Piyush Banerjee
Erasmus scholar, Azrieli Foundation Grant recipient
Univ. of Haifa Alumnus
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. / This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Introduction
The Merchant of Venice is undisputedly one of the literary masterpieces of the English literature and has been taught in the schools and universities and staged all over the world for decades. However, the charge of this play being anti-Semitic in nature has been made by many. According to Harold Bloom, an eminent literary critic-
“One would have to be blind, deaf and dumb not to recognize that Shakespeare’s grand, equivocal comedy ‘The Merchant of Venice’ is nevertheless a profoundly anti-Semitic work.” (Frank)
The reason behind that charge is the portrayal of the character Shylock, a Jew in this Shakespearean tragicomedy. The dialogues spoke by other characters and certain phrases used for Shylock during the play and his problematic conversion to Christianity at the end of the play make a strong case to support the charge. This paper would try to find an answer whether such an argument against the play holds water. The importance to find the answer lies in the simple fact that this drama is one of the most popular in the entire world and therefore its portrayal of a Jewish character might have an immense impact on how Jews would be generally perceived by the readers or the audience.
The ‘evil’ Jew versus the ‘kind’ human beings
There are numerous occasions throughout the play when Shylock is perceived in a negative manner by others or shown in a negative light. The major issue behind such a portrayal lies in the fact that his evil nature is not attributed to his human characteristics but to him being a Jew. Shylock has been addressed as a ‘Jew’ for the most part of the play, and has been called by his name only 17 times (Cohen 54). Also, the other characters refer to him as ‘the Jew’ most of the time while talking about him. His name and personal identity is overshadowed by his Jewish identity and thus, his personal negative characteristics tend to give an overall impression of the Jews as a whole. In the entire play, the term ‘Jew’ has been used 58 times, ‘Hebrew’ is used 2 times and other words such as ‘Jews’, ‘Jewess’, ‘Jewish’ and ‘Jew’s’ have been used 14 times. These words have been used 74 times in the play (Cohen 54), which is several times more than Shylock’s own name. A few examples-
In Act IV scene I, the famous court scene, the Duke says-
“Go one, and call the Jew into the court.” (Shakespeare 66)
Later in the same scene, he says-
“.....We all expect a gentle answer, Jew.” (Shakespeare 67)
In the same scene, Antonio speaks-
“I pray you think you question with the Jew....
As seek to soften that- than which what’s harder?-
His Jewish heart.....
Let me have judgement, and the Jew his will.” (Shakespeare 69)
In Act II scene II, Launcelot Gobbo, Shylock’s servant, makes this statement about his master-
“...My master’s a very Jew...” (Shakespeare 23)
These examples make it absolutely clear that Shylock’s personal identity had been limited to his Jewish identity and he was only perceived as a Jew by others. He, therefore, ceases to be a common human being like others as no other character is referred or addressed so many times by his/her religious identity and remains as the ‘other’ among these people throughout the play.
Additionally, the association of the term ‘evil’ and the character of Shylock with the Jewish identity and the term ‘kind’ and Antonio’s character with the Christian identity tries to establish a direct superior-inferior binary in the play. Shylock hates Antonio because Antonio is a Christian. He says, in Act I, scene III-
“How like a fawning publican he looks!
I hate him for he is a Christian;” (Shakespeare 13)
In the same scene, Antonio says-
“Hie thee, gentle Jew.
The Hebrew will turn Christian; he grows kind.” (Shakespeare 17)
In the dialogue spoken by Antonio, there is a clear association of kindness with the Christian identity while Shylock seems to hate Antonio because of him being a Christian. Therefore, the spectator or the reader is left with the decision to judge a man who hates another person for his kind nature and his religion. During the entire length of the play, Antonio comes out as a virtuous and kind person because of his Christian faith while Shylock’s evil and inhuman nature remains closely associated to his Jewish identity.
The word ‘devil’ has also been associated with the term ‘Jew’ on several occasions in the play. For instance, Launcelot Gobbo, in Act II scene II, had this to say about his Jewish master-
“Certainly, my conscience will serve me to run from this Jew my master .... To be rul'd by my conscience, I should stay with the Jew my master, who (God bless the mark) is a kind of devil; and to run away from the Jew, I should be rul'd by the fiend, who, saving your reverence, is the devil himself. Certainly the Jew is the very devil incarnation, and in my conscience, my conscience is but a kind of hard conscience, to offer to counsel me to stay with the Jew.” (Shakespeare 20)
The play was written at the end of 16th century (1596-98) and printed in 1600 (Raffel xvii). By this time, the Jews of England had been either expelled or forcefully converted. Hence, there exists a high chance that neither Shakespeare nor his audience ever met a Jewish person in their lifetime (Cohen 53). In this tragicomedy, Shylock has been clearly portrayed as the bloodthirsty Jew who would stop at nothing to drain the Christian Antonio’s blood. Even in the court scene, Shylock rejects Portia’s proposal of having a surgeon for Antonio. The Jew only wants to see the kind-hearted Christian die. This aspect of Shylock’s characterisation reverberates with the medieval Europe’s image of the bloodthirsty Jew who murdered the Christian children and used their blood to make bread for Passover.
Shylock is compelled to convert to Christianity at the end of the court scene. Antonio also insists that Shylock becomes a Christian and therefore, this conversion from Judaism to Christianity symbolises Shylock’s transformation from evil to kind. This compulsion of baptism sends a clear message and establishes the superiority of the Christian faith over the Jewish one. The message is supported by the fact that Shylock apparently goes through a moral transformation as he no longer remains a Jew.
Conclusion: Is The Merchant of Venice anti-Semitic?
The answer to this simple yet complex question can be answered by analysing the way in which the term ‘Jew’ has been used and the portrayal of Jews in general in the drama. According to Derek Cohen, ‘an anti-Semitic work of art’ is the ‘one that portrays Jews in a way that makes them objects of antipathy to readers and spectators- objects of scorn, hatred, laughter, or contempt’ (Cohen 54). After a close reading of this literary masterpiece, one can definitely notice anti-Semitic elements which come up on numerous occasions either implicitly or explicitly. But to claim that Shakespeare was anti-Semitic only by reading or watching this play also lacks evidence. The problematic ‘forceful’ conversion at the end of the court scene also establishes the superiority of Christianity over the ‘inferior’ Jewish faith. Since the beginning of the play, constant comparisons are being made implicitly between a ‘good’ Christian who helps others out of kindness and an ‘evil’ Jew who practices usury and plans to murder a man. But to claim that the whole play is anti-Semitic in nature is also not entirely true.
The bard gives several occasions to Shylock to express his feelings towards the wrongdoings against him and the discrimination he faces because of being a Jew. Yes, there are some visible anti-Semitic elements in the play, but the play itself is not entirely anti-Semitic. In Act III scene I, Shylock says-
“...He hath disgraced me, and hind’red me half a million; laughed at my losses, mocked at my gains, scorned my nation, thwarted my bargains, cooled my friends, heated my 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 diseases, healed by 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.” (Shakespeare 44-45)
A careful reading of the play will reveal that it is more ambiguous towards Jews than it appears at first glance.
References:
Cohen, D. M. “The Jew and Shylock.” Shakespeare Quarterly, vol. 31, no. 1, 1980, pp. 53–63. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2869369. Accessed 8 Sept. 2020.
Frank, Steve. “‘The Merchant of Venice’ perpetuates vile stereotypes of Jews. So why do we still produce it?” The Washington Post. July 28, 2016. https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/07/28/stop-producing-the-merchant-of-venice/. Accessed August 22, 2020.
Shakespeare, William. The Annotated Shakespeare: The Merchant of Venice. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2006.
Shakespeare, William. The Merchant of Venice. New York: Pocket Books, 1957.
