CRITICISM

Brooke, Stopford A. “Measure for Measure.” In Ten More Plays of Shakespeare, pp. 139-164. London: Constable, 1913.

Compares Measure for Measure with other Shakespearean dramas—particularly the tragedies of King Lear, Hamlet, and Othello—and concentrates on the play's moral themes.

Ciliotta-Rubery, Andrea. “An Opposing Worldview: Transient Morality in Shakespeare's Measure for Measure and Machiavelli's Mandragola.” Logos 6, no. 2 (2003): 84-107.

Contrasts Measure for Measure and Machiavelli's Mandragola in terms of their depiction of moral order and corruption.

Crane, Mary Thomas. “Male Pregnancy and Cognitive Permeability in Measure for Measure.” Shakespeare Quarterly 49, no. 3 (autumn 1998): 269-92.

Applies contemporary cognitive theory to Measure for Measure's depiction of mind, body, sexuality, power, and authority.

Dodd, William. “Power and Performance: Measure for Measure in the Public Theater of 1604-1605.” Shakespeare Studies 24 (1996): 211-40.

Links the tragicomic qualities of Measure for Measure with historical attempts by King James I to reinforce his monarchical power by means of the English public theater.

Enterline, Lynne. “What ‘Womanhood Denies’ the Power of ‘Tongues to Tell.’” Shakespeare Studies 27 (1999): 25-36.

Discusses efforts by Shakespeare's female characters to surmount the limitations placed upon their verbal expression by patriarchal discourse, concentrating in particular on Isabella's plea for Claudio's life in Measure for Measure.

Gash, Antony. “Shakespeare, Carnival and the Sacred: The Winter's Tale and Measure for Measure.” In Shakespeare and Carnival: After Bakhtin, edited by Ronald Knowles, pp. 177-210. London: Macmillan, 1998.

Examines the influence of the Erasmian serio-comic tradition on Shakespearean drama, focusing in particular on Measure for Measure and The Winter's Tale.

Gelb, Hal. “Duke Vincentio and the Illusion of Comedy or All's Not Well That Ends Well.” Shakespeare Quarterly 22, no. 1 (winter 1971): 25-34.

Maintains that Shakespeare employed an experimental structure in Measure for Measure that mingles comic expectations with tragic potentiality.

Hayne, Victoria. “Performing Social Practice: The Example of Measure for Measure.” Shakespeare Quarterly 44, no. 1 (spring 1993): 1-29.

Claims that Measure for Measure stages certain social acts, including disrupted betrothals, prenuptial pregnancy, and adultery, in accordance with the comic conventions of the early modern theater.

Little, Arthur L., Jr. “Absolute Bodes, Absolute Laws: Staging Punishment in Measure for Measure.” In Shakespearean Power and Punishment: A Volume of Essays, edited by Gillian Murray Kendall, pp. 113-29. Cranbury, N.J.: Associated University Presses, 1998.

Offers a Foucaultian analysis of authority and punishment in Measure for Measure, noting that the play is principally concerned with “the Duke's impenetrable and unknowable body and power.”

Marrapodi, Michele, ed. “English and Italian Intertexts of the Ransom Plot in Measure for Measure.” In Shakespeare and Intertextuality: The Transition of Cultures Between Italy and England in the Early Modern Period, pp. 103-117. Rome: Bulzoni Editore, 2000.

Probes Shakespeare's adaptation of early modern English and Italian literary ransom scenarios in Measure for Measure.

Miles, Rosalind. The Problem of Measure for Measure: A Historical Investigation. New York: Barnes & Noble Books, 1976, 349 p.

Attempts to place Measure for Measure within its proper historical context, evaluating the play's themes, characters, and plot in terms of the social and dramatic conventions of 1604 and preceding decades.

Price, Jonathan R. “Measure for Measure and the Critics: Towards a New Approach.” Shakespeare Quarterly 20, no. 2 (spring 1969): 179-204.

Surveys more than a century of critical dispute in regard to Measure for Measure and discusses the work's inherent ambiguities of character, theme, and dramatic structure.

Shuger, Debora Kuller. Political Theologies in Shakespeare's England: The Sacred and the State in Measure for Measure. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave, 2001, 194 p.

Historicist assessment of early modern political theology and the tensions between Christian and secular conceptions of authority and justice depicted in Measure for Measure.

Stevenson, David L. “Design and Structure in Measure for Measure: A New Appraisal.” ELH 23, no. 4 (December 1956): 256-78.

Asserts the central significance of irony and paradox to the dramatic design of Measure for Measure.

———. “The Role of James I in Shakespeare's Measure for Measure.” ELH 26, no. 2 (June 1959): 188-208.

Approaches Measure for Measure as an “intellectual comedy” centered on the contentious nature of government.

Wasson, John. “Measure for Measure: A Play of Incontinence.” ELH 27, no. 4 (December 1960): 262-75.

Focuses on the critically troubling figures of the Duke and Angelo in Measure for Measure, claiming that the former represents the Christian virtues of temperance and mercy as opposed to retributive justice, while the latter can be interpreted as “the incontinent man” whose wicked or unjust deeds derive from circumstance rather than an inherent character flaw.