Volu m e II - Purdue University Calumet

Essentially in the Duke’s absence or in the absence of the “God-like” character it is very evident that
authoritarian oppression is personified in Angelo, not Duke Vincentio. It is Angelo who is out of control.
Dollimore asserts that it is the Duke who in some way represents the authoritarian presence. Dollimore
suggest, “By means of the Duke’s personal intervention and integrity, authoritarian reaction is put into abeyance but
not discredited” (Dollimore187). I agree with Dollimore partly. He emphasizes, Angelo’s activity was only
put into suspension at the Duke’s return. However I also believe that in addition to Angelo being
“unmasked” the Duke also in some sense represents an authoritative and authoritarian nature in some
instances. It is evidenced in the facts, by Dollimore’s own admission “No law is repealed and the mercy that exist
remains the prerogative of the same ruler who initiated the reaction” (Dollimore 187).
The Duke seems very comfortable to be able to “absolve sinners as a friar” and, “his desire to operate
power from the inside, investigating the various characters in his disguise and determining from the evidence they provide
what the best course of action will be. The Duke is the only character who appears in almost every location in the play;
his hand is active everywhere, and he is pulling most of the strings” (SparkNotes Editors).
The Duke reinforces his desire to create a coveting for his style of leadership. Yet this is not to be
misinterpreted as authoritarian repression personified in the character of Duke Vincentio. I believe the
Duke as the play progresses should no longer be viewed as an idealist, but a character with clarity as to the
situation of his city’s plight and a genuine desire and anxiousness to see a city that reflects the moral
standard, temperance, and balance that he believes himself to have. The Duke arguably may secretly covet a
desire for the people to respect his governing style. This may be most evident in final scenes of measure for
measure. “Indeed, the whole final scene produces and effect whereby the public humiliation of Angelo seems only a
means to an end or a side effect of the Duke’s staged display of authority and power” (Kontiris 299). The Duke
discriminately, illustrates through the errors of Angelo his deputy that an authoritarian repression is not
impartial, and that in the presence of that repression he is the fair and understanding alternative to be
desired as the just almost, divine ruler.
379