Shylock - Victim or Aggressor

Authors Avatar

Francesca Meyrick-Cole

SHYLOCK: Victim or Aggressor

“Since I am a Dog, Beware my fangs”

There is a lot of controversy over whether the character Shylock in Shakespeare’s ‘The Merchant of Venice’ is a racial stereotype of a Jew, or whether he is actually the victim of a hostile Venetian society. The idea of Shylock as a bloodthirsty and mercenary individual is contrasted with his portrayal as a man with human instincts and feelings who understandably responds with hostility, to the relentless insults and abuse he receives from Christians.

We first learn of Shylock’s victimisation in Act 1 scene 3, where the bond is made between him and Antonio. We are told that Antonio has in the past insulted and abused Shylock without any regret just because Shylock is Jewish:

You call me misbeliever, cut-throat dog,

And spit upon my Jewish gaberdine.

I feel that Shylock has the capability of handling confrontations with the Christians very well, as he can be humorous when he controls his temper by making sarcastic comments instead of insulting ones. For example, when Antonio has spoken about the bond, Shylock questions his request, stating there is not one thing Antonio has ever done to warrant Shylock lending him the money. Here he uses humour in a bitter manner:

Fair sir you spat on me on Wednesday last,

You spurned me such a day, another time

You called me dog; and for these courtesies

I’ll lend you thus much moneys?

Shylock could also be interpreted as an aggressor in this scene when he talks about Antonio, ‘How like a fawning publican he looks’, but I think he has a justifiable reason for his behaviour. It is apparent that the only reason the Christians are now being civil towards Shylock is because they need him, and not because their feelings of hatred towards him have changed:

I am as like to call thee so again,

To spit on thee again, to spurn thee too.

Shylock is victimised mainly because of his race; he is Jewish, and because of this he isn’t referred to by his name, ‘Shylock’, but as the ‘Jew’ which automatically singles him out as being different, and puts up a barrier between him and the rest of Venetian society. All of the Christians call Shylock names and think of him as evil. Even Shylock’s assistant, Launcelot, is derogatory about him behind his back, ‘Certainly the Jew is the very devil incarnation’, ‘the Jew my master who is a kind of devil’. I feel that Launcelot is very disrespectful towards Shylock, as we find out later in the play from Shylock that Launcelot is an indolent worker who wastes time and money:

Join now!

The patch is kind enough, but a huge feeder,

Snail-slow in profit, and

If this is true, then Launcelot has no right to call Shylock animalistic and devilish names, as he himself is no better, ‘He sleeps by day more than a wildcat.’ However Shylock is also shown to be racist, ‘I hate him for he is a Christian’, but I see this as his retaliation from the relentless racial abuse he suffers from Antonio and most of the other Christians. He is a social outcast who is the laughing stock of Venice and is mocked by almost everyone, ...

This is a preview of the whole essay