Month: January 2016

Act 3 scene 3 is about how shylock talking to the jailor, and Antonio about his bond and tells him he has his bond and will not let go of his bond (won’t rest until justice is served).

Act 3 scene 4 portia has a plan to pretend to go to a convent whilst actually dressing as a man and spying on bassanio.

My essay will be based on the question “is the merchant of Venice anti-Semitic”. I will look at how Shylock is seen as a criminal rather than a victim because of stereotypical terms of Jews liking money. The play is seen to be anti-Semitic in it’s first scene. Jews are hated by Christians in the play due to there different views in religion which is why they’re spat on and mistreated This results in an anti-Semitic play, anti antisemitism being discrimination towards Jews. I will look further into how stereotypes are used to distinctly separate the Christians from the Jews especially in the Venetian Rialto and the Jewish ghetto .

First of all Shylock makes a good stereotype when it comes to Jews liking money, I know this because in the play when his daughter Jessica runs away from him with his ducats he’s more infuriated about the loss of ducats than the loss of a child.”O my ducats! O my daughter! Fled with a Christian! O my Christian ducats! Justice! the law! my ducats”. In modern day life Jews are seen to like money and Shylock portrays that. It is as if Shakespeare wanted to build the perfect stereotype by putting in a character like Shylock.

Although on the contrary some may disagree with this statement because: since Shylock is in a deal with Antonio where Antonio is dealing with Shylock’s money. Since Shylock knows that Antonio ships are common with mishaps and unsuccessful returns he tells Antonio that if his money is lost than a pound of flesh will taken from him instead of the money being paid back.”If you repay me not on such a day, In such a place, such sum or sums as are Express’d in the condition, let the forfeit Be nominated for an equal pound Of your fair flesh”. So in this scenario Shylock seeks flesh over money.

Where antisemitism really strikes in the play is when Shylock is spat on and has no right whatsoever to react unless wanting to face greater punishments.You, that did void your rheum upon my beard. And only ever when in need does Shylock have an actual chance where the power is in his hands.The fact that cases like this in the play are common is a real factor towards Shakespeare creating an anti Semitic play. but what really startles you is that when you look back, Shakespeare intended this play to be a comedy but we see this as a tragedy so does this mean that when spat on we were meant to be humored by it and laugh at the low status of Shylock.

The play is slightly based on its reality at the time. In Venice 1596 the case was that Jews wore yellow scarves when leaving the Jewish ghetto to distinctly point out there religion, which in the play is represented as wearing red hat. which leads on to my next point where that the Jews where only permitted to leave the ghetto during day time where they were again restricted because there only job was to lend money or work in pawn shops. So is the play anti-Semitic or just based on the truth and historic facts based on Jews in the 16th century?

Furthermore into the play when in court over a dispute with shylocks money happening to have not made it back from Antonio ships.even though shylocks  case against Antonio is very sturdy the judge is Christian so the rules may be tweaked in the state of antisemitism. Anti semitism being the case would mean that all of shylocks ducats had gone to waist But what is even worse is that he will not get his revenge.before in the play he had stated That in the case of there being a mishap with the money that a pound of flesh will be taken. This means that no matter the case, that the majority of the time Jews will not get there way, also meaning that Antonio will have the upper hand and shylocks points will be irrelevant .So has anti semitism completely ruined a contract by also making it only one sided.

In the play shylock is mocked for his religion when lore no says to him that for if he goes to heaven it will be for Jessica converting religions into Christianity. This shows that he feels only Christians have the right to go to heaven in honour.

In conclusion I think that the merchant of Venice is an anti Semitic play because of the discrimination against Jews in the play and the way the are mistreated (Like being spat on being cussed and the main reason of Christians always having the upper hand over Jews who will always be looked down upon and there points to be useless , simply, only on there race and religion

Portia tries to slow down bassanio’s decision. She wants to tell him to pick the right casket but doesn’t want to break her oath of secrecy.

The 2 main things that happen in act 3 scene 2 is the marriage of bassanio and portia, it’s also the marriage of nerissa with gratianio.

Caricature / stereotype (caricature uses stereotypes to mock people, making them laugh).

I think that free land feels as though the play is anti-semitic. I feel this because until I read his view on the play I had thought shylock was the victim yet now I see shylock as the villain. In the article he uses very descriminating language. Free land says ” thus he is shown as obsessed by money, a man who dreams of moneybags.” This shows that he is trying to use the modern day stereotype of Jews being good with money . when Jessica flees, shylocks concern is about his ducats not about the loss of a child.

I think that even though the play is anti-semitic we should continue in Learning about to help us understand the descrimination and it’s use.