These alternative justices make themselves apparent in production through their flexibility simple directorial decisions can accentuate these justices, remove them or radically reposition their dominance. Although these subjective justices never triumph in a comedy, they are rarely the target of moralisation. In this sense, superposition occurs when other characters offer subjective justices: systems of justice that come from the needs of a character rather than a dramatic requirement. This comic justice acts to bring the play towards its obligatory, happy conclusion. Comedic justice is the sense that the play will arrive at a ‘justified’ ending – that ‘true love’ will prevail and villainous characters will be punished for their actions. Shakespearean comedy in particular seems to offer a preferred mode of justice, what I will refer to as comedic justice. While Lantham argues that this dramatisation occurs at the level of the playtext, it is my intent to argue that there is an analogous mechanism operating at the level of the play itself. In a morally ambiguous play text, the characters dramatise their motives to justify their actions. “Drama, ceremony, is always needed to authenticate the experience”. The justification of a characters action occurs as theatre. One arc of action is performed over others so that “ramatic motive is stronger than ‘real’, serious motive”. In ‘The Motives of Eloquence’, Lantham describes Shakespearean drama as the art of “superposition”.