Here's something you might be interested in.
Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Brush up on your Shakespeare
Despite its age, Measure for Measure is still surprisingly relevant.
Daniel Petzold, Mahka Mthembu, and Christopher Salazar (from left) in Measure for Measure
Watching Measure for Measure — performed as part of the Old Globe’s “Globe for All” program, which injects free productions into unconventional venues all over town — I got deja vu listening to Angelo, the autocratic deputy hell-bent on cleaning up licentious Vienna, excuse himself from the moral culpability of ordering Claudio’s execution:
- “Be you content, fair maid.
- “It is the law, not I condemn your brother.
- “Were he my kinsman, brother, or my son,
- “It should be thus with him. He must die to-morrow.”
- Where have I heard that sentiment before?
Oh. Right. The Supreme Court.
Now, everybody heard all about that “mere factual innocence is no reason not to carry out a death sentence properly reached” quotation, which was, in all fairness, a borderline libelous misconstruction tailor-made to fit Twitter-length pseudo-journalism. Still, late-Justice Antonin Scalia often made headlines for his hard-ass approach to the humanitarian causes that come before the ad hoc political entity posing as the nation’s highest court. When Lawrence v. Texas struck down draconian sodomy laws in Texas, Scalia bemoaned (and with his brilliant intellect predicted) the inevitability of legal gay marriage on the grounds that because the Constitution doesn’t give gay people any special rights, why should he? He famously brushed off a Boston Globe reporter with a rude-ish gesture, and don’t get him started on abortion.
Ignoring his salty disposition, Justice Scalia arguably changed the image of the judge from the executor of wise discretion to the dispassionate arbiter of the law — a position that, by the end of Act II, Measure for Measure demonstrates is untenable. So great was Scalia’s influence, that by the time John Roberts sat down for his confirmation hearing in 2005, the future Chief Justice claimed his role would be like “an umpire.”
You know, one of those “life-and-death” umpires.
Despite the 400+ candles on its birthday cake, Measure for Measure is still surprisingly relevant. That big, glaring vacancy on the Supreme Court will be filled by someone who must at least pay lip service to the “umpire” conceit in order to pass the Senate hearings. Maybe if everyone just boned up on his Shakespeare we wouldn’t still be having this debate.
Measure for Measure runs through November 20.
Here's something you might be interested in.
Brush up on your Shakespeare
Despite its age, Measure for Measure is still surprisingly relevant.
Brush up on your Shakespeare
Despite its age, Measure for Measure is still surprisingly relevant.
Daniel Petzold, Mahka Mthembu, and Christopher Salazar (from left) in Measure for Measure
Watching Measure for Measure — performed as part of the Old Globe’s “Globe for All” program, which injects free productions into unconventional venues all over town — I got deja vu listening to Angelo, the autocratic deputy hell-bent on cleaning up licentious Vienna, excuse himself from the moral culpability of ordering Claudio’s execution:
- “Be you content, fair maid.
- “It is the law, not I condemn your brother.
- “Were he my kinsman, brother, or my son,
- “It should be thus with him. He must die to-morrow.”
- Where have I heard that sentiment before?
Oh. Right. The Supreme Court.
Now, everybody heard all about that “mere factual innocence is no reason not to carry out a death sentence properly reached” quotation, which was, in all fairness, a borderline libelous misconstruction tailor-made to fit Twitter-length pseudo-journalism. Still, late-Justice Antonin Scalia often made headlines for his hard-ass approach to the humanitarian causes that come before the ad hoc political entity posing as the nation’s highest court. When Lawrence v. Texas struck down draconian sodomy laws in Texas, Scalia bemoaned (and with his brilliant intellect predicted) the inevitability of legal gay marriage on the grounds that because the Constitution doesn’t give gay people any special rights, why should he? He famously brushed off a Boston Globe reporter with a rude-ish gesture, and don’t get him started on abortion.
Ignoring his salty disposition, Justice Scalia arguably changed the image of the judge from the executor of wise discretion to the dispassionate arbiter of the law — a position that, by the end of Act II, Measure for Measure demonstrates is untenable. So great was Scalia’s influence, that by the time John Roberts sat down for his confirmation hearing in 2005, the future Chief Justice claimed his role would be like “an umpire.”
You know, one of those “life-and-death” umpires.
Despite the 400+ candles on its birthday cake, Measure for Measure is still surprisingly relevant. That big, glaring vacancy on the Supreme Court will be filled by someone who must at least pay lip service to the “umpire” conceit in order to pass the Senate hearings. Maybe if everyone just boned up on his Shakespeare we wouldn’t still be having this debate.
Measure for Measure runs through November 20.
Comments