'Tis pity she's (not) a whore.

[e_juliana]

I was drawn into a discussion last night of Measure For Measure and the problems inherent in setting it (or any Shakespeare) in a modern setting. This one is especially thorny for the lead actress, since her dilemma is so far removed from modern life: sleep with Angelo and spare her brother, or preserve her virginity and let Claudio die? (I am aware that Shakespeare's audience wouldn't have sympathized with her overmuch, but women's virginity was much more of an issue 400 years ago.) The actress mentioned that she had been quizzing her social circle, and that the answers broke fairly cleanly along gender lines, with the men having much less of a problem with Isabella basically prostituting herself for her brother than the women. (Hmmm. A little personal bias creeped in there, methinks.) Our male friend (who's playing Lucio) argued that it's for a life, so even though it's not a fantastic solution, the woman should save her brother. He even said that if the reverse were to happen, and the man had to go to prison a la Oz to save his sister, that it should be done. My argument is that by asking Isabella to give up the one piece of power she has, Claudio & Angelo are asking her to give up her life. She would not be allowed to join the convent - her life's ambition - if she was not a virgin. She would be a woman with no place, no rank, no life. Death would be preferable to such a fate, and she in fact expresses the desire to change place with her brother, so that she may give her life for his.

So, I ask you - what do you think? Which of these fates would you choose, and why? Why do you think the discussion breaks along gender lines?

Comments

[septembergrrl.livejournal.com]

I would prostitute myself. I recognize this is a modern answer, but I can't get myself into a head-space where preserving my rank and getting into a convent is worth someone's death.