The treatment of Shylock in The Merchant of Venice has long been a controversial issue. In the context of the play, Shylock hates Antonio and seeks his revenge in an unusual and even garish way by demanding a pound of flesh. Any villain would be seen as extremely villainous for that sort of behavior, but the villainy of Shylock has been tied to the idea that the play is saying his villainy derives from his being Jewish. In fact, such a view ignores the comic nature of the play itself and also the way Shakespeare gives Shylock real motivations for his actions and treats him more as a human being than would be likely if this were an anti-Semitic stance.
First, Shylock in The Merchant of Venice has a number of reasons for hating Antonio and for seeking revenge on him and those Shylock sees as like him. Shylock is a Jew, and he believes he is shunned and hated by Christians. This alone differentiates his treatment in the play from an anti-Semitic rant, for Shakespeare recognizes that society does often demonize the Jew and that such a judgment is unfair, so much so as to become a self-fulfilling prophecy. He further discovers that his daughter, Jessica, has eloped with Lorenzo and intends to convert to Christianity herself. These events come on the heels of all the other reasons he detests Antonio--because Antonio lends money and does not charge interest, because Antonio has denigrated him in the past, and because Antonio is a Christian. Tubal is his friend and brings him news that Antonio's ship has disappeared. He also has been asked to find out about Jessica but at this point has learned nothing new.
Shylock speaks of everything in terms of money, and this includes his daughter: "A diamond gone, cost me two thousand ducats in Frankfort!" (III.i.77). The news that his daughter has not been found is coupled here with news that Antonio's ship has been lost, linking his anger over his daughter with the man he will try to make responsible for it, or at least make pay for it. He has compared the man who took his daughter to a thief stealing his jewelry, and this act is directly linked with Antonio again because the ship was lost off Genoa and Jessica was seen in Genoa at around the same time. For Shylock, the person and business are always closely linked. Throughout this scene, Tubal shifts back and forth between Jessica and Antonio in what he reports, and Shylock similarly shifts from anger at Jessica to a sense of joy at the revenge he is about to achieve. Indeed, both emotions are close together in his mind.
This scene will lead directly to the court case that dominates the latter part of the play as Shylock seeks to exact his revenge for all the slights that have been visited upon him, including that of having his daughter run away with a Christian and take the turquoise ring discussed in this scene with her. Shylock sets in motion the apparatus to bring Antonio to court:
Go, Tubal, fee me an officer; bespeak him a fortnight before. I will have the heart of him, if he forfeit; for, were he out of Venice, I can make what merchandise I will. Go, Tubal, and meet me at our synagogue; go, good Tubal; at our synagogue, Tubal (III.i.119-124).
The fact that Shylock speaks in prose rather than verse sets him apart and makes him appear to be of a lower class than the others in the play. The reference to meeting at the synagogue emphasizes the Jewishness of these two men, which is one of Shylock's motivating factors. Tubal clearly is in agreement with Shylock both about Jessica's perfidy and about punishing Antonio, for he says that Antonio is clearly undone, and Shylock agrees. The reference to their synagogue again seems to indicate that the whole Jewish community may be supporting Shylock in this effort and seeking revenge vicariously through him and through what will happen to Antonio.
However, it remains difficult to see this play as anti-Semitic when the Jewish community has so many valid reasons for wanting to right the wrongs done to them over the years. Indeed, it would appear that the Christian hatred of the Jews is more an unreasoning hate than the Jewish reaction to being ill-treated. For many critics, of course, the mere fact that Shylock is Jewish and a villain is prima facie evidence that the play is anti-Semitic, though this is not really a reasonable position. Bernard Grebanier notes this and says, I might convincingly enough make out Shakespeare's purposes to be anti-Semitic with selective analysis: But if I honestly wish to discover Shakespeare's intentions, I will begin with no preconceptions concerning Shylock's character, and start gauging him from the moment we first meet him in the play (Grebanier 186).
Harold Bloom note that a similar problem is often cited for Othello, as if that characters problems were because he is black (though, of course, he is not depicted as a villain). Bloom then notes that Shylock is no more a mere means to exemplifying the Semitic problem than is Othello for the raising of the color question (Bloom 39). Bloom notes of the drama that at the heart of it are men (Bloom 39), with all the faults and failures of men. Shylock is above all a man, no less prized by Shakespeare because he is Jewish. Shylock is an imperfect human being, but he is depicted as a human being and not as an object to be despised. Shakespeare is far more even-handed than his critics give him credit for being. Indeed, a good deal of sympathy is evoked for Shylock in a play that delves more deeply into the problem of hatred between groups in society than might appear true on a cursory examination.
Works Cited
Bloom, Harold. Shylock. New York: Chelsea House, 1991.
Grebanier, Bernard. The Truth about Shylock. New York: Random House, 1962. Page Number: 186.
Already have an account? Log In Now
3506