Shylock - villian or victim?

Shylock has been very badly treated by certain Christians and he yearns for revenge. He goes too far when he seeks the life of his main persecutor, but he is essentially, an intelligent, dignified man who can no longer bear to be humiliated.

Long before Shylock plotted against him, Antonio seemed to take a pride in spurning Shylock, treating him in public with rudeness and contempt. This type of behaviour appears to contradict with the rest of his character. You would imagine that such a man would instinctively shrink from insulting anybody so grossly, but Antonio seems proud of it and tells Shylock that he will probably abuse him again, 'spit on him again and spurn him, too'.

In 'The Merchant of Venice', Shakespeare does not treat Shylock as simply evil for evil's sake. He makes him human. Shylock has good reason to resent Antonio. He says:

'You call me misbeliever, cut-throat dog,

and spit upon my Jewish gabardine,

and all for use of that which is mine own,'

When Shylock shows a seeming kindness to Antonio he takes it as a sign that 'The Hebrew will turn Christian: he grows kind'. Kindness in a Jew is beyond Antonio's conception.

Christians alienate Shylock simply because he is a Jew. In ancient, medieval, and Renaissance times, Jews almost always encountered prejudice from non-Jews around them. Scholars are divided on whether Shakespeare, in The Merchant of Venice, was attempting condemn anti-Semitism by sympathizing with Shylock or approve of anti-Semitism by ridiculing Shylock. It may well be that Shakespeare was simply holding a mirror to civilization to allow audiences to draw their own conclusions contends that Shakespeare wrote The Merchant of Venice to condemn the moral and ethical values of errant Christians, not the Jewish moneylender Shylock. Throughout the play Shylock's name is overlooked and rather than being called by his name he is referred to as "the Jew". The fact that Shylock is being alienated (by being classed as "the Jew") underlines the social deprivation of Jews at the time the play was written. In England, when Shakespeare was writing, Jews had been banished for the past 300 years. Shakespeare's audience would not have known any Jews; their knowledge of Jews would have been based solely on rumour and prejudice. They would have enjoyed the verbal insults and racist jokes against Shylock, and would probably not have questioned the treatment Shylock receives as we do today. During the period of time the play was written, audiences would have preferred Shylock to be the villain of the play, as in a pantomime character to be booed at, at every entrance or devious action, especially with the fact that Shylock was a Jew. But Shakespeare's creation goes much deeper. There is a lot of hostility between the Christians and the Jews of Venice, and this of course fuels the hatred between Shylock and Antonio. There is verbal abuse between the two groups. Shylock is keen to commit murder in the cutting out of the pound of Antonio's flesh.

This is a preview of the whole essay

Shylock is neither hero nor villain, but both victim and predator himself. Though the play doesn’t name him in the title, Shylock is undoubtedly the main character of Merchant. He is, at least in the views of the other characters, a villain. He begins the play as a wealthy Jewish money-lender, scorned by Venetians for making money off charging interest and, even more so, for his religion: the other characters usually refer to Shylock simply as “the Jew.” He is subjected in the play to a string of indignities: he is endlessly mocked and taunted by his fellow citizens; his servant leaves him for a poor but Christian nobleman; his daughter steals his money and runs away with her Christian lover; and, finally, he is forced to convert to Christianity. But the play focuses not on the cruelties Shylock suffers but on the one he commits: insisting on the pound of flesh that Antonio has promised him as collateral for a loan. While villains normally transgress the bounds of the law, Shylock’s “crime” is adhering to it too strictly – he is condemned for his lack of mercy, and finally, at the play’s climax, outwitted in the courtroom by Portia.
But it is difficult for many modern readers to think of Shylock as a “villain” at all, no matter how much the other characters insist on it, for he often seems the victim of a pervasive and inhuman anti-Semitism. But neither is Shylock an endearing character: more often than not, he seems petty and cruel.

Shylock is an arresting presence on the stage, and although Antonio may be the character for whom the play is named, it is Shylock who has come to dominate the imaginations of critics and audiences alike. Shylock’s physical presence in the play is actually not so large, as he speaks fewer lines than other characters and does not even appear in the play’s final act. However, in many ways, the play belongs to Shylock. The use of a Jew as the central villain was not unknown to Renaissance comedy, as evidenced by The Jew of Malta, a wildly popular play by Shakespeare’s contemporary Christopher Marlowe, which revolves around a malevolent, bloodthirsty Jewish character named Barabas. Shylock, however, differs in that his malice seems to stem, at least in part, from the unkindness of his Christian colleagues. Exactly how to read Shylock has been a matter of some debate, and even the most persuasive scholars would be hard-pressed to call him a flattering portrait of a Jew. One could certainly argue, however, that Shylock receives far less of a stock portrayal than what was common in Shakespeare’s time, and that, given the constant degradation he endures, we can even feel something akin to sympathy for him.

At the heart of any sympathy we might feel for Shylock lies the fact that the bonhomie and good nature that so mark Antonio’s appearance with Bassanio disappear, and his treatment of Shylock is unexpectedly harsh and brutal. Even though Bassanio and Antonio require a favour from Shylock, Antonio’s is still a tone of imperious command, and his past, present, and future attitude toward Shylock is one of exceptional contempt. Shylock vividly illustrates the depth of this contempt, wondering aloud why he should lend Antonio money when Antonio has voided his “rheum,” or spit, on Shylock’s beard, and he kicked Shylock as he would a stray dog (I.iii.113–114). The repeated mention of spittle here sharply differentiates Antonio’s Venice, where even shipwrecks seem like spice-laden dreams, from Shylock’s, where the city is a place of blows, kicks, and bodily functions. Without these details, Antonio’s haughty attitude toward Shylock could easily be forgiven, but the very visceral details of spit and kicks show a violent, less romantic side to Antonio, and our sympathies for him cannot help but lessen.

Shylock is noticeably different from Shakespeare’s other great villains, such as Richard III or Iago, in several ways. In the first place, these other villains see themselves as evil, and while they may try to justify their own villainy, they also revel in it, making asides to the audience and self-consciously comparing themselves to the Vice character of medieval morality plays. Marlowe’s Jew, Barabas, is a similarly self-conscious villain. Though the Christian characters of The Merchant of Venice may view Jews as evil, Shylock does not see himself in that way. His views of himself and others are rational, articulate, and consistent. Also, Shakespeare’s other villains are generally more deceitful, passing themselves off as loving and virtuous Christians while plotting malevolently against those around them. Shylock, on the other hand, is an outcast even before the play begins, vilified and spat upon by the Christian characters. Shylock’s actions are relatively open, although the other characters misunderstand his intentions because they do not understand him.

Indeed, Shylock understands the Christians and their culture much better than they understand him. The Christian characters only interact with Shylock within a framework of finance and law—he is not part of the friendship network portrayed in Act I, scene i. Though Bassanio asks him to dine with them, Shylock says in an aside that he will not break bread with Christians, nor will he forgive Antonio, thereby signalling his rejection of one of the fundamental Christian values, forgiveness. Shylock is able to cite the New Testament as readily as Jewish scripture, as he shows in his remark about the pig being the animal into which Christ drove the devil. Antonio notes Shylock’s facility with the Bible, but he uses this ability to compare Shylock to the devil, who, proverbially, is also adept at quoting scripture. As we see more of Shylock, he does not become a hero or a fully sympathetic character, but he is an unsettling figure insofar as he exposes the inconsistencies and hypocrisies of the Christian characters. Shylock never quite fits their descriptions or expectations of him. Most significantly, they think he is motivated solely by money, when in fact his resentment against Antonio and the other Christians outweighs his desire for monetary gain.

Peer Reviews

Here's what a star student thought of this essay

PicturePerfect

22nd of Apr 2012

Quality of writing

The candidate fails to mention the use of language within the play, It is necessary to discuss Shakespeare's use of linguistic techniques, such as metaphors and smilies, in order to achieve a higher grade at this level. Though the quality of the candidates writing is very good, there are no grammatical or spelling errors and the candidate uses a wide range of vocabulary throughout their essay.

Level of analysis

The candidate has given detailed analysis, they state their own ideas and opinions and have picked key quotations from the play the back up these ideas, thus showing a good understanding of how this type of essay should be written. It is also clear that they have undergone independent research, they mention the way in which Jewish people where generally treated, at the time this play was written and compare Shylock to other Shakespearian characters. This additional information shows the candidates interest in their work and makes the essay more enjoyable to read. Unfortunately though the candidate fails to give a clear conclusion and as a result the essay doesn't have a clear end point. To write a strong conclusion you must make sure that you answer the initial question, summarise your key points and ideas and include your personal opinions (in this case do you think Shylock is a villain or a victim, why do you think this?). This is important as it brings the essay to a close and gives you a chance to leave the reader with a good impression.

Response to question

Unfortunately the candidates introductory paragraph is a little weak, the essay reads as if there were no introduction and the candidate has gone straight into the main body of the essay. It is important to give a introduction to your essay as it outlines what you plan to discuss. A good introduction should also include any questions that you intend to answer (in this case, is Shylock a villain or victim?), mention any relevant points and perhaps in this case it would appropriate to give a brief introduction to Shylock as a character. This is your chance to catch the readers attention, so the key is to try and make it short, to the point and interesting. On a positive note the candidate gives a strong response to the set question, they have discussed their own ideas an opinions clearly and have done so in a coherent manor.

Did you find this review helpful? Join our team of reviewers and help other students learn