"How might modern audiences react to Shylock's fate in the trial scene?"

Authors Avatar

Sarah Cooper 11Lat.                                                           Merchant of Venice coursework essay

“How might modern audiences react to Shylock’s fate in the trial scene?”

The Merchant of Venice was written by William Shakespeare in the year 1599. At this time in England there was a lot of racism, particularly anti-Semitism. These views are reflected in the play. The character of Shylock is a Jewish moneylender who is despised by the Christians of Venice because he is a Jew and because he lends money with interest, which is frowned upon by Christians. Shylock agrees to lend Antonio money but with a bond attached; if the money is not repaid in time, Shylock is entitled to take as a forfeit one pound of Antonio’s flesh from whichever place he chooses. Antonio agrees to this bond, but fails to pay back the money that he has been lent in time. Act 4 Scene 1 is the trial scene, in which it is decided whether or not Shylock is indeed entitled to the pound of flesh that Antonio agreed to give in the bond. Antonio has lent the money that he borrowed from Shylock to his friend Bassanio who needs it to show Portia that he is rich enough to marry her. Bassanio then chooses the right casket and returns to Venice with Portia. In the trial scene, Portia enters disguised as a lawyer and she is the one who saves Antonio’s life by realizing that the bond he has signed has made no allowances for a single drop of blood, thus preventing Shylock from taking the flesh. The two halves of the story therefore come together in this scene.

In Act 1 Scene 3, it appears that Shylock’s hatred of Antonio is not solely religiously motivated, but more from a business perspective; in lines 37-39 he says:

“I hate him for he is a Christian;

But more, for that in low simplicity

He lends out money gratis…”

As Shylock was a moneylender by trade, he charged interest on loans, something which was heavily frowned upon by Catholics at the time. Antonio was taking away business from Shylock by lending out money “Gratis”-without interest.

Therefore at the beginning of the play, I believe that most audiences would not react in a negative way to Shylock, as it seems that he is not purely racist, but also has valid reasons for his dislike of Antonio- As Shylock was a moneylender by trade, he charged interest on loans (usury), something which was heavily frowned upon by Catholics at the time. Antonio was taking away business from Shylock by lending out money “Gratis”-without interest, which was obviously more desirable. Antonio does not give any valid reasons for his dislike of Shylock and is openly rude to him; in lines 125-126 in response to Shylock confronting him:

Shylock: “…Fair sir, you spat on me on Wednesday last,

               You spurn’d me such a day, another time

Join now!

               You call’d me dog…

Antonio: “I am as like to call thee so again,

               To spit on thee again, to spurn thee too”

This extract shows that Antonio has open disrespect to Shylock, and happily admits it, which gives an audience a negative impression of him compared to the impression that we get of Shylock; therefore at this stage in the play, audiences would quite sympathetic to Shylock, and had his fate come at this stage, there would be much more sympathy for ...

This is a preview of the whole essay