Measure for Measure

As a Problem Play

Measure for Measure can also be seen as a “problem play” aimed at addressing
problems of sexual, religious, and civic morality. The term “problem plays” was coined in 1896
by F. S. Boas in his book, Shakespeare and his Predecessors. Because these plays can neither be
neatly classified as comedies or tragedies, Boas borrowed a term from the theater of his time
and classified them as “problem-plays.” Shakespeare’s audience would not have been
accustomed to this blending of genres into tragicomedy. Comedies were plays that ended
happily, usually in a marriage, in which a young couple must overcome obstacles to be
together, clowns and servants banter and entertain the audience, and there is often some
element of mistaken identity or deception. In the end, all is revealed and everyone ends
happily. Tragedies were plays that ended in death and usually conformed to Aristotle’s
concept of tragedy and the tragic hero, who was admirable but had a fatal flaw that led to his
downfall. Elizabethan history plays were a relatively new form, dramatizing actual historical
events that occurred years earlier. “Problem-plays” fit into none of these categories, and are
more similar to modern drama and “tragicomedies” than to the usual Elizabethan theater fare.

AR: Why Problem Play? Who is F.S Boas?

Measure for Measure itself might have been inspired by the ascendance of James I to
the English throne after the death of Queen Elizabeth I. The 1604 Canons enacted by James I
put harsh restrictions on those who wished to get divorced, pronouncing that no one could
remarry if their spouse was still living. This statute was meant to end the “‘epidemic’ of
‘disorderly marriages’ and divorces.” There are clear parallels between this statute and the
harsh law enacted by Angelo at the beginning of the play, also intended to clean up the morals
of Vienna. In fact, Shakespeare has never been to Vienna, and the city in Measure for Measure
is more likely a fictionalized version of London at his time, teeming with brothels and drunks.
By setting the play in fictionalized Vienna, Shakespeare could present it to James I in London
without fear of retaliation.
 AR: What’s the Historical Background?

In the years 1602-4, Shakespeare wrote three comedies which are often grouped
together under the title ‘problem plays’: All’s Well That Ends Well, Troilus and Cressida and
Measure for Measure, that seem to be stylistically distinct from comedies, tragedies, and
histories. The three plays are sometimes labelled as tragicomedies. One of Shakespeare’s
contemporaries, John Fletcher, gave a rather superficial definition of this genre: ‘it wants
death which is enough to make it no tragedy, yet it brings some near to it which is enough to
make it no comedy’

AR: What’s the other problem plays? John Fletcher?

But the problem goes deeper. Critics have identified in these plays a strong sense of
cynicism, despair and even disgust at life. We see this, for example, in the Duke’s almost
nihilistic speech, ‘Be absolute for death...’ in Act III Scene 1, and in his contemptuous
reprimand to Pompey. Indeed, none of the characters (including those who would chastise
others, such as Angelo, Isabella and the Duke) is really likeable or possessed of a sympathetic
warmth. However, the cynicism of the play should not be exaggerated. For example, although
Lucio and the brothel-keepers are condemned there is also an element of amused indulgence
in their treatment, suggesting that their flaws and misdeeds are seen with a sense of humor.
Lucio may be a whoring, treacherous fellow, full of slanders, but the comic elements in his
speeches make our stern attitudes soften. The denouement also offers at least some hope.
Three marriages are arranged (the traditional number in Shakespearean comedy) and only
Lucio’s promises to be loveless. Above all, mercy is exercised by Mariana, Isabella and the
Duke, and this illustrates that human goodness can transcend whatever weakness we all
possess. The play is, to a great extent, a record of error and evil, but it does have positive
notes. Measure for Measure is neither wholly cynical nor wholly joyful but an unsettling
combination of both.

AR: Cynicism in the Play?

 A problem play is concerned with a moral or social issue that is presented in a way that
unsettles the audience’s moral bearings. This ambiguity leads to uncertain and divided
responses, leaving the resolution open to interpretation. In such plays, the author typically
offers no definitive solution to the issues raised. For instance, Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House
explores the problem of a woman’s status within her marriage and home. While the play
raises profound questions about gender roles and personal freedom, it provides no conclusive
answers, leaving readers or viewers to draw their own conclusions.

AR: What are issues raised in a problem play?

Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure is a problem play in a more complex sense. It raises
numerous questions about issues such as law versus mercy, physical purity, and forced
marriage—problems for which Shakespeare provides no clear resolutions.

AR: What are the problems raised in Measure for Measure?

The first major problem in Measure for Measure is the conflict between law and mercy.
Angelo, the Duke’s deputy, represents strict adherence to the law. Angelo, as the Duke’s
deputy, revives old laws that had become redundant during the Duke’s time. He declares
prostitution to be illegal and orders all brothel houses to be shut down. One such law
sentences Claudio to death for fornication after he impregnates Juliet, his betrothed. Although
Claudio admits his guilt, he explains that he intended to marry Juliet but was prevented by
circumstances beyond his control. Despite widespread appeals for mercy, including those from
Isabella, Claudio’s sister, Angelo remains resolute, declaring that laws should be enforced
strictly rather than treated as mere warnings.

AR: Discuss the issue of law versus mercy?

On the other hand, Isabella embodies the plea for mercy. In her first encounter with
Angelo, she passionately argues for her brother’s life, invoking the Christian principle of
forgiveness. She reminds Angelo that all humans are sinners who have been redeemed
through divine mercy. Yet Angelo remains unmoved, insisting on the necessity of upholding
the law: “It is the law, not I, condemn your brother.” This creates a central dilemma: should
justice prioritize the letter of the law, or should mercy temper its application? Furthermore,
the play questions whether mercy can coexist with strict legalism or whether the two are
incompatible.

AR: What was Isabella’s take on Mercy?

Another significant problem in the play revolves around physical purity, specifically
chastity versus familial affection and sensuality versus official duty. Angelo, who initially
appears to be a paragon of virtue, succumbs to his own sensual desires when faced with
Isabella’s beauty. He offers to spare Claudio’s life in exchange for her chastity.

For Isabella, this creates an intense conflict. She rejects Angelo’s immoral demand and
informs Claudio of his intentions. However, Claudio, terrified of death, pleads with Isabella to
sacrifice her chastity to save his life. Isabella reacts with anger and rebukes Claudio harshly,
calling his plea cowardly and selfish. This raises an ethical question: was Isabella justified in her
extreme response to Claudio’s desperation, and was her unwavering commitment to chastity
the right choice in the face of her brother’s potential execution?

AR: Explain the problem of Physical purity?

The play also addresses the problem of forced marriages. Under the Duke’s orders,
Angelo is compelled to marry Mariana, a woman he had abandoned despite being betrothed
to her. While Mariana is overjoyed to marry Angelo, there is no indication that Angelo harbors
any affection for her. This raises concerns about the prospects of their marital happiness and
Angelo’s capacity to honor his duties as a husband.

Lucio, another character, also becomes a victim of forced marriage when he is ordered
to wed a woman he had wronged. Lucio is also ordered by the Duke to marry the whore whom
he had made pregnant of course, the whore would become an honest woman when Lucio
marries her, but the question is whether Lucio can even be happy as the husband of a whore.
This marriage would also, therefore serve no fruitful purpose. These marriages are presented
as punishments rather than unions based on mutual consent and affection, prompting the
audience to question the ethical implications of using marriage as a form of retribution.

AR: What’s your opinion on Forced Marriage?

Another controversial issue is the Duke’s decision to forgive both Angelo and Lucio
entirely. Angelo, who abused his authority and attempted to force Isabella, receives no
punishment beyond being compelled to marry Mariana. Similarly, Lucio escapes with a forced
marriage as his sole penalty. Critics like Coleridge and Swinburne found this resolution deeply
troubling, seeing it as a violation of justice. Angelo’s actions, in particular, seem to warrant
severe legal consequences, yet he is spared. This raises a critical question: is the Duke’s
forgiveness an act of mercy or an abdication of justice?

In light of these issues, Measure for Measure undoubtedly qualifies as a problem play. It
highlights complex moral and social dilemmas, leaving them unresolved and open to
interpretation.

AR: What’s your take on the Duke’s decision to forgive both Angelo and Lucio?

Summary

The Duke of Vienna asks a nobleman, Angelo, to assume leadership of the city and
uphold the law while he—the Duke—is away traveling. He commands Angelo to uphold the
law, and reveals that he plans to remain in the city in secret, disguised as a friar, to see how
the city responds to what he expects will be Angelo’s stricter upholding of the law. Sometime
after the Duke’s departure, Angelo imposes a death sentence on Claudio, who has
impregnated his wife-to-be, Juliet, before their marriage. Lucio, a friend of Claudio’s, relays
this news to Isabella, Claudio’s sister who has begun training to be a nun. Isabella’s religious
beliefs cause her to disapprove of Claudio’s transgression, but Lucio persuades her to beg
Angelo for mercy.

She pleads her case in front of Angelo, who appears to grow gradually more
sympathetic. He tells her to return tomorrow to hear his decision. Afterwards, Angelo, who
prides himself on his ice-cold demeanor and uncompromising restraint, is distressed to realize
that he is enamored of Isabella. The next day, he offers her a bargain: if she will sleep with
him, he will release her brother.

Isabella is initially too innocent to grasp Angelo’s hints. When Angelo directly proposes it
to her, she refuses, shocked by his inappropriate suggestion. She visits Claudio in jail and
reports this interaction to him, and he initially supports her decision to remain pure. However,
Claudio changes his mind and begs his sister to take up Angelo’s offer.

Isabella is offended by her brother’s request. However, the disguised Duke arrives and
convinces her to orchestrate a liaison with Angelo: when the time comes to seduce Angelo, a
woman named Mariana—a former fiancée of Angelo’s whom he abandoned after she lost her
brother and her dowry in a shipwreck—will take Isabella’s place.

However, even after this encounter takes place, Angelo reneges on his word and orders
Claudio’s beheading. At the Duke’s urging, the Provost who runs the jail deceives Angelo by
sending him the head of a dead pirate, claiming it belonged to Claudio. The Duke sends a letter
to Angelo announcing that he will soon return to Vienna.

On his arrival, the Duke requests a public hearing before the city gates, where citizens
can go to seek redress for injustices. When he reads this letter, Angelo nervously wonders
whether Isabella will denounce him publicly, and regrets ordering Claudio’s execution out of a
fear of retribution. At the hearing, Isabella speaks out against Angelo, but the now undisguised
Duke pretends not to believe her. Mariana, too, tells her story, but the Duke remains
unconvinced. The Duke then reappears in his friar costume, and Lucio accuses him of
disrespecting the Duke. In an ensuing scuffle, the Duke’s disguise is removed. His masquerade
revealed, the Duke carries out long-overdue justice. He forces Angelo to marry Mariana, and
though he wishes to sentence him to death, Mariana and Isabella convince the Duke to spare
Angelo. Claudio is permitted to marry Juliet, and Lucio is reprimanded and compelled to marry
a prostitute who has borne him a child (and who he had refused to wed). Finally, the Duke
asks Isabella to reconsider her monastic vows and marry him instead.
Themes

Justice and Mercy

Measure for Measure explores the spectrum from absolute justice to absolute mercy,
with different characters representing different points along this spectrum. At the opening of
the play, the Duke recognizes that the city has become a land of sin due to his reluctance to
enforce laws and his tendency to opt for mercy instead. He puts Angelo in charge, instructing
him to enforce the laws but also to show mercy when needed, according to his humanity. He
then goes into disguise to watch what happens.

AR: Why the Duke Disguised?

Angelo subscribes to the idea of enforcing absolute justice. The ban on sex outside of
marriage is intended to catch traffickers and sex workers, but instead they can evade the law
while Claudio and Juliet — who are engaged to be married — are caught by it. Their sexual
conduct is ruled illegal, because they are not married when Juliet becomes pregnant. Angelo
decides to make an example of Claudio by enforcing the law.

Isabella, by contrast, represents absolute mercy. She begs for her brother Claudio’s life
at the beginning of the play, and later begs the Duke for mercy for Angelo even though she has
been wronged by him. She advocates for his life not just out of a sense of forgiveness, but out
of a desire for Mariana to be married to him to satisfy Marianna’s desires and love. However
despite her strong desire for Claudio to be spared, she will not compromise her principles to
save him.

AR: Who represents absolute mercy, and absolute justice?

This play raises questions about what is the right balance of justice and mercy, and
presents characters advocating for various blends of the two extremes. The question of
whether this play is recommending severity or mercy in dealing with offences against the law
is uncertain. A chief reason for this is that the arguments advanced for both are strong, and
individual characters are found to be supporting severity at one moment, but mercy at
another.

AR: What’s the right balance of justice and mercy?

The Duke is a good example of this apparent fickleness. His main reason for handing
over temporary power to Angelo is to ensure that the law which he himself has neglected is
enforced. The language which he uses to explain this to Friar Thomas in Act I, Scene 3 is the
language of severity; the ‘strict statutes and most biting laws’ must be enforced; fathers who
merely display the ‘threatening twigs of birch’ (24) without using them to beat their children
are seriously misguided. In a later scene in Act III, Scene 2, his abusive speech to Pompey is in
similar terms: Pompey is ‘wicked’ (18) and is guilty of ‘filthy vice’ (22); he is ‘stinkingly
depending’ (26) on the, abominable and beastly touches’ (23) of his brothel customers.
Vincentio turns to the constable and says: “Take him to prison, officer:”

And yet, despite this firmness throughout the play, in the final scene he is the chief
instrument of extreme mercy: Angelo and Lucio are forced to marry the women they wronged.
It is clear, too, that he expects and hopes that Isabella will show mercy towards Angelo.

AR: Explain the apparent fickleness in the Duke.

The same contradictions exist in the character of Escalus. He is a judge and accepts the
need for severity, but is himself remarkably lenient to Froth and Pompey in the trial scene.
Indeed, his leniency is probably the reason why he is passed over for deputy by Vincentio, who
wants to be certain that he appoints someone strict.

The position is further confused because of the nature of the arguments used by Escalus
to persuade Angelo to be lenient with Claudio. First, he urges the fact that Claudio ‘had a most
noble father’. Even granted the greater importance attached to parentage in Shakespeare’s
day, this is not an impressive defense. Secondly, he asks his brother deputy whether he,
Angelo, might not at some time in the past have been in danger of falling into the same sin as
Claudio. This second point is as feeble as the first and is swiftly dismissed by Angelo.
 AR: Examine Escalus’ contradictions.

Isabella, like the Duke and Escalus, seems uncertain about whether to apply strict
punishment or mercy when dealing with offenders. She acknowledges that she must ask for
mercy, even though she would prefer to see justice carried out in normal circumstances. This
suggests that, under ordinary conditions, she would want to see someone in Claudio’s position
punished, but because of her familial ties and emotional attachment, she feels compelled to
plead for mercy on his behalf. This means her appeals for mercy may not be entirely genuine;
she is simply advocating for her loved one. This realization reduces the impact of her
emotional pleas, as she admits that, in her desire to protect her brother, she is willing to
excuse something she personally dislikes for his benefit.

Furthermore, when Isabella hears that Claudio has been executed, her reaction is not
one of mercy but of vengeful anger. She even threatens to go to Angelo and tear out his eyes.
In the prison scene, when Claudio pleads for her to save him, her response is harsh and
unforgiving, showing no mercy at all. Despite these moments, Isabella demonstrates true
compassion in the final scene of the play when she pleads for Angelo’s life, showing a capacity
for forgiveness.

AR: Describe Isabella’s contradictions now.

In the play, mercy is not always effective or suitable, and even Escalus, known for his
patience, becomes frustrated by Mistress Overdone’s repeated offenses. Her being let off with
warnings has had no impact, and Escalus reflects that continued leniency only encourages
further wrongdoings. Mistress Overdone pleads for mercy, calling Escalus a merciful man, but
Escalus responds with growing irritation, stating that if mercy continues to be shown without
consequence, it risks becoming tyranny itself.

AR: What’s Escalus’s take on Mistress Overdone?

The arguments in favor of mercy, rather than strict justice, presented in the play are not
particularly convincing. For example, Isabella, in Act II Scene 2, argues that Angelo should
condemn the offense but not the offender. She suggests that if Angelo and Claudio were in
each other’s positions, Claudio would be more lenient towards Angelo. She accuses Angelo of
being tyrannical and a mere “petty officer,” implying he is acting inappropriately for his
station. She also expects him to show mercy because he too might feel guilt, appealing to his
own sense of vulnerability.

Although the arguments for mercy are not intellectually persuasive, they are
emotionally powerful. This is most clearly demonstrated in Isabella’s simple response to one of
Angelo’s long, reasoned speeches rejecting mercy: “Yet show some pity.” The play emphasizes
that human emotions, alongside logic, must influence decision-making. It suggests that while
our minds may call for strict justice, our hearts can still be merciful. This emotional compassion
leads to the eventual softening of strict justice, which is ultimately reflected in the final scene.

AR: What were the arguments in favor of mercy?

The entire play, as indicated by its title, draws on ethical teachings found in a Sermon. In
the sermon, Christ advises his followers to reject the Old Testament principle of strict justice
—“an eye for an eye”—and instead calls for forgiveness of offenders. A key teaching for the
play is Christ’s admonition about judgment:

“Do not judge so that you will not be judged” and “by your standard of measure, it will
be measured to you?”

Angelo, in the play, is guilty of judging Claudio for a small flaw while he himself harbors
a far greater fault. The third verse of this passage is reflected in the play’s title, which suggests
that Angelo, who shows strict justice to Claudio, should receive the same harsh treatment in
return.

AR: What’s the Christ’s teachings?

However, there is a significant issue with interpreting the play through the lens of the
biblical teaching. In the Sermon on the Mount, Christ is speaking about the need for
individuals to forgive personal wrongs and not judge others. The situation of a public official,
such as a judge, tasked with handling crimes (i.e., public wrongs), is viewed quite differently by
theologians. A judge is not in a position to forgive; if judges were to do so, no legal system
could function. Judges are not acting on their own behalf; they are required to uphold laws
that must be enforced, or else they risk being disregarded, which would harm society as a
whole. Angelo, the most intellectually astute character in the play, clearly understands this
distinction between private and public roles. He explains to Isabella, “It is the law, not I, that
condemns your brother.” For Shakespeare’s contemporaries, this separation was
fundamental. Princes and their appointed judges were considered representatives of God,
endowed with divine authority to rule, judge, and punish. The biblical injunction against
judging did not apply to them.

AR: Why this biblical teaching don’t apply?

In Measure for Measure, there is a notable irony in the idea that strict justice can, in
itself, serve as a form of mercy. Isabella pleads for Angelo to show some pity, to which Angelo
responds by asserting that he demonstrates mercy most effectively when he enforces justice.
He argues that through justice, he shows pity for those whom he does not know, as pardoning
a dismissed offense would only encourage further wrongdoing. By ensuring that the
wrongdoer faces justice, he prevents them from committing more harm in the future, thereby
doing them a greater good than any leniency could offer.

AR: What’s the notable irony in the idea strict justice?

Appearance and Reality

On the surface, there are many moments throughout the play where appearances
deceive and do not reflect the true nature of a situation. This is encapsulated in the concept of
dramatic irony, a term that refers to situations in which the audience knows essential
information that on-stage characters do not. Ironic cases of mistaken identity are seen
throughout the play, such as when the Duke disguises himself (and Lucio unknowingly exposes
him), when Isabella switches places with Mariana to seduce Angelo, and when Angelo
mistakes the pirate’s head for Claudio’s. In each case, the characters misunderstand the
situation based on how things appear.

AR: What are the disguises in the play?

Additionally, there are deeper contradictions between appearance and reality. One
example is Angelo’s hypocritical “do as I say, not as I do” morality. This is the dark side of
pretending to be something you’re not, which allows the least virtuous characters to appear
the most moral, at least for a while. The opposite scenario, however, is found in Isabella’s
personal dilemma: in order to rescue her brother Claudio, she must appear to disregard her
religious vows. In other words, in order to behave justly, she must appear to behave unjustly—
an exact inversion of Angelo’s deceitful behavior. Similarly, the provost must ostensibly
disobey his oath to Angelo and the Duke by sending the head of a pirate to convince Angelo
that Claudio has been executed—but yet again, it turns out that his apparent misbehavior was
in fact the correct, virtuous course of action. Even the Duke himself must deceive others in
order to restore order to his state. This disconnect between appearance and reality is what
propels the play’s plot. It’s important to note that the play’s conclusion ensures that every
instance of deceiving appearances is set right, especially through the punishment Angelo
receives.

AR: What are the other appearances?

Symbols

The Brothel Industry

The prevalence of brothels in Vienna, as well as the appearances of characters who run
them, like Mistress Overdone and Pompey, illustrates the moral decline that the city has seen
during the Duke’s rule. The dull-witted police officer Elbow, whom Pompey easily outwits,
symbolizes the ineptitude of the law.

When Angelo takes power, the suburban brothels are ordered torn down in a
demonstration of righteousness. However, along with this transition, Pompey segues from
working as a pimp to working as an executioner—perhaps a hint that the eradication of one
sort of vice will lead to the rise of another, more sinister kind.

AR: What does the brothel industry symbolize?

Quotes

Escalus hopes that heaven will forgive Claudio and Angelo for condemning him; he feels
sorry for Claudio who has only made one small mistake, and contemplates Angelo’s fate for
potentially committing worse actions and going unpunished:

“Well heaven forgive him, and forgive us all! Some rise by sin, and some by virtue fall. Some
run from brakes of vice, and answer none; and some condemned for a fault alone”

Isabella implores Angelo to condemn the crime but not the man who committed it.

Condemn the fault and not the actor of it? (Angelo, Act 2 Scene 2)

O, it is excellent

To have a giant’s strength, but it is tyrannous

To use it like a giant.

(Isabella, Act 2 Scene 2)

The miserable have no other medicine

But only hope.

(Claudio, Act 3 Scene 1)

What’s mine is yours and what is yours is mine.

(Duke, Act 5 Scene 1)

Critical Quotes

Coleridge’s distaste for the “pardon and marriage of Angelo” is surprisingly similar to
that of Samuel Johnson. Johnson argued that “Angelo’s crimes were such, as must sufficiently
justify punishment, whether its end be to secure the innocent from wrong or to deter guilt by
example; and I believe every reader feels some indignation when he finds him spared.”

Coleridge states explicitly that Angelo is guilty of “cruelty”, “lust”, and “baseness”.