Merchant of Venice - Essay Example

This paper looks at Shakespeare’s Merchant of Venice and discusses the question ‘is Shylock a sympathetic character, or an anti-Jewish stereotype: neither or both?’. In terms of understanding the question posed in this paper, one should first look at the historical setting of the play; at the time the play was written, society itself was anti-Semitic, as during this time, Christians were forbidden, by law, to lend money and as such, Jews were the only people who entered in to money lending (usury). They entered in to this profession as they were banned, by law, from practising any other profession during this period in history, leading to many portrayals of Jews as greedy and evil in contemporary works of the time, for example, in Marlowe’s The Jew of Malta. Thus, it can be argued that Shakespeare was not being anti-Semitic when he placed a Jew as a usurer in his play, rather that he was using historical fact as a basis for writing his play. To have written anything else would have been entirely out of historical context. Shakespeare, the greatest dramatist of all time, was not concerned with the issue of anti-Semitism, rather he used the fact that Shylock was a Jew as a tool, through which he was able to explore the issues he wished to discuss in this play – the play, read in this way, is not itself anti-Semitic, rather, it is a play about anti-Semitism, about the similarities and differences one encounters when dealing with people of different religions. Throughout all of Shakespeare’s writing, he uses characters as tools with which to build his story, and entertain his viewers/readers - The Merchant of Venice is no exception to this rule, and so according to this reading of Shakespeare’s motives, this interpretation of the play can be argued to be valid. Shakespeare’s creation of a character as multi-faceted as Shylock is a testament to his skills as a writer – at times we sympathize with Shylock, at times we simply cannot understand his methods or motives; this is because Shakespeare wanted to create a ‘larger than life’ villainous character, who would entertain us through his actions. He is an eternally fascinating character, he keeps us, the viewer/reader, captivated. The fact that Shylock is a Jew is incidental to the drama; Shakespeare wanted to design a character through which he could develop the action of his play, and it is testament to Shakespeare’s skills as a dramatist that he created such a memorable character, that leaves the reader asking so many questions. At times we dislike Shylock, at times we sympathize with the things he is going through; at all times, he arrests us with his depth and his evident selfishness; he is captivating as a character, not because of the fact that he is presented as a Jew, but because he is a deeply interesting and complicated man, whose actions and way of thinking produce many reactions in us, the viewer/reader. He is an intensely human character, whom we can all sympathize with; his religious beliefs become somewhat irrelevant in the reading of the text, other than being a means through which Shakespeare was able to discuss the issues he wanted to raise. However, having said this, it should be borne in mind that there are many questionable turns that Shylock takes in the play: for example, his ultimate conversion to Christianity has been read by many of evidence of anti-Semitism, that Shakespeare was bowing to popular beliefs (i.e., anti-Semitism) and therefore decided to ‘save’ Shylock at the end of the play, by having him change religion, to be made to undergo a forced conversion to Christianity. This is, however, but one reading of these events; this action can equally be read as another dramatic tool utilized by Shakespeare, in that this change of heart on Shylock’s part was simply a way for Shylock to be redeemed as a man, in that he no longer wished to kill Antonio by this stage of the play. His change of religion was a dramatic tool, through which Shakespeare was able to discuss issues of redemption, not simply religious redemption, but rather spiritual, human, redemption, the redemption of a man who realises his actions have not been moral. This interpretation of the play is how many people see the issue of anti-Semitism in the play, including many Jews, as, if the play is read from a Jewish perspective, with an understanding of the Jewish religion, it can be seen that the play is simply not anti-Semitic. The Christian religion allows its members to commit sins, but tells them that they are allowed to ask forgiveness for these sins from God, through Jesus, at any time; Jews, however, do not beg forgiveness for their sins, but rather atone for them. This means that forgiveness from God is essentially irrelevant to those who follow the Jewish faith, and that, rather, Jews should aim to follow a moral life at every point in their life, otherwise they act to harm themselves, which is counter-productive for all concerned. This fundamental division between these two religions, and the effects it has on the lives of Jews vs. Christians, is an idea that Shakespeare introduces, through his characterization of Shylock, and his portrayal of the Christian characters in his play, in order for issues of morality and responsibility to be introduced to the reader/viewer. How does this reading of the play affect the allegations of anti-Semitism? In this way, reading the play in a directly religious manner, we can see that Shylock is actually a morally upright character, whose wish to follow the rules by the letter is simply a matter of his faith, ensuring that he sees himself, and that others see him, as a morally upright man. That Antonio entered in to an agreement with Shylock was Antonio’s own decision, not something that Shylock forced upon him, and, as such, Shylock’s determination to comply with the agreement is a matter of morality, a gentlemanly thing to insist upon. The Christian Antonio’s future refusal to comply with the agreement can be seen as a degenerate action to take, an anti-religious matter, and has been argued by many as a tool Shakespeare used in order to show the weakness of the Christian religion as compared to the Jewish faith. Through this interpretation of the play, it can further be argued that Shakespeare actually intended for Shylock to become a tragic figure, showing this moral strength and the strength of his convictions, and as such, that the issue of anti-Semitism does not merit discussion, as it is simply not valid; after all, Shylock is, in the play, really no different from the Christian characters (Antonio, Portia etc.), in fact he is more honest than many of the Christian characters, and actually only seemed to learn the concept of revenge from the Christian characters, who were determined to do anything they could, however immoral, to avoid harm coming to Antonio. Thus, we can see that the issue of anti-Semitism in The Merchant of Venice is a highly complex issue, made more complicated by Shakespeare’s brilliance in characterization and in designing his plots. The complex nature of his main character, Shylock, and of his motivations and thinking, religious or otherwise, coupled with his complex interactions with the other characters, leads the viewer/reader to many different conclusions regarding this issue, as we have seen. My own reading of the play is that Shylock, as a character, is a tool used by Shakespeare, through which he was able to discuss issues of morality and responsibility. In this interpretation, Shylock is not a Jewish stereotype, nor a sympathetic character; he is simply a complex, captivating character, who we – at times – despise, and who we – at times – feel great compassion for, but who always makes us think about our moral responsibility, as human beings interacting with other human beings, of whatever race, faith or creed. References Shakespeare, W. (1594-1597?). The Merchant of Venice. The Arden Shakespeare. Read More