In 'The Merchant of Venice' in Act 1 Scene 3, Shylock is described as being 'the devil' by Antonio. To what extent do you agree that he is the villain in the play?

Authors Avatar

In ‘The Merchant of Venice’ in Act 1 Scene 3, Shylock is described as being ‘the devil’ by Antonio. To what extent do you agree that he is the villain in the play?

Shylock’s character in Shakespeare’s ‘The Merchant of Venice’ has long been a controversial subject- more so now than it was when the play was written in the late 16th Century. First performed in 1605, it seemingly conforms to the anti-semitic stereotypes towards Jews and their conduct but, unlike Shakespeare’s rival’s work (‘The Jew of Malta) by Christopher Marlowe, the main Jewish character is attributed not only the negative traits associated with Jews at the time, but also a side that sees to show humanity. Therefore, in this essay, it is my aim to explore whether calling Shylock the villain in the play is justified or not based on his actions and those of the characters surrounding him (to see if there is evidence of provocation), and placing this into the context of Elizabethan England and thus coming to conclusions abut whether views towards the extent of his villainy have remained the same.

        The one single action in the play which seems most convictive of Shylock is his argument with argument over the lending of 3,000 ducats-and the penalty fixed in case of its late return in Act 3 scene 1. The very notion of imposing such a brutal penalty seems to us shocking in its severity and absurdity, but, of course, Shylock’s reasons for setting it must also be taken into account. It can also be argued that it was Antonio’s right to refuse it, and so Shylock’s wish to fulfil the terms of the contract cannot be classed as murder. Antonio agreed to it, and he was fully aware of the implications.

        Antonio asks of Shylock the loan of 3,000 ducats. Shylock is a moneylender by profession, and this is a fact that would have been significant to an Elizabethan audience watching the play, as Shylock charges interest on his loans, something that they would have undoubtedly despised but which we see no wrong in today. The fact that Antonio lends money to others too, but does not charge interest on it seems to be merely a clarification of Shakespeare’s desire to show the difference in the moral standards of the two characters- Shylock is made to seem petty or even greedy (one of the seven deadly sins) in comparison to Antonio’s magnanimity. However, to me, Antonio appears arrogant, and this is especially visible in Act 1 scene 3 when the bond is set and we have Bassanio to compare him with.

        It is clear from the outset that, to Shylock, this is not merely another transaction- this is clear from the fact that, at first, he is reluctant to agree to it because of whom he would be helping by it (Antonio):

‘Fair sir, you spit on me Wednesday last,

    You spurned me such a day, another time

          You called me a dog; and for these courtesies,

                           I’ll lend you thus much moneys?’

It is also clear from the fact that Shylock does not charge Antonio interest, instead of this he imposes the penalty on the bond which will ultimately lead to his downfall:

                      ‘If you pay me not on such a day…

                           …let the forfeit

                           Be nominated for an equal pound

                        Of your fair flesh.’

This is the first time we clearly see Antonio’s arrogance- whilst Bassanio is immediately alarmed at this proposal (‘You shall not seal to such a bond for me, I’ll rather dwell in my necessity’), Antonio agrees to it, seemingly without considering the violent implications (‘Content, i’faith, I’ll seal to such a bond...’).

Join now!

        So it is obvious, that, to Shylock, this is not a normal transaction, and the bond is not one he would normally make, so we can assume that, to Shylock, this is not a matter of business, it is personal. And should there be a reasonable explanation as to why this affects him so much, it would be fair to assume that this sort of violence is not characteristic of Shylock, and that there must have been some form of provocation. This would lead us to believe that Shylock is more a victim than a villain- he is merely exasperated ...

This is a preview of the whole essay