Across the world, millions of people are taking to the streets demanding urgent action on climate breakdown and other environmental emergencies. Extinction Rebellion, Fridays for Future and Climate Strikes are part of a new lexicon of environmental protest advocating civil disobedience to leverage change. This groundbreaking book -- also a Special Issue of the Journal of Human Rights and the Environment -- critically unveils the legal and political context of this new wave of eco-activisms. It illustrates how the practise of dissent builds on a long tradition of grassroots activism, such as the Anti-Nuclear movement, but brings into focus new participants, such as school children, and new distinctive aesthetic tactics, such as the mass 'die-ins' and 'discobedience' theatrics in public spaces. Expert international authors offer fresh insights into the strategies and goals of these protest movements, the changing vocabulary of environmental activism, such as the 'climate emergency', and the contribution of specific protest actors, particularly youth and Indigenous peoples. They also consider how some governments have responded to these actions with draconian anti-protest legislation, and by using the Covid-19 pandemic as cover to keep protesters off the streets. The scholarly analyses are complemented with first-hand interviews of some leading protagonists, including Extinction Rebellion leaders and Green Party politicians. The result is an unrivalled analysis of the role of new environmental protest movements seeking to drive a new generation of policies and laws for climate action and social justice. This impressive book will prove an important and insightful read for students and scholars interested in environmental law, climate law, and grass roots activism specifically.

Of the five major Shakespearean tragedies-Hamlet, Macbeth, Romeo and Juliet, King Lear, and Othello-King Lear is perhaps the most challenging. Issues of rulership, family and blood, are overlaid with bastardy, loyalty, lust, and deceit. Add to this the apparently gratuitous on-stage blinding of Gloucester, the deaths of Cordelia, Lear, Gloucester, and Kent, and one might be inclined to agree with Samuel Johnson that "The good suffer more than the evil, that love and suffering, in this play, are almost interchangeable terms and the driving force of the action is derived from the power of the evil to inflict mental agony upon the good" (quoted in Kermode, 505). However, one would be mistaken to accept wholeheartedly the happy endings of the eighteenth and nineteenth century revisionists. While the pleasant ending would certainly ease the sensibilities of the audience, it would omit the Aristotlean concepts of hamartia and the purgation of fear and pity attendant upon actually witnessing Shakespeare's King Lear, the necessary catharsis, a possible scapegoat for our own emotions. Of course, the ending is to some extent unpleasant and even shocking; however, one can argue that the ending is organic to the play; the ending IS, to a great extent, the play.

The Merchant of Venice is problematic. Not only does it present the disparate and unrelated stories of the caskets and the trial for a pound of flesh, but it challenges contemporary audiences to evaluate the treatment of Jews and what constitutes justice. The character of Shylock, although presented as an object of ridicule and even comedy to Shakespeare's patrons, might even be considered tragic to one sensitive to injustice. In fact the implied definition of justice is challenging: what justice is represented by a forced conversion from one belief to another? The definition of friendship between Antonio and Bassanio is itself quite satisfying; Bassanio at one point says he would sacrifice his wife for the friendship (IV.i.292-97) which naturally Portia bridles at. The character of Portia, herself, is also challenging. While intelligent, rich, and beautiful, she behaves questionably when she deliberately entraps Bassanio-her affianced lover-into ostensibly betraying her by giving away her ring and then apparently treating the whole incident as a joke. Surely Bassanio is entitled to a modicum of resentment if not anger. Additionally, she entices Nerissa to do the same with Gratiano. While this scene (V.ii) would evoke great laughter from an audience who is in on the joke, to a modern-thinking person, it smacks of sexism: ridicule the male at his expense and make fun of him for his resentment. Of course, the groundlings would pay no attention to such an offense. It seems clear that The Merchant of Venice today demands re-interpretation and re-definition.

Of the five major Shakespearean tragedies-Hamlet, Macbeth, Romeo and Juliet, King Lear, and Othello-Macbeth is in some ways the most accessible. For one it is the shortest. For another the witches continue to attract audiences just as they did during Elizabethan times. In addition he cinematographic approach of the last act-cutting easily from scene to scene-works as well as it did in Shakespeare's time. Thus, the play is a natural to introduce students to the Shakespeare canon. Probably it doesn't rival Romeo and Juliet in popularity with students or Julius Caesar with teachers, but nevertheless it is a finished, representative work of the best of William Shakespeare. In addition the main theme-ambition-one which is relevant to Americans today, can be witnessed again and again, especially during our quadrennial presidential elections. "I have no spur to prick the sides of my intent," Macbeth muses; there are those seeking to attract the public eye for whom this statement applies equally well. I cannot say I enjoyed reading Macbeth the first time. It was an assignment and, as do many students, I disliked having to read the play. However, over the years of teaching the play and re-reading it-by choice-I have come to regard the play with respect and simultaneously admiration for the playwright. The play communicates its own special numen. Macbeth is the most tightly unified of the Shakespearean tragedies, and it is filled with major themes-ambition, definition of character, allegiance to one's state and king- and some which may be regarded as minor-sleep, drink, and humor. None of them could be sacrificed as together they make a unity of approach meant to satisfy the general audience and the groundlings. As one who has a foot in both camps, I believe the play is a masterpiece.