Measure for Measure

So...technically this play is a comedy. Yeah...that is billywhacks. It is very tragic. The only thing I can truly discern about this play that keeps it from being a true Shakespearean tragedy is the fact that no one actually loses their lives. I just was so upset about this play because the whole time I am thinking "This is a comedy" but I felt the catharsis of a tragedy, not the lightheartedness of a comedy. It made the experience long and difficult. But aside from all that I want to focus on the exploitation of women in this play. Particularly the exploitation of Isabella.

Poor Isabella. She is a pathetic character nearly on par with Ophelia. She is an innocent character who is thrown into an impossible situation. She will either lose her brother and preserve her virginity, or she will lose her virginity and her future as a nun (it is interesting to note that the name Isabella means "My God is a vow" which is the life that Isabella intended to lead as a nun) and preserve her brother's life. This is an impossible choice that she should not be forced to make. Just when the situation seems most dire for Isabella, the disguised Duke secretlycomes to her aid. His plan to trick Angelo and save Claudio seems like an answer to everyone's prayers--even though Isabella is left in the dark to believe her brother is dead.

And just when everything seems to be turning out for the better, the Duke shows who he really is. The duke demands that Isabella,who seemed set on a chaste life as a nun, marry him. The plot has thrown her from one precarious situation to another, and she is finally left with no real option, but to marry the duke. Shakespeare provides no evidence that Isabella wants this, nor does he allow her any real escape from the duke's demand. In essence, she is in the same position with the duke as she was with Angelo.

The exploitation of women is not uncommon in Shakespeare's plays, but it seems more pathetic and heart breaking in this play because Isabella does not receive the release of death (as Ophelia and Desdemona do) nor does she receive the acceptance and even enjoyment of her fate (as Kate and Hippolyta do), she must simply endure, suffer, and pay for the wrongs of others. 

Since this "comedy" was so tragic, I am in the mood for a true comedy. And I can't decide. So I am putting it for a vote. Help me decide between The Tempest or The Two Gentlemen of Verona. YAY!

Julius Caesar

Julius Caesar brings up all sorts of questions about the nature of politics, but it also brings up even more important questions about the nature of men. One of the ideas that I found most intriguing in the play is the conflict of honor vs. ambition and which brings greater happiness and success in life. For me, when I come across this question I feel it is more important to be honorable than ambitious. I am happier with myself when I have done and said things that are good rather than doing things that are big and impressive. However, the play call this into question through three characters: Brutus, Cassius, and Antony.

Brutus is the most honorable character in the play. Antony tells us this at the end of the play, "This was the noblest Roman of them all" (Act V Scene 5). Brutus makes his decisions because he truly believes it is what is right for his people and his country. He agreed to kill Caesar because he was given notes that he thought were from the people, leading him to think that the death of Caesar is what the people wanted. Without that reassurance, Brutus would never have agreed to the assassination. He would have continued as he was before. Brutus refuses to kill Antony, because he does not feel that it will help the country. Brutus also agrees to let Antony speak at Caesar's funeral, because Brutus feels it will be good for the people to hear from Antony. Those are both tremendous mistakes. If Brutus had agreed to kill Antony as well, he would not have ended up dead at the end of the play. If Antony had not spoken at the funeral and riled up the people, Brutus would not have ended up dead. Brutus's honor is his tragic flaw. How absolutely terrible is that? Honor and being noble is a flaw, that ends up with a tragic life and death. So if being honorable leads to tragedy, being ambitious must lead to success and happiness, right? That is how it turned out for Antony.

Antony truly loved Caesar. There is no doubt about that. Caesar was his friend and leader and Antony would follow Caesar to the end of the world. But that does not make Antony honorable. Antony is ambitious. He wants power and exploits Caesar's death in order to get power. He prays to the god of chaos. He riles up the people of Rome in order to create chaos. Why does he want chaos? So he can be the one to put the country "back together." That is not honorable. That is ambitious. And it is ambitious in the worst way. And he wins. Antony wins. He gets the power. He turns the country to chaos and he still gets everything he desired. 

Now, Cassius. Cassius is just as ambitious as Antony. However, Cassius's ambition leads him to destruction. Cassius is shrewd and intellectual. He is never wrong. If Brutus had followed through on all of Cassius's ideas and decisions, then both of them would have much more pleasant outcomes. 

So, what should we do as human beings? Should we be honorable? Or should we be ambitious? Based on this play, being honorable leads to losing, and ambition can go either way. This play gives no straight answer about how to live your life. For me, I would rather live honorably and risk the chance of failure, than to live ambitiously and lose my integrity.