In Scene iii the “note-ing” is as effective for evil as that in scene i, is for good.  But a counter influence is brought to bear upon it which consists in “noteing” the falsity of the first “noteing.”  Show how this is arranged and promises to solve all difficulty.  But the marriage is shown next to be in active preparation, and then the promise of intervention in time to frustrate Hero’s disgrace is in scene v itself frustrated by the bestowal of all Dogberry’s “tediousness” upon Leonato and by his own impatience.  Show the place in the action of the hurrying on of scene iv, and the tediousness of scene v, and of both on the humor of the Play.

QUERIES FOR DISCUSSION

Are the Prince and Claudio justified in the action they propose?

Is the element of chance, which both destroys the falseness of the evidence by means of Borachio’s talk, and prevents it from being known by Dogberry’s, especially fitting?  Why?

ACT IV

HERO IS REPUDIATED AND BEFRIENDED

Does Claudio’s demeanor in the repudiation scene betray the violence of love?

What is to be inferred from the Prince’s words and those of his bastard brother Don John?

Is it natural for Leonato to be convinced and to know his daughter no better?

Why is the Friar on her side?  Notice how the Friar represents the Church as Dogberry does the Law.  As institutional forces of civic life, outside the circle of the central group of characters, they intervene in the action of the drama when it is properly amenable to outside influences and civic instrumentalities.  And both are brought into the sphere of the Play by a means in sympathy with the artistic method belonging to it.  Observe how Dogberry is made humorously to desire to have everything noted down, and how the Friar has come to the conclusion that Hero is innocent “by noting of the Ladie.”  With the Friar on her side, Hero and her one staunch friend—­Beatrice are enabled to follow a policy of resistance to her disgrace and of re-establishment, first, of her good fame and, then, of her happiness.  How is this brought about?  The share of the Friar in rallying her friends to be loyal, and the share of Beatrice in instituting a counter-movement to the accusation combine to what effect?  How does it suit with the scheme of the action that the love of Benedicke and Beatrice here attains its climax?

What does scene ii accomplish for the plot?

QUERIES FOR DISCUSSION

Is the injection of tragedy at this Fourth Act into the Comedy effective?  Does it change the character of the Comedy or merely intensify it?

Does Beatrice ask an unreasonable deed of Benedicke when she says “Kill Claudio”?  Suppose it were to prove true, instead of to be prevented as may be already guessed, by the defeat of Don John’s false witness and evil influence:  Is Beatrice justified in refusing Benedicke if he will not kill his friend because it shows “there is no love” in him?