‘A complex character deserving sympathy.’ How far and in what ways do you agree with this view of Angelo in Measure for Measure?

In Shakespe ares Measure for Measure, Angelo emerges as a double-sided character an appropriate focal point for such a problem play, as many of Shakespeares later works are ciphered to be. Shakespeare appears to have taken his inspiration for the story from sources such as Promos and Cassandra (George Whetstone) and Giraldi Cinthios Hecatommithi, both plays in which a self-righteous deputy, be it Promos in Whetstones version, or Angelo in Shakespeares, seduces a woman (Cassandra or Isabella) by promise of pardon for her condemned brother.Scholars have argued for centuries whether Angelo, or thus Promos, is a moral or an evil character. Those scholars who support the notion of Angelo as moral often cite the following actors in the play the Duke obviously trusts Angelo Angelo is put off enough by the end of the play to offer a sincere apology and Angelo tries to resist the temptation that Isabella presents. On the other hand, others have argued that Shakespeare depicts Angelo as a purely evil man. These critics emphasise Angelos treatment of Marian, the Dukes possible suspicion of Angelo, his desire for Isabella, and his broken promise to Isabella.By examining Angelo in both of these circumstances, it will become unvarnished that the most successful interpretation of Angelos character is a combination of both of these facets. One of these critics, Leo Kirschbaum, suggests that the change in the structure of Measure for Measure is the leave alone of a change in the characterization of Angelo. At the beginning of the play, Kirschbaum notes, Angelo is cruel and inflexible, but this is tempered somewhat by the fact that he is also majestic in his consistent adherence to the law.But in the end he is a character who is no longer noble but who is instead small-minded, mean, calculative (and) vindictive. Therefore, a comprehensive analysis of the character and his significance is necessary to decide whether Angelo does actually deserve sympathy. Upon analysis o f the early aspects, we, as the audience, would instinctively begin to consider Angelo a character not expensey of sympathy, as he has ostensibly fooled the Duke into trusting him enough to give him power over Vienna and then immediately condemns Claudio to death for impregnating his lover, despite his genuine love for her.By telling Angelo Mortality and mercy in Vienna Live in thy tongue, and heart, it is apparent that the Duke trusts Angelo, nevertheless more than his own right-hand man, Escalus, who is overlooked to be the Dukes deputy. This, however, is overshadowed by the Dukes conversation with the friar in I. iii where he says Believe not that the dribbling zip of love Can pierce a complete bosom and I have on Angelo imposd the office Who may in thambush of my name strike inhabitancy in both quotes we are led to believe that the Duke perhaps does not trust Angelo to the extent that is initially apparent. Instead, it appears to be part of a wider plan of which we are s o outlying(prenominal) unaware. To make a moral judgement on Angelo at this stage of the play would be incorrect however we have yet met him as a person, and only seen him in a brief exchange whilst accepting the position the Duke offers him. He is, however, tyrannous enough to promise Claudios liberty in return for Isabellas virginity, such is his power in the Dukes place.These factors, along with his cruel treatment of Mariana, with whom he had plans of marriage which broke down because her promised proportions Came sort of composition, exposing his shallow and hypocritical nature, would point to Angelo not being worthy of the audiences sympathy, and simply a cold, emotionless character (whose blood is very snowbroth) created by Shakespeare to reflect the promiscuous evil of Viennese society at the time.For all the negative criticism of Angelo, there is in fact plenty of evidence to suggest he is a character with deliver features who can be seen as reflecting the positive implic ations of punishment in a play so concerned with the theme of justice. His apology in the final scene is the prime example of his somewhat altered attitude, due to the events of the story. He is sorry that such sorrow I procure And so deep sticks it in my ruthful heart a quote which refers to the Dukes analysis that the dribbling dart of love Can not pierce a complete bosom.This apology, especially with its placement at the end of the play, does leave the audience with a slightly more positive view of Angelo than would be had otherwise. Angelos initial refusal of Isabellas offering whilst carrying out the Dukes plan is another factor of the play which would lead the audience to sympathising somewhat with Angelo and not considering him an entirely malicious character.Despite the evidence of these two points, however, I firmly believe that Angelo is mainly a character undeserving of sympathy, whose reputation amongst the masses is well-founded by his selfish actions and hypocritical nature, as we learn that he has committed a crime far worse than Claudios something apparently known by the Duke, who soliloquises at the end of Act III, saying He who the sword of heaven will bear Should be as holy as severe.Although the best analysis of Angelo as a person would clearly be a combination of both malicious and beneficent, as many of the key characters in Shakespeares problem plays would best be described as, he does appear to be vastly a malevolent being, not worth of the audiences compassion.