impartially, and disorder will inevitably thrive. Nevertheless, the situation is deliberately allowed to arise in order to provide an opportunity for Angelo to redeem himself, or, as we by now expect, to avoid exposure by indulging in further deceit.
The punishments in Measure for Measure deserve close scrutiny, since they are an indicator of the extent to which the law has been administered with strict justice or with mercy. The central issue about which the play's most important conflict rages is Angelo's punishment of Claudio. The idea that Claudio must die for an act of procreation is an
- 274 -
ironical inversion of the Biblical demand for strict justice, 'life for life' (Deuteronomy 19:21): Claudio must pay for the illicit creation of life with his own life -
... It were as good
To pardon him, that hath from nature stolne
A man already made, as to remit
Their sawcie sweetnes, that do coyne heauens Image
In stamps that are forbid ...
(II.iv.43-46)
Angelo's equating fornication to murder is typical of his puritanical stance, and is in keeping with his avowal that he would submit to the same punishment as he is inflicting on Claudio were he ever to commit a similar offence himself (II.i.27-31); the Duke observes this as well:
If his owne life, Answere the straightness of his proceeding, It shall become him well: wherein if he chance to faile he hath sentenc'd himselfe.
(III.ii.249-251)
In our assessment of Angelo we must mark to his credit that when his crimes are discovered, he, having shown no mercy, anticipates none; 5.71 and he stands by his word, accepting the fact that he must pay for his sexual liberty with his life:
... let my Triall, be mine owne Confession:
Immediate sentence then, and sequent death,
Is all the grace I beg.
(V.i.370-372)
The violence and severity of justice which Angelo expects to be his lot would be a fitting reward for one who has been such a harsh judge himself:
IVdge not, that ye be not iudged. For with what iudgement ye iudge, ye shal be iudged, and with what measure ye mette, it shall be measured to you againe.
(Matthew 7:1-2)
Angelo not only condemns Claudio to death, but is also responsible for the ruthless destruction of much property (admittedly put to ill use) in the suburbs of Vienna. The extreme violence of Angelo's psyche is illustrated as well here as it is in smaller matters, such as his impatience which threatens to sour the humour of the scene where Elbow brings Froth and Pompey before him: he leaves the stage hoping that after hearing the case, Escalus will 'finde good cause to whip them all'. This brutality manifests itself again in Angelo's thinly disguised threat to
- 275 -
the Provost, 'faile not to doe your Office, as you will answere it at your perill' (IV.ii.123-124). Angelo's guilt is the greater, then, when he plays on his reputation for violence in attempting to frighten Isabella into accepting his proposals by making a threat so horrible to contemplate that she must fear the worst for Claudio:
... Redeeme thy brother,
By yeelding vp thy bodie to my will,
Or else he must not onlie die the death,
But thy vnkindnesse shall his death draw out
To lingring sufferance: Answer me to morrow,
Or by the affection that now guides me most,
Ile proue a Tirant to him.
(II.iv.162-168)
Angelo's conduct elicits a forthright response from Brown: she says he is 'a sensualist and psychopathic sadist of the master criminal type'. 5.72 This is rather heavy-handed. Angelo's violence cannot be denied, but the extent to which it is sadistic may be questioned: violence does not excite Angelo, and there is no evidence to show that he actually enjoys inflicting pain - for him it is simply a means whereby he hopes to satisfy his puritanical fastidiousness on the one hand, and his libidinous urges on the other.
In the event the threat of a lingering death for Claudio is not carried out, as Angelo supposes Isabella to have complied with his demands; but his subsequent ordering of Claudio's execution (without the added torture) is then not only ruthless, but also perfidious. When the Duke pronounces sentence on Angelo he invokes 'The very mercy of the Law' (V.i.405) in applying the 'measure for measure' maxim: the law, in its mercy, must see that Claudio's death is compensated for, and that Isabella has her revenge - 'An Angelo for Claudio, death for death' (V.i.407). This is a strange conception of mercy, but recalls Angelo's own insistence that he was being most merciful when most severe (II.ii.101-105), and so the Duke's sentence is apt. By this reasoning the conflict between justice and mercy is done away with, for justice is mercy; but mercy cannot be rationalised in this way, for doing so deprives it of its very nature. Mercy is a spontaneous giving where nothing is deserved, and if any person learns this it is Isabella. Her initial pleading for Claudio is a request for unconditional mercy, the complete laying aside of the law; when she perceives Angelo's evil intentions she threatens to expose him to justice unless he pardons Claudio. On learning that Claudio has been executed, her spontaneous cry
- 276 -
is an emotional demand for violent revenge - 'I wil to him, and plucke out his eies' (IV.iii.119). There is no thought of mercy here, and by the time the final scene is reached, Angelo's crimes have multiplied to such an extent that Isabella's imperious and indignant cry is for 'Iustice, Iustice, Iustice, Iustice' (V.i.26); what the Duke gives her in sentencing Angelo to death is the justice she demanded, and the climax of the play is reached when she realises that this is not what she wanted after all. She kneels and asks for mercy to be shown to the man she believes has killed her brother. Just as Angelo remains true to the principle of justice, she is ultimately true to the principle of mercy.
Vincentio's granting of mercy to Angelo has no sound legal or logical basis. Shakespeare's point is that since, in Angelo's words, 'We are all fraile' (II.iv.121), we are all in need of the same unconditional mercy shown to Angelo. Thus it is that the murderer Barnadine is also pardoned, but in his case, since he is unrepentant, he is left in the keeping of the Friar, who is told to 'aduise him' (V.i.483). With the general dispensation of mercy at the end, it seems a little unjust that if Barnadine and Angelo can be pardoned, Lucio receives such a harsh punishment. The point was remarked by Johnson, who suggested that this might have been an intentional slur by Shakespeare on the Duke's character, to show 'that men easily forgive wrongs which are not committed against themselves'. 5.73 On the other hand, Winston identifies Lucio with the Vice Iniquity of morality plays, making him 'a dramatic representative of the misrule which besets Vienna'; 5.74 the conclusion is that 'Lucio must be disciplined if the play is to end with the semblance of a restoration of order to Vienna'. 5.75 Johnson has missed Shakespeare's point entirely, while Winston, closer to the truth, also misses the point by oversimplifying the application of justice to meet the dramatic demands of the comic denouement. 5.76 Lucio must be punished if order is to be restored, but what is important is the particular form the punishment takes. Lucio, Angelo and Claudio have one thing in common by the end of the play: they have all had sexual relations with a woman out of wedlock, and associated with this disorderly behaviour there are, in each case, violent consequences. For Claudio, not only is there the death sentence, but the ensuing dispute between Angelo and Isabella becomes violent on both the physical and the spiritual levels. The Duke provides the means of avoiding the worst possible outcomes to this clash - the death of Claudio and the virtual raping of Isabella - and he does this by an infringement of trust in the bed trick. Nevo discerningly remarks that
- 277 -
the rendezvous serves as the green world of regeneration in Measure for Measure: 5.77 it is
... a Garden circummur'd with Bricke,
Whose westerne side is with a Vineyard back't;
And to that Vineyard is a planched gate,
That makes his opening with this bigger Key:
This other doth command a little doore,
Which from the Vineyard to the Garden leades,
There haue I made my promise, vpon the
Heauy midle of the night, to call vpon him.
(IV.i.28-35)
The 'Bricke' isolates the green world from the real world; the 'Vineyard' and 'Garden' are emblems of fertility, while the 'planched gate', the 'Key' and the 'little doore' all signify new beginnings. 5.78 Furthermore, the time of assignation is the 'Heauy midle of the night', which, as Lever notes, 'carries an association with "pregnant"', 5.79 pointing the generative and reparative function of the bed trick.
Lucio's case is different from those of Angelo and Claudio. His affair with Kate Keepdown epitomises his attitude to sex: he refuses to marry her despite the fact that she has borne his child. The Duke's initial sentence of Lucio, marrying Kate, whipping and then hanging, would be a violent but strict application of justice in line with the punishment at first proposed for Angelo, and like this punishment it does not take into account the plight of the widow. Kate would be no better off once Lucio had been executed than she had been before he married her: for absolute justice to be done Lucio must both marry Kate and support her and their child. His objections to this arrangement make it evident that he is being punished, but he is mercifully allowed to keep his life, and true justice is done to Kate:
Marrying a punke my Lord, is pressing to death,
Whipping and hanging.
(V.i.520-521)
With the three men married, Overdone safely in prison, and Pompey an executioner's assistant, the rule of sexual licence in Vienna comes to an end, and order is restored.
The order which is established in the play is particularly fragile, however. Angelo has repented of his major crimes, but we have no evidence that his hard, puritanical outlook has softened; Lucio has been made to marry a whore, but we have no reason to believe that his sexual freedom will be curtailed by this; and the worst offender, the murderer
- 278 -
Barnadine, has never been repentant despite all attempts to make him so - why should the obscure friar entrusted with his keeping have any more success than those who tried before him? The Duke's sentences, combining justice and mercy in measure, as required by each case, have not convincingly dealt with the problems underlying the misdeeds. Nevertheless, Shakespeare did provide some grounds for optimism: we, like Mariana, must be content with something less than perfection - she can say of Angelo, knowing all his faults, 'I craue no other, nor no better man' (V.i.424). There is no reason to believe that Claudio and Juliet will be anything but happy, and Juliet's child, like Helena's in All's Well That Ends Well, is emblematic of a fresh start and a productive future. Commenting on the marriage of Isabella to Vincentio, Wilson Knight finds the play's concluding happiness heavily qualified: 'the Duke's offer to Isabella may be said to use the happy-ending marriage convention to indicate a union of clemency and moral rectitude .... Beyond this no solution is offered. Shakespeare does not know the answer'. 5.80 In fact, both Isabella and Vincentio show clemency and moral rectitude in their tempering of justice with mercy, and so, in a sense, they are suitable partners. We are not, however, invited to go beyond the bounds of the action: the future happiness of the married couples should not be our concern, and we cannot predict the durability of the fragile peace and order which have been established.
Neither of the dark comedies ends with the complete radiant happiness and optimism of the romantic comedies, and two reasons may be postulated for this. Firstly, Shakespeare studies humanity too minutely, and rather than ignoring the imperfections of his principal characters he goes out of his way to highlight them. Secondly, he presents the central conflicts in these plays with an intensity not found in the early comedies, but hinted at in some of the middle comedies, such as The Merchant of Venice and Much Ado about Nothing; the sour taste left by such unremitting conflict cannot easily be dispelled.
One of the contributing factors in the conflicts of the dark comedies is the absence of satisfactory figureheads of authority. I have already remarked on a similar situation in Twelfth Night, 5.81 where Orsino, because of his melancholy over unrequited love, does not administer the affairs
- 279 -
of Illyria for most of the duration of the action. Similarly, the King in All's Well That Ends Well has no control over Bertram, or the events in the play: he is a diseased, weak figure at the start, and even after he recovers his health, his rule is ineffectual because he relies on war to improve and mature the young men in his realm. When he exerts his authority in the final scene, he is an irascible, confused old man, and we still have no confidence in his ability to untangle the complications. The Duke in Measure for Measure is an extreme case in that, while carefully engineering the course of events in Vienna, he hands over authority to a corrupt deputy, and so for the greater part of the play disorder is allowed to multiply unchecked in the upper strata of society. His resumption of power in the last act is tantalisingly delayed, although we do feel that, when he does finally administer justice, he will be a more competent man than the King in All's Well That Ends Well. In each case, though, there is a sense of insecurity engendered by the absence of a benign, guiding ruler.
In both plays disorder centres on sexual activity. In All's Well That Ends Well Bertram expresses his rejection of social order by this espousal of male values and virtues, the wars and honour, rather than female, regeneration through procreation; he also rejects socially acceptable sexual behaviour in running away from his wife and attempting the seduction of Diana. In Measure for Measure disorder is even more closely associated with sexual behaviour: in the lower classes sexual liberty is revealed in the activities of Overdone and Pompey; Lucio provides a link between them and those higher up the social scale, such as Claudio and Angelo where sexual freedom again manifests itself. While the problem in All's Well That Ends Well finds a satisfactory solution - Bertram's reconciliation with Helena - in Measure for Measure it is seen as being intractable, the only solutions being ones of extreme violence, such as the destruction of houses, and Claudio's execution; or that frivolously suggested by Pompey, 'to geld and splay all the youth of the City'.
An interesting aspect of disorder in All's Well That Ends Well is that it breaks a commonly accepted norm: marriage partners should be of equal social rank. A woman should marry one of equal status, as do most heroines, or one of lower status (as do Silvia in The Two Gentlemen of Verona and Rosalind in As You Like It), in which case the higher social status of the woman is surrendered - a point made by Kydd in The Housholders Philosophie:
- 280 -
And she ought to consider that no distinction of nobilitie can be so great by that the league which Nature hath ordeined betwixt men and women farre exceedeth it, for by Nature woman was made mans subiect. 5.82
The problems of discrepancy in social rank in marriage were considered best avoided, and when Helena marries above her station, the approval given by those in authority is noteworthy, intended to point the conflict between virtue and nobility. The fact that Bertram does not accept Helena because of her lowly birth makes this a central issue of the play, bringing him into conflict with authority - both his mother and the King.
One prominent theme in All's Well That Ends Well is the progression from disease and death at the outset to birth and regeneration at the close. This, too, is related to the idea of disorder, since the King's illness is emblematic of the degenerate state of society, and until he is cured disorder must persist. Although Lever finds 'the polarity of creation and death ... tirelessly reiterated' in Measure for Measure, 5.83 I do not think the emphasis is comparable with that in All's Well That Ends Well: the idea of death as a punishment is important, being applied to Claudio, Barnadine, Angelo and Lucio, and it is extensively commented on in the cases of Claudio and Barnadine. The finality and uncertainty of death frighten Claudio, and the pardon of Barnadine is a direct result of his refusing to prepare himself for death; but there is no corresponding emphasis of the opposing aspects of birth or regeneration. Fleeting reference is made by Lucio to the fecundity of Juliet's conception, but other than this it is largely ignored, or, worse, portrayed in negative terms:
Duk.
Repent you (faire one) of the sin you carry?
Iul.
I doe; and beare the shame most patiently.
(II.iii.19-20)
Sexual activity is not seen as a positive force capable of redeeming a corrupt world as it is in All's Well That Ends Well. Rather, it is sexual licence and depravity that attract attention, and these are symptomatic of an underlying disorder in society.
Violence in All's Well That Ends Well is essentially limited to its association with war, ironically seen by the King and the young men of the play as a regenerating force, enabling those who can to win honour. It is thus involved in the conflict between male and female values which plays such an important part in the development of the plot, and,
- 281 -
appropriately, there is considerable emphasis on violence in the sexual imagery used, which draws heavily on war and duelling for its inspiration. Violence is far more widespread in Measure for Measure, where it manifests itself in the various punishments - the pulling down of brothels, the beheading of fornicators, and the whipping of bawds and pimps; and in this atmosphere of fear and violence the idea of castration as a punishment, suggested by Pompey, is not at all out of place. The intensity of conflict in the later play can be gauged by the number of emotionally charged, violent outbursts that take place in confrontations between opposing figures. At Isabella's first meeting with Angelo we see her speeches becoming increasingly forceful and impassioned, but they do not approach the violence of her subsequent stormy speeches when she learns of Angelo's purpose and threatens to expose him; or when she rejects Claudio's desperate plea for his life. She is also particularly vehement when she confronts Angelo in the final scene. In each case Shakespeare carefully controls the intensity of emotion expressed by Isabella, reserving her most impassioned declarations for climactic moments. Her confrontation with Claudio is decisive, showing a change from generosity in pleading his case, to a self-interested demand for justice and Claudio's death - precipitated by Angelo's sexual blackmail. Similarly, her final espousal of mercy in the closing scene is made the more remarkable by being immediately preceded by her angry plea for justice. By contrast, All's Well That Ends Well is relatively calm: the King loses his temper with Bertram when he refuses to marry Helena, and he becomes impatient in the final scene when confused by the conflicting evidence brought before him. Other than this there is little of note: Bertram's sulky brooding does not lend itself to violent expression, and, in general, the emotive passages in All's Well That Ends Well fall far behind those in Measure for Measure in intensity. This is a contributing factor in the way the audience responds to each play's conclusion: All's Well That Ends Well, being less emotionally charged, contains a clearer vision of future happiness than Measure for Measure, where, once all have received their just measure for measure, there is no idea of reconciliation between the two principal antagonists, Angelo and Isabella, and for, for that matter, between Isabella and Claudio. These uncertain endings may, perhaps, be attributed to Shakespeare's inexperience with the medium of tragi-comedy, for the two plays have many affinities with the romances, where serious themes, tragi-comic plots and intense conflicts are not allowed to cloud the radiance of the conclusions.
- 284 -
- - - NOTES: CHAPTER FIVE - - -
5.52 Peter Brook, The Empty Space (London: MacGibbon and Kee, 1968), p.88. return
5.53 Line numbers are taken from William Shakespeare, Measure for Measure, ed. J.W. Lever (London: Methuen, 1979). return
5.54 Anthony Brennan, Shakespeare's Dramatic Structures (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1986), p.72. return
5.55 Joseph Westlund, Shakespeare's Reparative Comedies: A Psychoanalytic View of the Middle Plays (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984), p.148. return
5.58 Ibid., p.liii; Ernest Schanzer, 'The Marriage-Contracts in Measure for Measure', Shakespeare Survey, 13 (1960), 81-89, distinguishes between this and the sponsalia per verba de futuro of Angelo to Mariana; Karl P. Wentersdorf, 'The Marriage Contracts in Measure for Measure: A Reconsideration', Shakespeare Survey, 32 (1979), 142, agrees; but there is little textual evidence for the distinction: see Harriett Hawkins, 'What Kind of Pre-Contract Had Angelo? A Note on Some Non-Problems in Elizabethan Drama', College English, 36 (1974), 174-175; Lawrence, pp.97-98, also
- 285 -
finds the two marriage contracts similar. Wrightson, p.67, finds three types of marriage recognised by ecclesiastical law. return
5.59 The edition cited is James Winney, ed., The Frame of Order: An Outline of Elizabethan Belief Taken from Treatises of the Late Sixteenth Century (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1957), p.95. return
5.61 Forset also made a similar point, that in punishing offenders the good ruler
... will discover no hatred to their persons, but to their faults, shewing himselfe grieved and unwilling to afflict them, seeking rather their chasticement with pitie, then their destruction with crueltie ....
(Winny, p.92.) return
5.62 Verna Brown, '"Lilies that fester": A Study of Thwarted Idealism in Julius Caesar, Hamlet and Measure for Measure', diss., M.A. (University of South Africa, 1988), p.109. return
5.63 Harold Skulsky, 'Pain, Law, and Conscience in Measure for Measure', Journal of the History of Ideas, 25 (1964), 155. return
5.67 I take the view that Shakespeare intended us to disapprove of Angelo's behaviour towards Mariana, and that his marriage contract with her was as binding as Claudio's with Juliet, but it had not yet been consummated. The Duke introduces Mariana to us as a 'poore Gentlewoman' (III.i.218-219) who has lost 'her combynate-husband, this well-seeming Angelo' (II.i.222-223). return
5.69 D.E.C. Yale, 'Iudex in Propria Causa: An Historical Excursus', Cambridge Law Journal, 33 (1974), 80. return
5.70 Ibid., p.83. Coke actually used this principle in 1607 to inform King James that he could not act as judge in any case arising between himself and his subjects. It was a tenet of justice commonly recognised, and Webster uses it in The Deuil's Law-Case: Or, When Women Goe to Law, the Deuill is Full of Businesse, where Crispiano resigns his seat as judge when he discovers he could be related to the plaintiff:
[Cris.]
... I will give no sentence at all.
Ario.
No?
Cris.
No, I cannot, for I am made a partie.
(Devil's Law Case IV.2.490-491)
(The edition cited is that of Lucas.) return
5.71 In this Angelo resembles Antonio in The Merchant of Venice, who, because he does not ask for mercy during his trial, does not feel obliged to show it to Shylock when he has the upper hand. See p.148. return
5.74 Mathew Winston, '"Craft against Vice": Morality Play Elements in Measure for Measure', Shakespeare Studies, 14 (1981), 240. return
- 286 -
5.76 Winston recognises the importance of the justice versus equity conflict in the play (pp.241-243), but he does not refer this to Lucio's case. return
5.77 Ruth Nevo, 'Measure for Measure: Mirror for Mirror', Shakespeare Survey, 40 (1988), 119. return
5.80 George Richard Wilson Knight, Shakespearian Dimensions (Sussex: Harvester Press, 1984), p.26. return
5.81 See p.211 and p.229 n.96. return
Proceed to Chapter Six