Many people are villainous in the way they behave. Their villainous acts may be attributed to their desire to destroy others and in turn elevate themselves to a higher financial or social level. However, the root cause of their villainy may be a response to the treatment they have endured at the hands of others. In short, they have been taught villainy, rather than it being an integral part of their personality. In such instances, revenge can be a key motivator in inspiring them to act in a villainous way. It is on such occasions, where villains have themselves been exposed to villainy, that the distinction between villain and victim becomes blurred. Victims are usually characterised in the way that they are persecuted for circumstances, which are beyond their control for example their appearance. In plays and novels, the victim is sometimes a character included to highlight the prejudices and pre-conceptions of the social climate in which the play or novel was written. In the ‘Merchant of Venice’ it can be argued that Shylocks character undergoes a metamorphosis from villain to victim. However, in this essay I hope to discuss whether in fact Shylock can be defined as either villain or victim and to form an opinion of what Shakespeare intended.
First we shall look at the aspects of the text that portray Shylock as a villain. We are first introduced to Shylock in Act I Scene iii where we learn of his usury. It is in this scene that Bassanio seeks Shylock out and asks to borrow money from him in Antonio’s name. Also in this scene do we learn of Shylock’s hatred for Antonio and the Christians:
‘ How like a fawning publican he looks! / I hate him for he is a Christian; ’
(Act I Scene iii)
Shylock also displays elements of belligerence in his refusal to ever forgive the Christians. We also learn of his intent regarding Antonio’s life:
‘ If I can catch him once upon the hip, / I will feed fat the ancient grudge I bear him.’ (Act I Scene iii)
Shylock also shows himself to be devious and cunning by hiding his hatred beneath a façade of friendship in order to entice Antonio to become indebted to him, not just with money but with his life. Antonio is very naïve regarding the terms of the bond taking the ‘pound of flesh’ clause to be a show of friendship not hatred:
‘ The Hebrew will turn Christian: he grows kind.’ (Act I Scene iii)
Perhaps he receives the terms...
... middle of paper ...
...uted among his sworn enemies. Although Shylock pursues his revenge fervently he still has the audience’s sympathy because of the unfair and harsh punishment he receives. It strikes a modern day audience as grossly unfair that the severity of his punishment reflects not his crime, but his race. He is a victim of the Christians’ intolerance of other races and ideas.
In conclusion, I feel that ultimately Shylock is a villain. The way he treats those he is close to, for example his daughter Jessica exposes his vindictive and ultimately evil character. He lets his lust for vengeance engulf all other aspects of his life and his complete lack of mercy towards Antonio renders him a villain in the eyes of the audience.
We can only guess at the way in which Shakespeare intended Shylock to be portrayed. I feel that Shakespeare intended Shylock to be victim, he was created to challenge the pre-conceptions and ideologies of the Elizabethan era. Having said this, I feel personally that it is not productive for us to simply categorise Shylock as either victim or villain. Through Shylock, Shakespeare explores the way in which the line between the oppressed and the oppressor can become blurred.
Shylock’s characterial flaws prompt an chain reaction of deprivations, as they ultimately all contribute to his ruination. For instance, Shylock’s lack of mercy deprives him of all Judaism associations, as this lack
Throughout the play, Shylock was often reduced to something other than Human. In many cases, even the simple title of "Jew" was stripped away, and Shylock was not a man, but an animal. For example, Gratiano curses Shylock with "O, be thou damned, inexecrable dog!" (IV, i, 128) whose "currish spirit govern'd a wolf" (IV, i, 133-134) and whose "desires are wolvish, bloody, starved, and ravenous" (IV, i, 137-138). Or when Shylock is neither a man nor an animal, he becomes "a stony adversary, inhuman wretch" (IV, i, 4-5). When the Christians applied these labels to Shylock, they effectively stripped him of his humanity, of his religious identity; he was reduced to something other than human.
While engendering the bond in the inciting force of the play, Antonio says to Shylock – the antagonist – “Content in faith. I’ll seal to such a bond, / And say there is much kindness in the Jew” (1.3.149-150) which reveals how Antonio sees such positive terms in the deal. Although the terms may seem simples to follow, Antonio will still face the consequences of putting his life on the line for his dear friend, Bassanio. This bond portion of the play establishes relationships through the rivals and also gives background information about characters, which show the elements of dramatic significance. Subsequently, Shylock’s possessions are at stake during their trial after Antonio fails to pay him back because his argosies were abolished. Shylock’s punishment for attempting to
To make the claim that Shakespeare creates Shylock within an anti-Semitic culture, and therefore invests Shylock with biased anti-Semitic attributes, does not impugn the artistry of the drama. Nor does such a claim implicate Shakespeare himself as a monstrous anti-Semite. All this claim suggests is that Shakespeare, like most of the rest of his society, was hostile toward Jewry for religious and cultural reasons, and that hostility is revealed most clearly in Shylock.
William Shakespeare attained literary immortality through his exposition of the many qualities of human nature in his works. One such work, The Merchant of Venice, revolves around the very human trait of deception. Fakes and frauds have been persistent throughout history, even to this day. Evidence of deception is all around us, whether it is in the products we purchase or the sales clerks' false smile as one debates the purchase of the illusory merchandise. We are engulfed by phonies, pretenders, and cheaters. Although most often associated with a heart of malice, imposture varies in its motives as much as it's practitioners, demonstrated in The Merchant of Venice by the obdurate characters of Shylock and Portia.
Shylock is no more greedy than Bassanio begging for money or Lorenzo accepting Jessica’s gifts. Shylock is a loving father who wants the best for his only daughter. This love is expressed by his distress after he finds she has left him and through Shylock’s concern about Christian husbands during the courtroom scene in Act 5 Scene 1. Although Shylock showcases benevolent characteristics, like any individual he possesses faults. Shylock occasionally has moments of great acrimony in which he expresses his displeasment in the society. A strong proclamation of Shylock’s displeasment with his environment is when Shylock cries, “what 's his reason? I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes?”
Shylock and Iago are two of the most interesting characters created by Shakespeare. Their personalities and characteristics make them who they are. These characters do have some similarities, on the other hand, are different as night and day. Each one has a different motive for revenge, and also they both go about it in different ways. Iago will stop at nothing. Shylock has the reader's sympathy. Still their desire for revenge ruins them in the end.
In looking at Shylock, the sixteenth-century audience would deduce all view except the greedy, selfish, manipulating, Jew. In accordance with the normative view, Jews were believed to be out of tune with the universe. This is re-enforce in act 2 scene 5 lines 27-30 when Shylock is comment...
When most people think of justice, it commonly brings forward the words positivity, fairness, law, order, and other familiar words. However, in the Merchant of Venice, this is not the case. Justice is used negatively in a court case that reverses from putting Antonio, the convicted Christian merchant, on trial to Shylock, the Jewish money loaner asking for justice, to be put on trial. In the play, both mercy and justice are rejected because of the obvious influential bias that the character’s actions portray.
There can be many similarities drawn to both the character Shylock in Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice, and Barabas in the Jew of Malta. However besides the obvious fact that they were both Jews, and the common stereo-types that were attributed to both of them such as being miserly and conniving, there are gaping differences in the dynamics of the characters themselves. “There are profound differences in Barabas and Shylock. The role assigned to by Shakespeare to his Christian characters is far more extensive, his Jew on the other hand has been scaled down and domesticated. Shylock has none of the insatiable ambition that makes Barabas for all his grotesque acts, a character along the lines of the great Faustus and Tambourlaine.”(Shylock,21) There is a much greater roundness in Barabas then Shylock. Marlowe portrays Barabas the Jew in a dynamic and somewhat curios manner. It is difficult to surmise Marlowe’s intent when portraying the Jew, yet it is certain that there is more than what seems topically apparent. It is very clear that he is an outsider, not only in the obvious aspect that he is a Jew in the less than theologically tolerant and politically correct Elizabethan drama, but he is also an outsider in terms of evil and his mode of thought. He is obviously a villain, lying cheating, poisoning a entire nunnery, even killing those we thought were close to him, including his daughter, yet through his Machiavellan quest for power and riches we somehow become almost endeared to him and he becomes an anti-hero. All these aspects combine to make Barabas a character that we are somehow drawn to in the same way people are drawn to stare at a traffic accident...
In every great play, there must be a villain to assist in forming the base of the plot. Without a villain, no story or play will be successful or interesting. Shakespeare is well known for his use of different types of villains in his plays. “What constitutes a villain? -- You could probably write a whole thesis on that one. I'm going to adopt a rather loose working definition - villains are people who do bad stuff.” (Dooley) Dooley’s description of villains is a very accurate summary of the description of villains. They are, essentially, people who do things that are seen as morally wrong by readers. Many of the villains in Shakespeare’s plays come across as almost sociopathic. In Shakespeare’s plays Othello, Midsummer Night’s Dream, and Hamlet, the villains are Iago, Oberon, and Claudius, respectively.
It is difficult to say if Shylock is a complete villain or a victim, as his character is complex and ambiguous. However, it is difficult to view Shylock as anything other than a devious, bloodthirsty and heartless villain in the majority of the play. There are a few points in the story where he can be viewed as victimised, as most Jews were at that time, but Shakespeare has purposely portrayed Shylock as a stereotypical Jew, greedy, and obsessed with money. Shylock has been written to be very inflated and exaggerated. Even when Shylock makes his first appearance in the play, his first words are “Three thousand ducats,” Act 1, Scene 3.
Shylock is a wealthy Jew who invests money into shipments and trades. When Shylock’s enemy, Antonio, requests a loan of 3000 ducats, “Shylock adopts this Christian model of "kind" lending in his bond with Antonio as a means for lawful revenge.” Shylock’s agreement is that if the ducats are not returned, Antonio must repay his loan in human flesh. This is a way for Shylock to either make money or kill a Christian, either will satisfy him. Lee describes Shylock’s feelings towards Christians, “Indeed, although Shylock will neither "eat," "drink," nor "pray" with the Christians, he is willing to "buy" and "sell" with them.” This is where Shakespeare first introduces the devil inside Shylock. Had Antonio been a Jew, there would not have been a payment of flesh. Shylock’s hatred propels the story from start to finish. His hatred causes him to lose his daughter, drives Portia to use her money and wit to save Antonio, and why he ends up losing
During the discussion of the bond, Shylock says to Antonio “ I would be friends with you and have your love” and “this kindness will I show”. He pretends to be Antonio’s friend, but he has an ulterior motive, which is to take a pound of Antonio’s flesh from whatever part of his body he pleases. The underlying meaning is to kill him, and thus, although Shylock seems good-hearted, he is in truth, harbouring deceit. Shylock is manipulative and crafty as he tries to put up a show to deceive Antonio. He sounds generous about offering the three thousand ducats without “usance for my moneys”, thus winning Antonio’s trust. This was done to divert Antonio’s attention from his actual intentions. However, Shylock proposes a flesh bond as a “merry sport”, in substitution for not charging interest. The bond, although an unusual forfeit, is a serious matter, because Antonio may be killed from accepting its terms and conditions. Shylock is a brilliant strategist, and even the perceptive businessman, Antonio, has fallen for it. Shylock is a vindictive and unforgiving man, whose hatred for Christians has driven him to want to kill Antonio. We know that Shylock has suffered emotionally and physically because of how Antonio has kicked, spat and rated him many a times. Thus he deserves some of our pity, as taking revenge on your enemy is only natural.
Another way Antonio and Shylock are different is their religion based social status: Antonio is a Christian and Shylock is a Jew.