I began reading The Merchant of Venice with little knowledge of the plot or characters beforehand; I knew the Shylock was a Jew, and there was references to religious quarrels, but that is all. After reading Act I, I was left with questions about Antonio's depression, or the ridiculous concept of Portia's husband being chosen by choosing the right casket, but I was most intrigued by Shylock himself; the thought that crossed my mind at the end of the act was "Wow, what a dick." (seriously, a pound of flesh? That's a bit extreme.) So I continued to read, and within a short period of time found myself concluding the third act and with a different idea of Shylock entirely. I must admit I feel bad for him. Other than slight references to his ways before the beginning of the play, I began to ponder if perhaps, just the tiniest chance a LONG time beforehand, that Shylock was a good and decent person, and that through torment and judgment by other merchants and Christians made him the "villain" he has become. He has a daughter (although she despises him), so apparently he was once married; whether by force or love is yet to be discovered, but it is proof that once upon a time someone could have thought him worthy. Or there is the possibility he was a miserable miser since the day he was brought to life and I'm giving him too much credit.
One must admit , however, that with continuous torment comes resentment and hatred. When Antonio and Shylock discuss the wages of the loan, Shylock states he would like this to be extended through friendship, regardless of the fact good-nature Antonio had continuously called Shylock a dog, other obscenities, and even spit at him, but Antonio refuses, saying they should agree on the terms as enemies because he was liable to insult Shylock again. Wouldn't you feel a bit insulted if you extended your hand and had it "bit" off?
There is also a rare moment of vulnerability in Shylock when in the third act (sorry for the spoiler) he cries most famously "I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes?......" (p. 1147, l. 49 - 61) and continues to express that he is a person, and feels the same emotions, has the same body traits, and endures the same joys and sufferings that Christians do. If a Christian has the right to harm a Jew, than a Jew should have the same right to harm a Christian. He is pissed because of a life full of discrimination, and he is hell bent on revenge and will except nothing less.
So what more can I say? His wife either left him or died (I either over read it or it wasn't stated), his daughter ran off with a Christian and stole his money in the process, he has lived a life of persecution for his faith, and there is a debt owed to him by a man he loathes, who has been a constant torment to him. He has a right to be a prick, and if I were him I would be as well. I have stopped my reading, awaiting to begin Act 4, but I am curious in learning if my opinion of him will change through the remainder of the play.
4 comments:
Personally I find Shylock to be the most interesting character in the M of V. His dialog is clever and, while he has many justifiable reasons for bitterness, he pushes beyond his bitterness and is even willing to put his pain on display for those who have pained him. Yes, a "pound of flesh" seems a rather steep price, but it is the process of negotiation that brings interest to the story. And, I think, if you read the "pound of flesh" section correctly, what Shylock is really saying is that, since he fully expects the money to be paid back, he has no real intention of taking a pound of flesh. He seems to have a greater interest in establishing a relationship with Bassanio and Antonio, and is willing to forgo the interest that he deserves for what appears to be a wink, a silly bet, and a chance at true friendship with these two.
What happens next, as you say, is yet to be revealed.
Jeff, from my reading (and reading ahead) it became apparent to me that Shylock wanted Antonio to be punished for the torment the latter had put upon him. Jessica states on p. 1154, l. 283-287 that "When I was with him I have heard him swear to Tubal and Cush, his countrymen, that he would rather have Antonio's flesh than twenty times the value of the sum that he did owe him". I do not doubt that Shylock perhaps wanted acceptance or friendship (as stated in my blog), but he has become increasingly bitter and resentful because of the antisemitism. I agree with you though, as I also find him to be the most interesting character of the play.
This was an interesting post. I'd definitely have to say that Shylock is a "prick" by environment (though Antonio is kind of a 'prick' too). Shylock was initially just going to charge interest for the loan he was giving out (even though he knew of Antonio's past insults towards him), but it was after Antonio blatantly expressed his hatred for him that Shylock went overboard with the conditions of his loan. He wanted revenge for this unwarranted hatred he was receiving from Antonio.
Your opinion of Shylock is all about how you read his personality and evaluate his situation. He is just a man who has to do his job, in addition to being plagued by the constant and intentional racism of his felloe man. He is in a cut-throat business, which heightens the pressures of his day to day life. I know if I were in his position, I would definitely be on the edgy side.
Post a Comment