right master and man fall into this talk after the earlier
cross-purposes with the wrong man, seems to betray the fact that they
do belong together. They are so readily familiar that the
cross-purposes making up the plot seem to be no longer troublesome
either to themselves or the audience. The interval of reassurance
makes the return of strangeness more unaccountable. Antipholus is also
now reassured about his gold, and the earlier cross-purpose seems only
a jest.

Why does the mention of Dromio's name (II, ii, 156) cause both master
and man to exclaim? Why should it not have led them to guess the
truth?

Would this scene with Adriana and Luciana have been equally mystifying
and skilful if the right master and man had not been together?

QUERIES FOR DISCUSSION

In the debate between the sisters upon patience in marriage is Adriana
or Luciana the more justifiable? Has their argument anything to do
with the plot? Is character interest or plot interest of the first
importance, and how are they apportioned in this play?

Is Adriana's argument that she is bound to share morally herself in
the infidelity of her husband sophistical? Or has it a core of sound
ethical value?


ACT III