SOURCE: "'Infinite Space': Representation and Reformation in Measure for Measure" in Shakespeare Quarterly, Vol. 49, No. 4, Winter, 1998, pp. 393-410.

In the essay that follows, Diehl maintains that Shakespeare's use of "representational strategies, " such as substitutions, in Measure for Measure reflect his experimentation "with a Protestant aesthetic of the stage."

Measure For Measure is a deeply dissatisfying comedy, so problematic that, as Jean Howard argues, it "puts critics under stress."¹ They typically respond by judging, finding fault with the play's structure, the Duke's elaborate manipulations, Isabella's ethical choices, Shakespeare's use of the bed-trick, and, especially, the final trial scene, with its exaggerated theatricality, its failure to effect any real reformation, and its unsettling subversion of the conventional comic ending.² Identifying a pattern of failed, inadequate, and problematic substitutions in Measure for Measure, Alexander Leggatt, like many other critics, concludes that the play is flawed:

I am not saying that Shakespeare...