Shakespeare Anti-Semitic? I Think so.

The Merchant of Venice tackles the big issue of anti-Semitism and can be interpreted many ways. No one knows exactly what Shakespeare intended Shylock’s character to represent but we can make a conclusion based on evidence. Because of Shylock’s role in the play, I believe it is easy to see that he is the “evil antagonist” in The Merchant of Venice. I do not think Shakespeare was specifically anti-Semitic, I think he just wrote the play to display how life during that era actually was.
At first it is easy to fall into the trap of thinking that Shakespeare is sympathizing with Shylock. This is because Shylock speaks of being mistreated and spit on by Antonio. Also, the placement of Jews in ghettos helps in victimizing Shylock. (they were definitely treated wrongly I’m just speaking objectively).As the story progresses though, evidence points toward the idea that Shakespeare was not trying to sympathize with Shylock. First, I would like to talk about the main reason Shylock dislikes Antonio in the play. It is because Antonio lends money free of interest and consequently is taking away business from Shylock. “He hates our sacred nation, and he rails Even there where merchants do most congregate On me, my bargains, and my well won thrift, Which he calls interest”.(A1, S3 L48-51) Shylock therefore hates someone based on their religious views in the play which does not exactly make him a virtuous character. Just as the Christians hated the Jews for lending money at interest Shylock is hating someone back for disagreeing with him.
Another reason why Shylock is also seen as bad is because of his bet with Antonio. He is looking to kill him because of his dislike for him. His hatred for him goes so deep that he even refuses all the money Portia offers, (way more then he was promised from Antonio), just so he could have the pleasure of killing Antonio. Jessica shows that, “When I was with him I have heard him swear to Tubal and to Chus, his countrymen, That he would rather have Antonio’s flesh than twenty times the value of the sum that he did owe him. (A3 S2 L84-88). It is a little twisted, no matter who you are to go that far in my opinion. Also, Shylock’s hatred goes as far as to praise Antonio’s financial downfall. After hearing that he all his ships crashed he says, “I’m very glad of it. I’ll plague him, I’ll torture him, I’m glad of it.” (A3 S1 L116-117). Shakespeare does not depict Shylock as a nice person. He straight up shows him as a blood wanting murderer. He does not help out in hypothesizing the Jews because of his portrayal of Shylock as a mean character. More evidence to Shylock being evil is at the ending of the play. Not only does Shylock lose the court case, Shakespeare punishes him severely by making him convert to Christianity! It is clear Shakespeare did not intend in arguing that Anti-Semitism is bad, but instead just wrote history.
The other way to look it at is that Shylock is portrayed as a human because of this famous quote, “…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, heal‘d by the same means, warm‘d and cool‘d 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, shall we not die?” (A3 S1 L58-66) Although this is a very convincing argument by Shylock I do not believe it outweighs the other evidence pointed to his demon ization. Shakespeare just does not put enough textual reference to show that he cares about the racism pointed towards Shylock at all. The whole play revolves around how Shylock becomes a blood thirsty and irrational.
By examining the court trial and Shylock’s demeanor throughout the play, I believe Shakespeare did not rise above his time and try to teach us a lesson about Anti-Semitism. I think he just was thinking about what would appeal to the audience; he wanted to write a comical romance and needed a bad guy to spice things up. That is where Shylock came in. By referencing him only by “the Jew” or comparing him to a dog, Shakespeare did not prove to me that he understood racism was bad. I do not blame him for it, because it is difficult to live ahead of one’s time.(770)

The Merchant of Venice--What is its message?

The Merchant of Venice presents an interesting situation because it is hard to tell who Shakespeare intends the “bad guy” to be. Although Shakespeare is known for his understanding of why people do bad things, (such as racism or murder), Shylock is not necessarily portrayed as a victim in this play. When Antonio fails to pay his bond, Skylock is shown as the “bad guy” and they devise a plot to stop him. Although today we know that treating someone for his or her religious views is unreasonable, (even though it still happens a lot more than people think), I actually believe that Shakespeare did not write this play to show that. I believe he wrote this play for purely entertainment.
In the beginning Shylock is portrayed as a victim and we initially feel sorry for him because of how he is treated. To be honest though, as the play progressed he started to turn a little darker than I would have expected. I started reading this play waiting for some moral message on how people can mess up by wanting too much power, money, and love. At first I thought it was that racism is bad and that Jews were treated unfairly, but then after Shylock made his bond with Antonio he became a mean person. He wanted a pound of flesh, human flesh. That is not a nice thing to do regardless of how you are treated. Shakespeare began to show that “the Jew” was actually heartless and it puzzled me. So what is the point of the play? The closest thing to a message that I could find was that one should always cherish his loved one from the situation between Bassanio, Portia, and her ring.
After analyzing the play more closely, I came to the conclusion it was made purely for entertainment because even Antonio does not really learn his lesson for mistreating Shylock because he wins in the end! He defeats the “bad guy” and gets his money back because it turns out not all his ships were doomed. Also, another way Shylock is portrayed as the bad guy is with his situation with his daughter Jessica. He does not let her marry out of faith even though they are madly in love. This play made me distrust Shakespeare a little bit because he does not show that it is bad to be a racist. He allows Antonio and Bassanio to live happily ever after, while in the end only Shylock got scammed.
After much thought; however, I have come to the conclusion that Shakespeare did not mess up, but he indeed wrote a play for entertainment because of the time he lived in. He did not know what it was like to be accepting because in that era Jews were seen as bad people and they were separated in ghettos. To him it was normal, and therefore that is why he didn’t write The Merchant of Venice in order to sympathize but in fact to be funny and to attract an audience. I am disappointed in him because after following his works in our class, he has showed me that he really is a good person and understands the principle values that people should follow such as honesty, love, patience, and virtue. I did not enjoy this play as much because there was no distinct humane message that I could relate to.

Merchant of Venice

Merchant of Venice

King Lear

Lear's oldest daughter Goneril is an evil woman who is willing to go to extremes to achieve her goals. She doesn’t let anything get in her way. Goneril pretends to love her father so he would give her a good portion of his kingdom. Right off the bat of the play portrays how she can be deceiving which sort of foreshadows her role in the play.
After gaining a large portion of her fathers land, she discarded Lear. She didn’t actually love her father, she just had a wanting for power. Her father was an annoyance to her. She banishes him and moves on like he never did anything for her. Her heartless cruelty becomes more and more apparent as the play progresses.
Goneril even plans to kill her own husband, the Duke of Albany as well as her sister Regan so she could be with Edmund. Goneril progresses to get what she wants through evil schemes and manipulation. She lies to her father for land, she lies to Albany to get a respected husband, and then she starts an affair with a bastard. Meanwhile, Lear is banished and going crazy. This cruelty and recklessness directly causes her death.
Goneril and Regan are personifications of evil because of their hunger for power. It is their hunger that drives them to do such foolish deeds. Ultimately, their poor embodiment of evil results in justfication, even though many innocent people are killing along the way such as Gloucester and Cordelia.

Poem of da day

A Dream Of Death

I DREAMED that one had died in a strange place
Near no accustomed hand,
And they had nailed the boards above her face,
The peasants of that land,
Wondering to lay her in that solitude,
And raised above her mound
A cross they had made out of two bits of wood,
And planted cypress round;
And left her to the indifferent stars above
Until I carved these words:
i{She was more beautiful than thy first love,}
i{But now lies under boards.}

William Butler Yeats

The Battle of Wits

Much Ado About Nothing portrays a hilarious and ironic relationship between Benedick and Beatrice. The way Shakespeare makes them hate each other in the beginning makes their eventual love so much funnier. The relationship goes through many stages where they sort of fight, but I believe that they liked each other all along.
Benedick’s relationship with Beatrice in the beginning of the play reminds me much of a boy and girl that like each other in kindergarten. They bicker endlessly every time they see each other. It may be their way of showing like for one another. I think it represents a sort awkwardness between them considering they have been together before. The reason I think that is because of how the movie showed a specific scene of them fighting with all their wit. After being stung by an intense comment and Benedick walks off so he could claim victory. Beatrice becomes sad by Benedick’s “move” if you will and mutters under her breath that it is typical of him to walk away from a situation rather than fight it through. It shows some unhappiness and maybe shows that she still wants to be with him and wishes he could be open and honest rather than fighting every time they meet. If that were to ever happen they would need the help of an outside force.
Their feelings finally come out with the help of their friends. The work of Claudius, Leonato, and the Prince allow for Beatrice and Benedick to consider loving each other. With their help it gives Benedick and Beatrice the opportunity to come clean with their feelings. I think Shakespeare is showing a major idea about human nature. It is impossible to interact as humans in a positive way if the people don’t open their minds. Benedick and Beatrice finally speak openly and realize that they actually love each other. They went from saying that they will never die married” to celebrating love.
A relationship, being sexual or friendly, will never work without honesty. Even then it might still be too awkward to function properly. Shakespeare’s portrayal of Benedick’s and Beatrice’s comical bickering helps show us how to lighten up and be open to share our true feelings. An idea or tradition may be in the way of letting good things happen between people but all barriers must be shed if we are to truly be human.