Measure for Measure... and Music!

While I was in the shower, I started to think about how lonely a quiet shower is, especially in the morning, when I'm trying to get energized and ready for the day ahead. I wished that my iPod had better portable speakers so that I could wrap it in a plastic bag and listen to my music in the shower so I wouldn't have to hear the extremely annoying muffled conversations of every other person in the bathroom with me.

Then I thought, "Wouldn't it be cool if the books we read in class had a soundtrack?" This thought was born out of desperation, I'll admit, and the need to talk about other things for this blog. But hey, music!

 Also, I don't remember if anyone else has done this before. If so, thank you so much for inadvertently inspiring me! You are a magical human. If not, then cool, too, because I sort of borrowed the soundtrack idea from Tumblr, as well.

So here's  my music series for "Measure for Measure". I came up with songs that I think say a lot about the three main characters: Angelo, Claudio, and Isabella. They might be songs that have to do with their characters, or songs the characters might listen to, were the play set in modern times.

Angelo (the dirty bastard)
"All These Things That I've Done"-- The Killers
"Ever Fallen in Love (With Someone you Shouldn't?)" -- The Buzzcocks
"Turn Me On" -- Bromheads Jacket
"Arabella" -- Arctic Monkeys

Claudio (ya hecked up big time, buddy)
"Apple Tree" -- Wolfmother
"World Spins Madly On" -- The Weepies
"The Lion and the Wolf" -- Thrice
"Older Brother" -- Pepper Rabbit

Isabella (oh girlie, ya got some decisions to make)
"Almost Pretty" -- The Perishers
"Awake my Soul" -- Mumford&Sons
"Dead Sea" -- The Lumineers
"Mace Spray" -- The Jezabels

Angelo Did Not Handle All This Well…..

I want to go back to Measure for Measure, to a discussion that has stuck with me about Angelo. A question was asked as to how could the people think that Angelo was a good person, and then when he took the place of the Duke, he behaved as he did? My thinking on this matter is that his position changes him or brought the worst out in him. I agree with everyone that Angelo is a terrible person, but I think that if he had stayed a “commoner” the likelihood that he would behave the way he did would be less likely. The reason I believe that Angelo would not behave in the way he does towards Isabella is because he would not have been in the position to behave in that way. As a commoner he is expectations and behaviors are different because he is a follower to his government, but when he becomes in charge, people become responsible to meet his expectations, which in his mind gives him the right to behave in anyway he wants. As cliché as this idea is, this image sums up my feelings of Angelo’s behavior…..

So, this idea of “with great power comes great responsibility” (thanks Stan Lee) screams Angelo to me because he was not able to use his position responsibly. He didn’t behave in the interest of the people, but rather in the interest of himself.

Post 2/5

Image: www.keepcalm-o-matic.co.uk 

Measure for Measure

I'm going to return to Measure for Measure real quick. I just wanted to say how I feel bad for Isabella, and that I do not think that the ending was all around satisfactory. I'm not even going to get into my feelings about Angelo, because what he asked of Isabella was wrong all around and I cannot express enough how much he creeps me out.

I think Isabella's decision to not give up her virginity to save her brother's life was definitely justified. Although Claudio's crime may not have been as bad as some others, which were ignored, Isabella still believed that her brother committed a sin. As much as she wanted to save his life, she did not want to do so by committing the same sin herself by giving up her virginity to Angelo. At first Claudio was cool with this, but then he changed his mind and saw her as being selfish.

I do not think that Isabella was being selfish. Isabella sincerely believed that her brother was going to hell for his actions; she didn't want to have to condemn herself just to extend his life for a little while, especially since she wanted to become a nun. Nobody should ever be forced or guilted into sleeping with somebody.

As for the Duke, it just annoyed me endlessly how he proposed to Isabella at the end. Was he planning this all along, or did he just happen to notice that she is a strong, independent woman and decide that he wanted her, just as Angelo did? We don't really know for sure, and we never find out what her answer to him is in the end because she has no dialogue. I like that this gives directors of different productions of this play freedom the play around with this and decide how they want Isabella to react through expression. However, I did not like that the Duke did not seem to give her much of a chance to answer, and that he asked for her hand in marriage even though he knew that she was going to become a nun. Even though in the end her brother's life was spared because of the Duke's master plan, I just don't see how Isabella would even consider marrying him after he lied about Claudio's death and tricked her.

Isabella and Claudio: Family Feud

I'm going to bring us back to Isabella and Claudio for a second because apparently I saved a draft and then assumed it fell off the face of the Earth.
Now that we've had class about this whole brotherly/sisterly love situation, I feel like my view may have changed a bit.

When I first read the scene where Isabella goes to tell her brother that she wasn't going to sleep with Angelo to free her brother, I was so irritated with her. I mean, Claudio was arrested for sleeping with the woman he loves, the woman he plans to marry. When I saw that Isabella wasn't going to do what Angelo wanted her to do, I was so upset that she was condemning poor Juliet to a life without a husband and her poor child would never have a father. I saw Isabella's decision as one that was keeping Claudio from the love of his life and Juliet from her happy ending.

Plus, if Angelo slept with Isabella, he would be committing the same crime he arrested Claudio for, so he would have to be sentenced to death too, right? Happy ending for everyone, right?

But after we discussed this scene in class, I realised that I wasn't really thinking about Isabella in all of this, and then I realised it wouldn't be a happy ending for everyone. If, after this tryst, Isabella gets pregnant, Lord knows Angelo's going to turn the other way on that one. Scum canoes just aren't built to be dads. Plus she was training to become a nun (do you train to be that or...Sister Act didn't prepare me for this) and sleeping with Angelo would essentially ruin that for her. Sure, Claudio would be free to be with Juliet, but Isabella would have no future, and I'm sure she wouldn't be able to marry after that point. I'm sure maybe there'd be someone somewhere, but her chances are slim.

Maybe I haven't changed my view fully but I am definitely a lot more conflicted about this scene then I originally was. At first I was like, "No no no, Isabella just sleep with that icky Angelo it'll be fine, Claudio needs to live!" And while I still believe that yeah, Claudio definitely needs to live (which he does, thankfully), I know understand that Isabella needs to consider her future in all of this.
And I agree with Jordan that, Isabella didn't get Claudio in this position so why should she throw away everything for him?

Plus let's be real, no one wants anything to do with this scum canoe, giving me the heebie jeebies. May God be with Mariana.

Next On Jerry Springer: Do You Have A Duke Ruining Your City With His Self-Glory Plan???

This play is supposed to be a comedy. I was not amused! It had its funny parts but the humor is seriously comparable to Jerry Springer. I mean come on, name one other show that has just as much sex drama. Measure for Measure could seriously have its own episode. They need some professionals after the whole thing was over. 

If you've ever seen Jerry Springer, the Duke would definitely be the guy who comes out last that all the girls or guys try to beat up right when they get on stage. 

Why not Angelo? 

I'm sure he would have gotten his fair share before the Duke shows up, but I see that the Duke should get most of the blame. 

This entire play, the whole thing, the madness is caused by this single man. He doesn't want to be the "bad" guy and punish his people, so he hands all of his authority to Angelo with hopes he will take care of things. Then the Duke takes a "vacation, when he really just dresses up like a friar ready to start some shit.

We all know that Angelo takes his power to extremes and can be seen as a slimy hypocrite throughout the entire play. However, the duke the whole time was causing drama on his own. He made this entire plan to get Angelo for the same crime, he "saved" Claudio, and doesn't harshly punish any of his people for breaking the law (except Lucio). He was the hero! Yipee.

Not impressed.

This guy had this plan the entire time. He wanted to look good in his people's eyes and try to get the girl at the end. Poor Isabella. If I was her, I would have stayed just as silent. With my luck I would have said something that got my head and Claudio's head cut off real quick. 

It's kind of disgusting how the Duke got his attention and "glory". He caused all of that drama for people just to come out looking better than he did before. 

If I had a say, I would say off with his head.

Where is Isabella?

I know a lot of people on the blog have already been talking about the Duke but I wanted to throw in my two-cents as well. I don't understand why the Duke in Measure for Measure asked Isabella to marry him in the end of the play. What was even the purpose of that? Throughout the entirety of the play I had no reason to believe that he might want Isabella for himself. The Duke kind of just threw that statement in at the end of the play like, “Give me your hand and say you will be mine…” (Act V. Scene I. 564)…AND ISABELLA NEVER RESPONDS. More than anything else about this play, this is what annoyed and frustrated me the most. Isabella has this strong voice through every Act, she makes herself known as a strong and intelligent woman and in the end in the face of marriage she has no dialogue. I guess what I wanted to understand better was why the play ended that way? And if anyone from class had any theories as to why Shakespeare did this. Was it because of what Dr. Mitchell-Buck said? Was Shakespeare tired? Or was there an ulterior motive? If there was then I do not see it.

Elizabethan Reality: "Undercover Duke"

     As we were wrapping up our final thought on Measure for Measure last class, I couldn't help but notice how this play can parallel as an Elizabethan version of “Undercover Boss.” For those that are unfamiliar with this television show, “Undercover Boss” follows CEO's who disguise themselves and go to work base-level jobs inside their own businesses unbeknownst to their employees. As amusing as this might sound, I envision the Duke as being the original “undercover boss.”

      I realize several people were annoyed with the Duke for leaving his post; and, in some ways, I can see how the Duke could be blamed for everything going to pot in his absence.  The Duke did leave an immoral hypocrite in power when he clearly should not have been in any sort of authoritative role.  Furthermore, his being MIA nearly culminated in the loss of a life that could have been preserved under his own rule.  But I personally found myself much more amused than annoyed with the Duke.  To some extent, I even wanted to congratulate him for setting things up so Angelo's corruption was so clearly unveiled.  If the Duke hadn't left and Angelo hadn't risen to such a level of control, Angelo's true character and nature would not have been revealed to the extent that it ultimately was.  If all this hadn't happened, Angelo would have remained with power he was underserving of.  In fact, I believe that perhaps the Duke's “holiday of sorts" was a rather bold and clever scheme that can be easily likened to the modern reality show - “Undercover Boss.”  Using his disguise, the Duke was able to see firsthand the ways issues were dealt with in his absence, just as the CEOs in the show are able to nose around their businesses as disguised employees to analyze efficiency, productivity and customer service elements, etc.     

This link will connect you to a more visual representation of the kind of snarky B.A. reveal I would like to imagine the Duke pulls off when he pitches his friar disguise to the wayside. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZYvt_pEolo

The Duke of Dork

I've struggled with this, but I just do not like the Duke. Whenever I picture him I see this:

Just ewww. 

So now that you have Tim Curry playing the ever sleazy Cardinal from "Three Musketeers" (the real one) in your head, I'm going to give you Sara's Top Ten Reasons The Duke Stinks

1. He forces Angelo to take on his job and then sneaks back in to spy on him.

2. He dresses as a friar and uses the disguise to manipulate Isabella and Marianna.

3. He tells Marianna that replacing Isabella is not a sin because she has a contract with Angelo - the same conditions under which Claudio has been condemned and Juliet imprisoned.

4. He manipulates Isabella and Marianna for pretty much the entire play.

5. He uses Claudio's death, or lack thereof, as leverage against Isabella - not telling her until just before he pops the question.

6. He punishes the daylights out of Lucio for things he says to/about him while he is disguised as the Friar. Yes, I get it, Lucio is really annoying but the punishment was petty and personal. Making an honest woman of the prostitute he left with child would have sufficed.

7. He doesn't solve anything! All of his worry about lax follow through of laws and his actions ends with a petty round of an eye for an eye or "Measure for Measure."

8. He uses his sneaky leverage to get the girl - I think. As far as I can tell, Isabella never says yes.

9. He expects Angelo to do the job he is not capable of and faults him for being as lecherous as himself (If Lucio is to be believed).

10. Well, number ten is  - All of this adds up to a Duke who is as much of a "scum canoe" as Angelo.


2 of 5

#TeamClaudio or #TeamIsabella

After reading Act 3, Scene 1, I'm not exactly sure how I feel about the outcome. We just found out Angelo's proposition in e last act. If I was in Isabella's shoes, I would have said HELL NO, just like she did. But then I would seriously have to think about it because my sibling's life would be on the line.

Once Isabella goes to the prison to talk to Claudio, she finally tells her brother what Angelo said. At first, Claudio totally agrees with Isabella's decision. He says "thou shalt not do't" (Line 116). It's up for debate on how this line would be performed. I felt the sincerity and that he knows how important Isabella's chastity is to her. He had to know she was working on becoming a nun. This makes me very much Team Claudio. For him to say this first before questioning Isabella's descion, means a lot in my eyes. Once he does question the proposition, it's not like he's mean or harsh to Isabella. He basically says "it wouldn't be too horrible if you slept with Angelo". 

If my sibling was in a terrible situation and that was my only option, Angelowould definitely have to be decent looking for me to consider it. I'm sorry, but if I'm saving your unlawful ass the man better be somewhat good looking. I do, however, understand why Isabella chooses not to follow through with the plan. Their time period and today's time period are EXTREMELY different, especially with perceptions of premarital sex. If Isabella chose to sleep with Angelo, her life would be literally over; no nunnery or even respect from anyone. It would even get better after life; hell for eternity!!!

Overall, I understand Isabella, but I would totally save my sibling regardless. It would be different if Claudio had committed a horrible crime. All he did was sleep with a woman he loves and plans on marrying. It's not right that Isabella is being asked to break the very same law to save her brother, but what other choice is there?

Was Justice Served?

This is a question I have been pondering since I finished Measure for Measure last night, and I have not been able to come up with a satisfying answer.

As much as I dislike Angelo, I am glad he did not die...I think. I'm actually not sure on that one. I do know, however, that I'm annoyed he married Marianna. I know that was supposed to be a punishment because he left Marianna and made people believe she had sex, but I don't understand how being married to a woman who loves him - despite all of his gigantic flaws - can be considered a punishment. While death may have been too severe, I would have accepted Angelo being locked up for a while or something. I just feel like he didn't really get what he deserved.

I totally did not foresee the Duke asking Isabelle to marry him. Am I the only one? That kind of came out of nowhere to me. And did she say yes? I mean, at the end the Duke told her what's mine is yours and what's yours is mine (Act 5, Scene 1), but did she respond to his proposal at all? Maybe she did and I just missed it. Anyway, I was super surprised by that. I am also glad Claudio got to marry Juliet. He didn't deserve to be in prison at all (in my opinion), so I am happy he was able to be with Juliet again.

Overall, I'm kind of dissatisfied with the ending of the play. I really liked to first four acts, but the last act bugged me. I don't feel like justice was served for Angelo, and the Duke's proposal to Isabelle bothers me. She wanted to be a nun. She refused Angelo's offer to save Claudio because she did not want to be dammed to Hell, only to have the Duke ask for her hand in marriage. I understand that a relationship between them would be very different than what Angelo had in mind, but it still bothers me. I wish she could continue on her journey to becoming a nun, not being stuck with the Duke. I mean, can you really say no to a Duke?

Wowie wow wow; In Which I Make a Strange Comparison

SO today in class (yesterday, really), when we started to talk about Angelo's scumminess and his general self-awareness, and his creepy lust for Isabella, I started to think about other characters with the same amount of ick and self-righteousness.

As per usual, my brain danced it's way to Disneyworld.

I hope that y'all remember "The Hunchback of Notre Dame". Because, to me, Angelo is definitely exhibiting some Frollo-like tendencies over here (Speaking of more Victor Hugo characters; I saw the Javert comparison, and that was GREAT).

The scumminess and righteous/just/cold Carl attitude, the crazy lust for a fairly innocent maiden who just wants to do her own thing, while trying to do the right thing... It's intense, man. Especially when I start to think of Angelo singing "Hellfire", because then things get weird but they start to make a whole bucketload of sense.

Frollo knows he shouldn't be lusting for Esmerelda, but he cannot stop himself. And if he cannot have her, than no one can. He even attempts to guilt her into having sex with him so she can 'save' the gypsy camp. Disney gets dark, man. I rewatched this in my history class in high school, and it was definitely not the same film I remember as a youngster. But that's okay.

So. What do y'all think?!

2 of 5

Mercy vs Justice

No, I'm not talking about that song by Kanye West. And  no, I'm not talking about that teenybopper store either. I'm talking about the actual words, what they mean (at least what they mean to me), and how they both play major roles in this play.

Mercy, at least to me, means to have the ability to inflict pain, punishment, death, etc. upon another being but choosing not to. This is a quality I have seen in the Duke as well as Mariana. I've seen this in the Duke when he eventually decides not to sentence Angelo to death. True, it was because Mariana protested against it, but as a duke, he could easily ignore her protests and kill Angelo anyways. Mariana shows mercy towards Angelo because, even though she had been wronged by him, she still forgave him for his actions and wanted him to have life.

So, I suppose good things really do happen to bad people. Angelo better praise Jesus (or Satan) for giving him a merciful woman such as Mariana.

The topic of justice that we discussed in class immediately reminded me of Javert from Les Miserables, which is yet another play (or musical, rather) that is a great illustration of mercy vs. justice. I mean, the dang thing opens with a bunch of dudes pleading for mercy and Javert (the law/justice) basically saying "No. You guys stole bread and now you have to pull this giant ship."

I'm a huge (and I mean HUGE) Les Miserables fan, so let me just include the reprise of the song by Gavroche and the rest of the underprivileged Parisians for your enjoyment. Notice how the privileged few seem to just turn a blind eye to the cries for mercy.

In this play, I believe Valjean represents mercy and Javert represents justice. Valjean shows mercy towards Javert by sparing his life, even though Javert has been a huge scumbucket towards him throughout the entire sequence of events. Javert was acting as the law, because as we all know, he is the law and the law is him.  Law is most commonly associated with justice and...you get it.

Anyways, mercy and justice battle it out throughout both of these plays. Ultimately, if you are looking at both plays through the lens of mercy vs. justice, mercy wins. In the case of Javert and Valjean, I think at the point where Valjean spares Javert's life is the point that shows Javert the dangers of blindly seeking justice without any mercy. I think that this leads Javert to look back on his life and how he had been living it and made him see that justice without mercy is really no way to live a righteous life (and we all know Javert is all about being righteous). So, he kills himself after yet another huge soliloquy and actually succeeds in making the audience feel sorry for him (or at least me).

Also, I ask you to please ignore Russel Crowe's mediocre singing. I just chose this class because the acting is good and I think that seeing the scene acted out really puts the whole thing into context.

Anyways, back to Measure for Measure (FINALLY!). In my opinion, Angelo most closely parallels Javert at least in the scene where Isabella is asking Angelo to show mercy towards her brother. Angelo responds "It is the law, not I, condemn your brother." (Act 2 Scene 2). This is a very Javert-like thing to say. Angelo could very well pardon Isabella's brother because...well...his offence wasn't that bad considering he was getting married to his lover soon (just like all Valjean did was steal some bread to feed his family). However, he showed no mercy and ended up (SPOILER) marrying Mariana. Not as bad as flinging one's self off a bridge, but whatever.

The Duke most closely parallels Valjean due to the fact that he purposefully spares Angelo's life even though killing him would be the most "just" thing to do, at least by the standards set at that time. However, he was merciful and spared him from the death penalty.

So, what I got from this is that, in the end, mercy always wins. But that's just me.

"Measure for Measure" :

So. "Measure for Measure" is actually really interesting! I've never personally read it before, but I know that it is actually my high school English teacher's favorite Shakespeare play as well. This is a fascinating connection between two teachers that actually might have a supernatural origin, but that's beside the point.
I've heard of it called 'a problem play' before, as well, when said English teacher was trying to describe the plot of it before. And, to be honest, I never really grasped what that meant. It was funny, like a comedy, but things weren't so black and white and twin-switchery and such. But that's about it.
Now, though, I think I'm beginning to understand the concept of a problem play, which is nice. It's funny enough, but with wayyy darker tones than most comedies usually have. I also am much more emotionally invested in these characters than I usually get with a Shakespeare comedy. For instance, in "A Midsummer's Night Dream", I really don't care what happens to the characters, as I know it's going to turn out pretty okay at the end. But with a play like "Measure for Measure", I'm genuinely concerned with what's going to happen with Isabelle, and her idiot brother.
This play hurts in a way that a usual 'comedy' would not. I don't want Isabelle to compromise her ideals and what she believes is moral and right in the eyes of God, but I also don't want idiotic Claudio  to die for having sex with the woman he loves. So I'm conflicted, and I can feel the problem here.

(1 of 5)

The Question of Isabelle's Justification

I'm not surprised that so many people are offended by the question "was Isabelle's choice justified?"
Judging from the video we watched and the intense perverseness of the scene in which this question was meant for, it is perfectly rational for the answer to that question to be: "Um, that's a bullshit question because a woman's body is her right and not some poker chip she has to use to gamble for what's clearly right." or "That's a bullshit question because of feminine rights and that dude was clearly a rapist or some kind of sexual fiend."

However, I for one live by the age old rule that states: "There is no such thing as a bullshit question." I'm paraphrasing of course, but you get the idea.

Honestly, I'm pretty sure the question of Isabelle's "justification" was meant to be a rhetorical one; at least by modern standards. I hate to keep bringing it up, but a woman's sexuality was a commodity back in Shakespeare's time and even before then, as we have seen with the Canterbury Tales. So the question of if her choice was "justified" is perfectly rational to ask, even if the guy proposing the choice is a raging pervert.

But also, there have been plenty of other examples through different forms of media in which a woman is presented with the choice to give herself to some guy (or guys...ew) in exchange for someone's life or what not. Let's look at the queen from 300 for example. Yes, I am aware that 300 was an incredibly hokey movie and not entirely (if at all) factual. However, I chose this because it is a pretty modern example of what I would like to call: "Isabelle's Choice".

For those of you not familiar with the movie, let me explain the scene I am referring to. Leonidas and his men have holed themselves up in the Hot Gates and have been fighting valiantly against the Persian armies for a really long time. However, without reinforcements, their fighting would most certainly be in vain and they would all die. The queen, Gorgo, loves her husband very much and believes in his cause. She has faith that victory is in their grasp and all they need is more reinforcements. However, even as queen of Sparta, Gorgo cannot simply send the reinforcements to her husband's aid. She needs to sway the council (all men of course) to send the reinforcements; which requires the support of a particularly lecherous and traitorous councilmember named Theron. Here is where he presents Isabelle's Choice: Give yourself to me and I will sway the council in your favor. Refuse and you and your husband are SOL.

Here's the actual scene. And, I will warn you that things get uncomfortable at around 2:41.

Now, Gorgo chose to sleep with Theron, who was neither a gentle or ideal lover by far; which didn't work out in her favor because Theron betrayed her and well...the rest is history.

My point is: if Isabelle had chosen to sleep with the equally disgusting and unlikeable Angelo, would the question still be "bullshit"? If he had approached her in a kinder and more romantic way (let's say with flowers and chocolates, while strumming a lyre and singing beneath her balcony), would her choice not to sleep with him to save an innocent man still be "bullshit"?  

Although, because of the kind of person Isabelle is and because of the modern times we live in, it is quite difficult for us to consider her choice to not have sex with Angelo as anything but justified.

I just thought the comparison between these two different characters would make for an interesting discussion because I, myself, had issues trying to figure out how the question of Isabelle's justification even came into being. However, after much thought and seeing the two different answers to the same choice, I began to at least understand it a little bit.

Two Characters of Confusion

So I feel as though Lord Angelo was the character that our class had the most questions about. For me however, two characters that I had the most questions about were Isabella and the Duke. Something that I do not understand about Isabella was when she left the nunnery to go seek out her brother Claudio after Lucio implores her to go save him. “I will about it straight, No longer staying but to give the Mother Notice of my affair. I humbly thank you. Commend me to my brother. Soon at night I’ll send him certain word of my success.” (Act. 1 scene 4, 94-98) I don’t understand why she was naïve enough to think that she wouldn’t have to partake in some sort of unfavorable act to in order to save Claudio, and why then was she so willing to leave the nunnery? Isabella didn’t spare a second thought to leaving, and yet all she expected she would have to do would be to plead and beg Angelo? I guess I’m just surprised at her quick action and dismayed at her naivety.

            The Duke also confuses me. We talked in class about how he was a coward for letting Angelo step in to reinforce the rules of Vienna, and yet he is a caring coward. No true coward would have lurked around the city in disguise to see what was happening to his people. What I wonder is if he will step in as himself, and not as a disguised friar later in the play. All this advice he is lending out as a friar is well and good but right now his people need him to be rightful king. I am hoping that as we read on into the play Isabella and the Duke will become clearer characters to me.

Initial impression of Measure for Measure

I'm actually enjoying Measure for Measure, which is not something I thought I would be saying...or rather, typing. The first time I read the first scene, I was completely and utterly lost. But, once I went over it again, it made more sense, and the rest of the act as well as act two seemed to fall into place. Now I find myself genuinely curious about how the play will continue on.

That being said, I loathe Angelo. A lot. I don't see how he thinks it is a brilliant idea to make Isabelle have sex with him in order to free Claudio. He is asking Isabelle to do the same thing her brother is in jail for. That makes perfect sense. Angelo is just super sketchy, and I hope Isabelle continues to keep saying no to him....Sorry, Claudio.

Furthermore, I don't understand why the Duke gave all of his power to Angelo while he is away. I think Escalus should have been given the Duke's power, but he isn't even considered. I'm assuming we will eventually find out why the Duke chose Angelo, and I just hope he has a solid reason.

It's almost as if the power the Duke has given Angelo has gone straight to his head, so I would like to see someone knock him down a peg. Perhaps that someone will be Isabelle.

Isabella's justification

I was baffled today by the question “was Isabella’s choice justified?” and not because I didn’t know the answer: because there is a clear answer and I’m a little bit disgusted that it was actually a question being asked.

No one is ever obligated to justify not wanting to have sex with someone else. Maybe Angelo grossed her out, maybe he was creepy, maybe she really wanted to be a nun, or maybe she just doesn't swing for that team. None of these questions/justifications are necessary. Isabella didn't want to sleep with him, end of story. It doesn't matter if her brother is going to die because of it, it is her choice and her choice should be respected, not scrutinized for how justified it was.

Not to mention that even if you read the story without the scene we watched in mind, even if you interpret it as word for word what is written and no more, Angelo is trying to coerce her into sex. He is using her brother’s death as blackmail for her body. That is rape and she had every right to say no to him.

Sorry, this just bothered me so much during class and I had to post about it.