In Act 2, Scene 3 we get a glimpse of how Jessica feels about Shylock. She calls the house that she lives in with her father 'Hell' and says that it is 'Tedious.' It would have caused the audience in the 16th century would feel more of a sense of acceptance towards Jessica because she is negative about Shylock. Launcelot, a Christian servant, has a positive attitude towards her even though she is Jewish. He calls her a 'most beautiful pagan' and 'most sweet Jew,' which would have caused the 16th century audience to see her as being different to all other Jews because she acts 'pagan' and against her natural religious traits. She also says that she is 'ashame'd to be my father's child,' which shows that she is ashamed to be both Jewish and related to Shylock, which both shows that Shylock is disliked even by his daughter but also, that Jessica is not loyal to her father or her religion. However, this reveals a question, which can only be answered according to your point of view, does society make her ashamed to be a Jew or is she ashamed because of her treatment in society. Her rebellion of the Jewish religion would strengthen the 16th century audience's opinion of her and they would like her more, but it would make the 21st century audience feel sorry for Shylock because his daughter doesn't love him, and she is about to run away with a Christian, his greatest enemy.
In Act 2, Scene 5 we see Shylock as a demanding, racist, hate-filled man. He is full of distaste towards the Christians who invited him to eat with him and he says 'but yet I'll go in hate, and feed upon the prodigal Christian.' This doesn't cause the 21st century audience to feel sorry for Shylock's treatment by the Christians because they have offered him to go to have dinner with them and his behaviour that he is showing towards them is just as racist and abusive, although verbally not physically, as they were to him. However, they have not orchestrated his daughter's running away and are helping her, thus when he says they are wearing 'masques' he is ironically speaking the truth, as they are lying to him and hiding something that would otherwise be blatant, for example, their kindness towards her would show out against their hatred of him. The 16th century audience would be even more likely to hate Jews because Shakespeare is using Shylock as a representative of Jews; Shylock, being a main character, gives the audience a lasting impression and an insight into how racist Jewish people are and perhaps his protective nature could be a result of the abuse he fears she will suffer at the hands of the Christians.
He also treats his old man servant, Launcelot, with disdain; complaining about the level of work and ordering him around as if he is still in his service, while also showing him no respect, which is shown when he says 'Who bids thee call? I do not bid thee call.' He also shows that he doesn't want his daughter to be led astray by the Christians when he says 'Nor thrust your head into the public street to gaze on Christian fools with varnish'd faces,' which also shows his racism as well as his forcefulness. However, we also get an insight into the fact that he is about to lose his daughter. Towards the end of the scene, Jessica says 'I have a father, you a daughter, lost,' which creates a sense of pity towards Shylock.
In Act 2, Scene 8, the audience gets another insight into how other characters in the play see Shylock. We hear more about Shylock's greed when Salarino and Salanio discuss Shylock's daughter, Jessica, leaving Shylock with her father's money. Salanio shows that Shylock feels strongly about his money and his daughter being gone. Salarino and Salanio's opinions are biased though, because they are both Christian. Salanio calls Shylock 'dog Jew,' but he also tells the audience Shylock's reaction to losing his daughter and his money. Salanio says that Shylock was shouting about his daughter fleeing with a Christian [Lorenzo] but seemed more worried about his money. Shylock says 'My daughter! O my ducats!' which puts both his daughter and his money on the same level of importance. Shylock, from this evidence, shows that he is greedy and more worried about his money. He also shows that he wants revenge on his daughter through the law, which shows even more deeply that he is outraged by his daughter stealing his money than her leaving him. The conversation is proven to be biased because Salarino says 'A kinder gentlemen treads not the Earth,' about Antonio but Salanio also says that 'he only loves the world for him,' which shows that Antonio loves Bassanio more than the world, putting him in a kindly, loving light.
In Act 3, Scene 1, Salanio and Salarino bait Shylock by talking to him about the loss of his daughter. Shylock, who is angry and bitter, says 'She [Jessica] is damned for it,' but Salanio angers him by saying 'that's certain, if the Devil may be her judge,' so he is saying that if Jessica is going to be damned, it is the Devil who has damned her and not God, which is subtly racist against Jews. However, Shylock lets out his anger at Salanio and Salarino, because they are Christians and support Antonio, who helped Jessica and Launcelot elope. Salanio and Salarino try to dissuade Shylock from taking his bond of Antonio's flesh because Antonio is now poor, due to his ship being wrecked. However, Shylock talks about how much Antonio has done against him and how the Christian's shouldn't prejudice against the Jews because they are all human beings. Shylock says '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?' which is both valid and emotional. It would make the 16th century audience feel angry because he is comparing Jews to Christians, and saying that they are both equal. On the other hand, the 21st century audience would feel that Shylock is standing up for both himself and his nation, trying to make the Christians cease their racist abuse, because they are all equal.
In Act 4, Scene 1 Shylock is in a courtroom, arguing his case to get his part of the bond [the pound of flesh] from Antonio, because he did not pay back the money that he borrowed. The duke, who is Christian and also the Judge, shows immediately that he is on Antonio's side. He says that Shylock is 'an inhuman wretch, uncapable of pity, void and empty from any dram of mercy,' which shows that even the court is biased. The duke doesn't call Shylock by his name when he summons him into the courtroom, he calls him 'Jew,' which is derogatory and shows no respect. Shylock, however, does not prove that he is a merciful man, but he has had his money stolen by his daughter, who has run away with a Christian and now he is being dissuaded to have his bond, which was agreed by him and Antonio, which is not fair. However, we see the bond as being an act of revenge not just on Antonio, who he hates so much, but on the whole race of Christians. The Duke tries to persuade Shylock to show pity for Antonio, who lost one of his merchant ships, and he says 'Thou'lt show thy mercy and remorse more strange,' which would have caused the 21st century audience to feel sorry for Shylock because even the Duke, who is the judge of the trial, is against Shylock and is in favour of the Christian, Antonio.
Shylock, however, shows that he is not going to back down from his bond by arguing that 'If you [Duke] deny it, let danger light upon your charter and your city's freedom,' which is threatening and doesn't help his cause of anguish. The 16th century audience would not be surprised by the stubbornness because they would obviously see this as a characteristic of Jewish people and they would dislike him even more for not giving in and wanting to harm a Christian. Shylock, in his speech about why he wants to go ahead with the bond instead of taking double the amount of money, doesn't help his cause because his sole reason for wanting to take the pound of flesh is because he hates Antonio. Shylock, in court, shows that he has the upper-hand and that Antonio is at his mercy because he is strong enough to say to Bassanio that 'I am not bound to please thee with my answers,' which shows that he is free-willed and not scared of the Christians.
Antonio, however, does little to win the hearts of the 21st century audience, because although he is about to have a pound of his flesh cut from his body, he uses animal imagery and racism to talk about Shylock. He says that Shylock is stubborn and he calls him a 'wolf,' which creates a deep sense of viciousness that the Christians associated with Jews. Shylock replies to Bassanio's pleas for him to take the money that 'if every ducat in six thousand ducats was in six parts and every part a ducat, I would not draw them. I would have my bond' which shows his resilience and his want of revenge against the Christian race. The Duke says that Shylock shows no mercy and Shylock answers by saying that he is doing no wrong. He says that 'You have among you many a purchas'd slave, which, like your asses and your dogs and mules, you use in abject and in slavish parts because you bought them,' which gives us the idea that Shylock is using slaves and animals as a point of persuasion. He is also saying that he bought Antonio when Antonio signed the agreement to their bond and the pound of flesh symbolises this ownership of Antonio.
Also in Act 4, Scene 1 Portia is disguised as a lawyer and goes into the courtroom in an attempt to free Antonio of the bond. Portia says to Shylock 'must the Jew be merciful,' which is answered by 'On what compulsion must I? Tell me that.' Portia is trying to get Shylock to show Antonio mercy and drop the bond. She then gives a speech, saying that Christians are god-like because they show mercy, but not towards Jews. She is being deeply racist, which shows that the courtroom is biased because she is defending Antonio. Portia keeps referring to mercy, yet she is showing no mercy to Shylock. She knows he has lost his daughter and all of his money, and that although Antonio has signed the bond and agreed to pay back the sum that was originally lent to him, she is still in favour of freeing Antonio from the bond. Portia, however, shows the 21st century audience that she is cunning and turns the tables and says that 'in the cutting, if thou dost shed one drop of Christian blood, thy lands and goods, are, by the laws of Venice, confiscate unto the state of Venice,' which shows that the law is racist because it states that it is one drop of Christian blood. The drop of Christian blood is emphasized so it seems holy and precious. The 21st century audience would feel sorry for Shylock because he has lost all his money and now, he can't even have the money that is owed to him.
Shylock decides to leave both the money and Antonio, because he knows that he cannot get anywhere by insisting on having either. However, Portia corners him with another law and says that 'If it be prov'd against an alien that by direct or indirect attempts he seek the life of any citizen, the party 'gainst the which he doth contrive shall seize one half of his goods; the other half comes to the privy coffer of the state,' which shows that Shylock is seen as an outsider and that he, in the end of the strife, gets nothing. She also says that he must get on his knees and 'beg mercy of the Duke.' At this point, the 16th century audience would not feel sorry for Shylock and would think that the Jew got what he deserved. The Duke says that 'though shalt see the difference of our spirit, I pardon thee thy life before thou ask it,' which is racist because the Duke is saying that Jews don't show mercy and that Shylock should learn from them because they are merciful and by making him Christian they imagine that they have actually saved him.
Shylock, in the end, says 'nay, take my life and all; pardon not that. You take my house, when you do take the prop that doth sustain my house; you take my life,' which wins the heart of the 21st century audience because it shows that he has feeling and that his spirit is defeated, he has no more fighting spirit left and he is willing to give up his life because he has nothing left. Antonio thinks that he is being merciful when he says 'He presently becomes a Christian' because he views it as saving Shylock's soul. This would create a stir in the 16th century audience because Shylock has been ordered to become a Christian, and it would show that they are above all other religions. Nonetheless, the 21st century would feel pity towards Shylock because he has nothing and is begging the state to take his life because he has nothing left. Taking his life would be an act of mercy, from the 21st century point of view, because he has had everything, including his religion taken away from him. Shakespeare would not have allowed Shylock to win because he would have been aiming his plays at a Christian audience, who would have been anti-Semitic and this would have been the way that the Christian audience in the 16th century would have wanted it to end. It is a good message to show that revenge is not a good way to create equality and social harmony, because it just forces the wedge between the battling sides, in this case Christians and Jews.
The character of Shylock evoked different emotions and changes of views in both audiences of the 16th century and in the modern day/21st century. It caused the 21st century audience to feel sorry for the Jews and to give them an insight into how badly they were treated and how the attitudes have changed towards Jewish people dramatically over time. It shows that Shakespeare was a racist person and that although he wrote plays about people from other religions, he saw Christianity as being above all other religions, though he may not be completely racist because he writes the emotional speech which compares the Jews to Christians in the speech about 'hath not a Jew eyes, hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions?,' which is a very anti-racist speech. Maybe Shakespeare just came across racist because he had to write plays that would interest the audience and be relevant to their viewpoints, so that would have played a big factor in the good defeating evil plots in most of his plays. Shakespeare may not have been brave enough to be really controversial and talk about how Jews were good and equal to Christians, because it would have made him unfavourable towards the 16th century audience. Merchant of Venice, in my opinion, showed that the opinions of people about religion have changed a lot over time, maybe due to the historical actions that have occurred and have changed people's attitudes.
