JUSTICE AND SUBJECTIVITY IN MEASURE FOR MEASURE: BRIEF REFLECTIONS ON LAW AND LITERATURE

Abstract

This article explores the complexities of justice, power, and subjectivity in Shakespeare’s work, focusing on Measure for Measure. The analysis connects Shakespearean themes to emerging philosophical and legal traditions in early modernity, particularly tensions over authority and social order. The play is intertwined with the views of Hobbes, Machiavelli, and Sir Edward Coke, who debate the role of law and central authority. Seventeenth-century England, in transition from feudalism to absolutism, provides the backdrop for this reflection. Hobbes, in Leviathan, advocated a strong central government, while Coke argued for the primacy of the Common Law and judicial control over Parliament. This judicial contention is reflected in the moral and legal conflict of Measure for Measure, where the intersections between law and subjectivity emerge vividly. Shakespeare, although not presenting a partisan position, articulates dilemmas that echo modern concerns about the use of force and the flexibility of the law, opening up room for interpretations about the role of judges and the manipulation of laws in favor of private interests. These debates are deepened by Shakespeare's reading of themes such as honor, virtue, and the tension between freedom and order, linking the work to an ongoing dialogue between literature, law, and politics.