Contact us
 |
[email protected] |
 |
3275638434 |
 |
 |
| Paper Publishing WeChat |
Useful Links
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Article
Must We Release All Sinners Because of Our Sins? Clemency Power in Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure
Author(s)
Rinat Kitai-Sangero
Full-Text PDF
XML 837 Views
DOI:10.17265/2159-5836/2017.05.002
Affiliation(s)
Carmel Academic Center and College of Law and Business, Ramat Gan, Israel
ABSTRACT
The paper examines the concepts of justice and mercy in Shakespeare’s play Measure for Measure. As opposed to the strict meaning of the term “Measure for Measure”, analysis of the play demonstrates that it endorses for various reasons the ideas of mercy and clemency, and the conception that every person is entitled to and is capable of redemption.
KEYWORDS
retribution, clemency, mercy, Measure for Measure
Cite this paper
References
Aristotle. (2004). The Nicomachean ethics. New York, U.S.: Oxford University Press.
Asimov, I. (1970). Asimov’s guide to Shakespeare (Vol. I). New York, U.S.: Doubleday and Company.
Austin, S., & Nasser, H. (2004). On lawful lawlessness: George Ryan, executive clemency, and the rhetoric of sparing life. Stanford Law Review, 56, 1307-1344.
Batey, R. (2001). Kenneth Starr—Among others—Should have (Re)read Measure for Measure. Oklahoma City University Law Review, 26, 261-306.
Bennett, J. W. (1966). Measure for Measure as royal entertainment. New York, US: Columbia University Press.
Boudin, L. B. (1976). The presidential pardons of James R. Hoffa and Richard M. Nixon: Have the limitations on the pardon power been exceeded?. University of Colorado Law Review, 48, 1-40.
Braithwaite, W. T. (1982). Poetry and the criminal law: The idea of punishment in Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure. Loyola University of Chicago Law Journal, 791-816.
Clayton, M. (2013). Forgiving the unforgivable: Reinvigorating the use of executive clemency. Boston College Law Review, 54, 751-788.
Cookson, L., & Loughrey, B. (1994). Longman critical essays, Measure for Measure. London, UK: Longman Group.
Dressler, J. (1982). Rethinking heat of passion: A defense in search of a rationale. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 73, 421-470.
Dressler, J. (1985). Reassessing the theoretical underpinnings of accomplice liability: New solutions to an old problem. Hastings Law Journal, 37, 91-140.
Eisenberg, T., & Garvey, S. P. (2004). Capital jury: The merciful capital juror. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 2, 165-194.
Feinberg, J. (1970). Doing and deserving. Princeton, US: Princeton University Press.
Feinberg, J. (1995). Punishment for failed attempts: Some bad but instructive arguments against it. Arizona Law Review, 37, 117-134.
Garvey, S. P. (1999). Punishment as atonement. UCLA Law Review, 48, 1801-1858.
Garvey, S. P. (2004). Is it wrong to commute death row? Retribution, atonement, and mercy. North Carolina Law Review, 82, 1319-1343.
Griswold, C. L. (2007). Forgiveness: A philosophical exploration. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Halper, L. (2001). Measure for Measure: Law, prerogative, subversion. Cardozo Studies of Law and Literature, 13, 221-264.
Harris, J., & Redmond, L. (2007). Executive clemency: The lethal absence of hope. Criminal Law Brief, 3, 2-15.
Hawkins, H. (1987). Measure for measure. Boston, US: Twayne Publishers.
Huang, J. M. (2010). Note, correcting mandatory injustice: Judicial recommendation of executive clemency. Duke Law Journal, 60, 131-166.
Hurd, H. M. (2007). The morality of mercy. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 4, 389-422.
Katyal, N. K. (1997). Deterrence’s difficulty. Michigan Law Review, 95, 2385-2476.
King, B. (1989). Coriolanus. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan Press.
Kitai-Sangero, R., & Lipschits, I. (2011). The place of repentance in retributive sentencing. International Journal of Punishment and Sentencing, 7, 107-137.
Kobil, D. T. (1991). The quality of mercy strained: Wresting the pardoning power from the king. Texas Law Review, 69, 569-642.
Kornstein, D. J. (1994). Kill all the lawyers?: Shakespeare’s legal appeal. Princeton, US: Princeton University Press.
Krent, H. J. (2001). Conditioning the president’s conditional pardon power. California Law Review, 89, 1665-1720.
Lascelles, M. (1953). Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure. London: Athlone Press.
Love, M. C. (2000). Of pardons, politics and collar buttons: Reflections on the president’s duty to be merciful. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 27, 1483-1514.
Majeske, A. (2009). Equity’s absence: The extremity of Claudio’s prosecution and Barnardine’s pardon in Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure. Law & Literature, 21, 169-184.
Markel, D. (2004). Against mercy. Minnesotta Law Review, 88, 1421-1480.
McCauliff, C. M. A. (2004). The bawd and the bard: Mercy tempers strict statutory application in Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure. Catholic Lawer, 43, 81-124.
Meyler, B. (2010). “Our cities institutions” and the institution of the common law. Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities, 22, 441-466.
Moore, K. D. (1989). Pardons: Justice, mercy and the public interest. New York, US: Oxford University Press.
Moore, K. D. (1993). Pardon for good and sufficient reasons. University of Richmond Law Review, 27, 281-288.
Moore, M. (1999). Victims and retribution: A reply to Professor Fletcher. Buffalo Criminal Law Review, 3, 65-90.
Morison, S. T. (2005). The politics of grace: On the moral justification of executive clemency. Buffalo Criminal Law Review, 9, 1-138.
Moylan, M. B., & Carter, L. E. (2009). Clemency in California capital cases. Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law, 14, 37-104.
Muller, E. L. (1993). The virtue of mercy in criminal sentencing. Seton Hall Law Review, 24, 288-346.
Murphy, J. G. (2003). Getting even: Forgiveness and its limits. New York, US: Oxford University Press.
Murphy, J. G., & Hampton, J. (1988). Forgiveness and mercy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Nicholls, G. (1986). Measure for Measure: Text & performance. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan Press.
Note. (1975). Shakespeare and the legal process: Four essays. Virginia Law Review, 61, 390-433.
Palacios, V. J. (1996). Faith in the fantasy: The supreme court’s reliance on commutation to ensure justice in death penalty cases. Vanderbilt Law Review, 49, 311-372.
Phillips, O. H. (1972/2005). Shakespeare and the lawyers. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Posner, R. A. (1998). Law and literature. Cambridge, Massaschussets, US, London, UK: Harvard University Press.
Robinson, P. H. (2003). The virtues of restorative process, the vices of “Restorative justice”. Utah Law Review, 375-388.
Robinson, P. H., & Darley, J. M. (1997). The utility of desert. North Western University Law Review, 91, 453-499.
Ross. A. (2001). Vienna then and now: The impact of Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure on the twenty-first century legal profession. South Dakota Law Review, 46, 781-812.
Ruckman, P. S. (2016). Preparing the pardon power for the 21st century. Saint Thomas Law Journal, 12, 446-482.
Schanzer, E. (1963). The problem plays of Shakespeare. New York, US: Schocken Books.
Schimmel, J. B. (1992). Commutation of the death sentence: Florida steps back from justice and mercy. Florida State University Law Review, 20, 253-282.
Asimov, I. (1970). Asimov’s guide to Shakespeare (Vol. I). New York, U.S.: Doubleday and Company.
Austin, S., & Nasser, H. (2004). On lawful lawlessness: George Ryan, executive clemency, and the rhetoric of sparing life. Stanford Law Review, 56, 1307-1344.
Batey, R. (2001). Kenneth Starr—Among others—Should have (Re)read Measure for Measure. Oklahoma City University Law Review, 26, 261-306.
Bennett, J. W. (1966). Measure for Measure as royal entertainment. New York, US: Columbia University Press.
Boudin, L. B. (1976). The presidential pardons of James R. Hoffa and Richard M. Nixon: Have the limitations on the pardon power been exceeded?. University of Colorado Law Review, 48, 1-40.
Braithwaite, W. T. (1982). Poetry and the criminal law: The idea of punishment in Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure. Loyola University of Chicago Law Journal, 791-816.
Clayton, M. (2013). Forgiving the unforgivable: Reinvigorating the use of executive clemency. Boston College Law Review, 54, 751-788.
Cookson, L., & Loughrey, B. (1994). Longman critical essays, Measure for Measure. London, UK: Longman Group.
Dressler, J. (1982). Rethinking heat of passion: A defense in search of a rationale. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 73, 421-470.
Dressler, J. (1985). Reassessing the theoretical underpinnings of accomplice liability: New solutions to an old problem. Hastings Law Journal, 37, 91-140.
Eisenberg, T., & Garvey, S. P. (2004). Capital jury: The merciful capital juror. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 2, 165-194.
Feinberg, J. (1970). Doing and deserving. Princeton, US: Princeton University Press.
Feinberg, J. (1995). Punishment for failed attempts: Some bad but instructive arguments against it. Arizona Law Review, 37, 117-134.
Garvey, S. P. (1999). Punishment as atonement. UCLA Law Review, 48, 1801-1858.
Garvey, S. P. (2004). Is it wrong to commute death row? Retribution, atonement, and mercy. North Carolina Law Review, 82, 1319-1343.
Griswold, C. L. (2007). Forgiveness: A philosophical exploration. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Halper, L. (2001). Measure for Measure: Law, prerogative, subversion. Cardozo Studies of Law and Literature, 13, 221-264.
Harris, J., & Redmond, L. (2007). Executive clemency: The lethal absence of hope. Criminal Law Brief, 3, 2-15.
Hawkins, H. (1987). Measure for measure. Boston, US: Twayne Publishers.
Huang, J. M. (2010). Note, correcting mandatory injustice: Judicial recommendation of executive clemency. Duke Law Journal, 60, 131-166.
Hurd, H. M. (2007). The morality of mercy. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 4, 389-422.
Katyal, N. K. (1997). Deterrence’s difficulty. Michigan Law Review, 95, 2385-2476.
King, B. (1989). Coriolanus. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan Press.
Kitai-Sangero, R., & Lipschits, I. (2011). The place of repentance in retributive sentencing. International Journal of Punishment and Sentencing, 7, 107-137.
Kobil, D. T. (1991). The quality of mercy strained: Wresting the pardoning power from the king. Texas Law Review, 69, 569-642.
Kornstein, D. J. (1994). Kill all the lawyers?: Shakespeare’s legal appeal. Princeton, US: Princeton University Press.
Krent, H. J. (2001). Conditioning the president’s conditional pardon power. California Law Review, 89, 1665-1720.
Lascelles, M. (1953). Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure. London: Athlone Press.
Love, M. C. (2000). Of pardons, politics and collar buttons: Reflections on the president’s duty to be merciful. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 27, 1483-1514.
Majeske, A. (2009). Equity’s absence: The extremity of Claudio’s prosecution and Barnardine’s pardon in Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure. Law & Literature, 21, 169-184.
Markel, D. (2004). Against mercy. Minnesotta Law Review, 88, 1421-1480.
McCauliff, C. M. A. (2004). The bawd and the bard: Mercy tempers strict statutory application in Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure. Catholic Lawer, 43, 81-124.
Meyler, B. (2010). “Our cities institutions” and the institution of the common law. Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities, 22, 441-466.
Moore, K. D. (1989). Pardons: Justice, mercy and the public interest. New York, US: Oxford University Press.
Moore, K. D. (1993). Pardon for good and sufficient reasons. University of Richmond Law Review, 27, 281-288.
Moore, M. (1999). Victims and retribution: A reply to Professor Fletcher. Buffalo Criminal Law Review, 3, 65-90.
Morison, S. T. (2005). The politics of grace: On the moral justification of executive clemency. Buffalo Criminal Law Review, 9, 1-138.
Moylan, M. B., & Carter, L. E. (2009). Clemency in California capital cases. Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law, 14, 37-104.
Muller, E. L. (1993). The virtue of mercy in criminal sentencing. Seton Hall Law Review, 24, 288-346.
Murphy, J. G. (2003). Getting even: Forgiveness and its limits. New York, US: Oxford University Press.
Murphy, J. G., & Hampton, J. (1988). Forgiveness and mercy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Nicholls, G. (1986). Measure for Measure: Text & performance. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan Press.
Note. (1975). Shakespeare and the legal process: Four essays. Virginia Law Review, 61, 390-433.
Palacios, V. J. (1996). Faith in the fantasy: The supreme court’s reliance on commutation to ensure justice in death penalty cases. Vanderbilt Law Review, 49, 311-372.
Phillips, O. H. (1972/2005). Shakespeare and the lawyers. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Posner, R. A. (1998). Law and literature. Cambridge, Massaschussets, US, London, UK: Harvard University Press.
Robinson, P. H. (2003). The virtues of restorative process, the vices of “Restorative justice”. Utah Law Review, 375-388.
Robinson, P. H., & Darley, J. M. (1997). The utility of desert. North Western University Law Review, 91, 453-499.
Ross. A. (2001). Vienna then and now: The impact of Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure on the twenty-first century legal profession. South Dakota Law Review, 46, 781-812.
Ruckman, P. S. (2016). Preparing the pardon power for the 21st century. Saint Thomas Law Journal, 12, 446-482.
Schanzer, E. (1963). The problem plays of Shakespeare. New York, US: Schocken Books.
Schimmel, J. B. (1992). Commutation of the death sentence: Florida steps back from justice and mercy. Florida State University Law Review, 20, 253-282.