The Merchant of Venice

[William]

We are doing this in English Lit. class, and while some people have said Shakespeare was racist cos of the way he portrayed Shylock, our teacher says he was the opposite. This is why Shylock makes his famous speech in act 3 -


He hath disgraced me, and hindered me half a million, laughed at my losses, mocked at my gains, scorned my nation, thwarted my bargains, cooled my friends, heated mine enemies; and what's his reason? I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? Fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?


If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that. If a Jew wrong a Christian, what is his humility? Revenge. If a Christian wrong a Jew, what should his sufferance be by Christian example? Why, revenge. The villainy you teach me I will execute, and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction.



But our teacher also told us to do an interesting experiment - change every use of the word Jew to Muslim, look at how it reads, and think about what that tells us in today's world. He said that we need to know that the Jews were treated terribly in Elizabethan England, and that Shylock's attitude was the result of years of being treated as a second class human being and abused - Shakespeare was clever enough to present us with that situation in a way that we can come to our own conclusions. He also said that we need to understand the long term consequences of actions by society - which is why we should change the word Jews to Muslims, and think about how modern day events came about.

Wasn't Shakespeare clever! :smiley:

[Ethereal]

Shylock was my favorite character in The Merchant of Venice and I think it's pretty clear that Shakespeare was sympathetic to him in a way. In my opinion, Shakespeare had a tendency to subtly include subversive thoughts into his plays that may have been lost on most of his contemporary audience but perhaps was meant as a wink to future generations.

[Chris]

Agree, Shakespeare was sympathetic to Shylock. He was trying to expose anti-semitism.

[Mister D]

I think we tend to see what we want to see but I don't think it's necessarily a choice between disliking Jews or of being sympathetic to them. Personally, I don't see any contradiction in presenting Shylock as a complex personality with legitimate complaints about European society while condemning his greed and vindictive nature at the same time.

[Chris]

I think we tend to see what we want to see but I don't think it's necessarily a choice between disliking Jews or of being sympathetic to them. Personally, I don't see any contradiction in presenting Shylock as a complex personality with legitimate complaints about European society while condemning his greed and vindictive nature at the same time.

It was fairly common back them to condemn usury.

[Mister D]

It was fairly common back them to condemn usury.

And to associate usury with Jews. Different eras see Shylock in different ways. I think that says more about us than it does Shakespeare's intentions. In the end, all we can say for sure is that he was a good writer. :smiley:

[Chris]

And to associate usury with Jews. Different eras see Shylock in different ways. I think that says more about us than it does Shakespeare's intentions. In the end, all we can say for sure is that he was a good writer. :smiley:

Whoever it was, Francis Bacon, Christopher Marlowe, others are credited.

[Mister D]

Whoever it was, Francis Bacon, Christopher Marlowe, others are credited.

Oh? I didn't know that. Well, whoever it was. lol

[William]

Whoever it was, Francis Bacon, Christopher Marlowe, others are credited.

Lol, so was Queen Elizabeth I, Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford, and William Stanley, the Earl of Derby - I saw a panel show where several experts said all that was a nonsense.

http://shakespeareauthorship.com/howdowe.html

[Chris]

Lol, so was Queen Elizabeth I, Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford, and William Stanley, the Earl of Derby - I saw a panel show where several experts said all that was a nonsense.

http://shakespeareauthorship.com/howdowe.html


It's just we know so little of Shakespeare for as great a writer he was.

[nathanbforrest45]

One reason Jews became the bankers and money lenders was because the Church condemned charging interest. Christians could not and would not lend money and collect interest but since it was not a "crime" but a moral sin Jews were under no such restrictions. People have always needed a source of money, bankers and money lenders provided that source and Jews were the bankers and money lenders. But, then as now, people were happy to borrow but very reluctant to pay back.

[William]

It's just we know so little of Shakespeare for as great a writer he was.

That's true - this panel was talking about that - and how Shakespeare was a man who did not promote himself - he presented his work, and sort of disappeared into the shadows. :smiley:

When we lived in the UK, my school took us to the new Globe Theatre - it was mega cool. We were doing Richard III at that time. Most of my mates don't, but I like doing Shakespeare.

It makes you think, like the line from Romeo & Juliet. "Romeo, Romeo - wherefore art thou Romeo?" At first it didn't make sense, cos I thought she was saying "Where are you?" and he was right there in front of the balcony. But then I worked out that she was really saying "Why are you called Romeo?" The next lines are the clue - Deny thy father and refuse thy name; or if thou wilt not, be but sworn my love and I’ll no longer be a Capulet. Then she goes on to say - What’s in a name? That which we call a rose, by any other name would smell as sweet.

One of the reasons I like reading Shakespeare is it's like a game, where you have clues (old words) and you have to work out the real meaning. :smiley:

[Chris]

That's true - this panel was talking about that - and how Shakespeare was a man who did not promote himself - he presented his work, and sort of disappeared into the shadows. :smiley:

When we lived in the UK, my school took us to the new Globe Theatre - it was mega cool. We were doing Richard III at that time. Most of my mates don't, but I like doing Shakespeare.

It makes you think, like the line from Romeo & Juliet. "Romeo, Romeo - wherefore art thou Romeo?" At first it didn't make sense, cos I thought she was saying "Where are you?" and he was right there in front of the balcony. But then I worked out that she was really saying "Why are you called Romeo?" The next lines are the clue - Deny thy father and refuse thy name; or if thou wilt not, be but sworn my love and I’ll no longer be a Capulet. Then she goes on to say - What’s in a name? That which we call a rose, by any other name would smell as sweet.

One of the reasons I like reading Shakespeare is it's like a game, where you have clues (old words) and you have to work out the real meaning. :smiley:



Yes, that would be cool to go see the Globe Theater (American spelling :)). At college I saw a few plays in theater but mostly I've seen movies and read the plays. I think my favorite has always been "Midsummer's Night Dream" especially the play within the play.

[del]

Devouring Time, blunt thou the lion's paws,
And make the earth devour her own sweet brood;
Pluck the keen teeth from the fierce tiger's jaws,
And burn the long-lived phoenix in her blood;
Make glad and sorry seasons as thou fleet'st,
And do whate'er thou wilt, swift-footed Time,
To the wide world and all her fading sweets;
But I forbid thee one most heinous crime:
O, carve not with thy hours my love's fair brow,
Nor draw no lines there with thine antique pen;
Him in thy course untainted do allow
For beauty's pattern to succeeding men.
Yet, do thy worst, old Time: despite thy wrong,
My love shall in my verse ever live young.

[TrueBlue]

It was fairly common back them to condemn usury.
Sure wish the capitalists of today would condemn usury! :)

[Chris]

Sure wish the capitalists of today would condemn usury! :)

Why? The interest purchases your immediate use and my delayed use. All a matter of time preference.

[William]

Yes, that would be cool to go see the Globe Theater (American spelling :)). At college I saw a few plays in theater but mostly I've seen movies and read the plays. I think my favorite has always been "Midsummer's Night Dream" especially the play within the play.

Lol, not that it's important, but our English teacher says all proper nouns must be given their original spelling. So I would be marked wrong if I wrote Pearl Harbour - it is an American place, and the correct name is Pearl Harbor. Even though in English, the proper spelling for an anchorage is harbour. So while you go to the theater in America - it is the Globe Theatre in London. :wink:

[Ethereal]

I think we tend to see what we want to see but I don't think it's necessarily a choice between disliking Jews or of being sympathetic to them. Personally, I don't see any contradiction in presenting Shylock as a complex personality with legitimate complaints about European society while condemning his greed and vindictive nature at the same time.

Also true. Shakespeare was brilliant at getting inside his own character's heads and empathizing with them.

But there is something to be said about being able to do that and willing to put it in his plays.

Obviously, we cannot know what he was thinking, but I think there is something suggestive about his refusal to overly indulge contemporary polemicist viewpoints.

[Ethereal]

One of my favorite Shakespeare lines is from Merchant...

The villainy you teach me I will execute—and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction.

Now that's ruthless.

[Mister D]

Also true. Shakespeare was brilliant at getting inside his own character's heads and empathizing with them.

But there is something to be said about being able to do that and willing to put it in his plays.

Obviously, we cannot know what he was thinking, but I think there is something suggestive about his refusal to overly indulge contemporary polemicist viewpoints.

See, that's what I think is really going on. Shakespeare is exploring a perennial ethnic conflict without resorting to caricature. He makes it very human and thus very real.

[Mister D]

One reason Jews became the bankers and money lenders was because the Church condemned charging interest. Christians could not and would not lend money and collect interest but since it was not a "crime" but a moral sin Jews were under no such restrictions. People have always needed a source of money, bankers and money lenders provided that source and Jews were the bankers and money lenders. But, then as now, people were happy to borrow but very reluctant to pay back.

Just a quick historical note: Christians did in fact lend money with interest (e.g. the Templar Order) and the great banking houses used by European notables were often German and Italian. If the Jews held a monopoly on usury it was broken long before Shakespeare's time.

[del]

it was broken when edward i expelled the jews

[Mister D]

it was broken when edward i expelled the jews

England was an economic and cultural backwater though. I had all of Europe in mind.

Out of curiosity I looked up the English expulsion and it appears the Jewish population was tiny.