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

In Shakespeares Measure for Measure, Angelo emerges as a double-sided character an appropriate focal point for such a problem symbolise, as many of Shakespeares later works are considered to be. Shakespeare awaits to set out taken his inspiration for the story from sources such as Promos and Cassandra (George Whetstone) and Giraldi Cinthios Hecatommithi, two 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 br some other.Scholars have argued for centuries whether Angelo, or indeed Promos, is a moral or an evil character. Those scholars who support the opinion of Angelo as moral often cite the following factors in the play the Duke obviously trusts Angelo Angelo is dis tenderheartednessened enough by the end of the play to pop the question a sincere apology and Angelo tries to resist the temptation that Isabella presents. On the other hand, others h ave argued that Shakespeare depicts Angelo as a purely evil man. These critics emphasise Angelos discourse 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 apparent that the most successful reading of Angelos character is a combination of both of these facets. One of these critics, Leo Kirschbaum, arouses that the mixed bag in the structure of Measure for Measure is the result of a transfigure in the characterization of Angelo. At the scramning of the play, Kirschbaum notes, Angelo is rude and inflexible, but this is enured somewhat by the fact that he is also noble 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, calculate (and) vindictive. Therefore, a comprehensive analysis of the character and his significance is necessary to settle whether Angelo does actua lly deserve sympathy. Upon analysis of the early scenes, we, as the audience, would instinctively begin to consider Angelo a character not worthy of sympathy, as he has ostensibly fooled the Duke into trusting him enough to give him power over capital of Austria 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, even more than his own right-hand man, Escalus, who is lose 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 dart of love endure hurtle a complete bosom and I have on Angelo imposd the spatial relation Who may in thambush of my name strike home in both quotes we are led to mean that the Duke perhaps does not trust Angelo to the cessation that is initially apparent. Instead, it appears to be part of a wider plan of which we are so far unaware. To make a moral judgement on Angelo at this stage of the play would be incorrect however we have tho met him as a person, and only seen him in a brief qualify 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 organization, 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 bound the promiscuous evil of Viennese society at the time.For all the blackball criticism of Angelo, there is in fact plenty of evidence to suggest he is a character with redeeming features who can be seen as re flecting the overconfident implications of punishment in a play so relate with the theme of justice. His apology in the final scene is the prime ideal of his somewhat altered attitude, due to the events of the story. He is sorry that such heartbreak I procure And so deep sticks it in my penitent 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(prenominal) factor of the play which would lead the audience to sympathising somewhat with Angelo and not considering him an alone 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 reaso nable by his selfish actions and hypocritical nature, as we learn that he has attached 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 nirvana will bear Should be as holy as difficult.Although the best analysis of Angelo as a person would clearly be a combination of both malicious and beneficent, as many of the separate 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.