Than my faint means would grant continuance.’
Throughout the play it seems that money is the biggest motivator. We see this at the start of the play, whilst Bassanio is describing Portia to Antonio, and the first piece of information that he provides is that Portia is ‘a lady richly left’ and only following this does he mention that ‘she is fair, and – fairer than that word – of wondrous virtues.’ Straight away we see that wealth is more important than her beauty and virtues. From this we can also see how the possibility of gaining even more riches by marrying into Belmont is a big enough motive for Bassanio to see it worthwhile to increase his debts further to Antonio so as to have a bigger chance of winning Portia’s heart as well as her riches. It is interesting however, that it would be unlikely that an audience would think less of Bassanio for rating Portia's wealth above her virtues, especially when Shylock does something similar in relation to Jessica, and she is clearly being made to appear victimised. When Jessica goes missing it appears that Shylock is more concerned about the money that Jessica took from him than the fact that she has run away. This is shown when Shakespeare uses Solanio in Scene 8 to report his speech and at the same time comment on the morals of it. This is clever, as by having a character quote another character and then comment on the quote, the audience has less room to form their own opinions of the speech; instead the audience has a judgement forced upon them, and so Shylock is quickly made out to be the villain to everyone watching.
‘I have never heard a passion so confus’d,
So strange, outrageous, and so variable.’
Solanio says, expressing his amazement to how Shylock supposedly said,
‘My daughter! O my ducats! O my daughter!
Fled with a Christian! O my Christian ducats!
Justice! The law! My ducats and my daughter!’
Above, Shakespeare uses language to reiterate how Shylock values money over his daughter. When saying ‘O my Christian ducats!’, it could be argued that he is angry either by the loss of money which he gained through extorting Christians, or is angry that his money is now tarnished now being owned and managed by a Christian. Regardless of this however, it is shocking that he calls for justice from the law to be dealt onto his daughter, obviously unwilling to forgive her theft from him simply due to his fatherhood of her. In this extract Shylock is clearly being made out to be the villain and from this we see that in Venice money can be so powerful and inherent in a Venetian’s world that it becomes destructive also. There is certainly a difference in Belmont in relation to the value of money. Shakespeare tries to teach the audience through the casket test, in which the types of personality and character of Arragon and Morocco are displayed through their choice of casket. In Belmont, although there is an incredible abundance of money, it seems that Portia’s father was trying to show that the biggest commodity in Belmont is Portia herself, rather than the riches she possesses. This is why Morocco makes the wrong choice of casket, as it is his arrogance and perception of the gold casket being most valuable, and therefore its supposed reflection of Portia’s ‘value’ that leads him to be fooled and mislead.
‘And so may I, blind fortune leading me,
Miss that which one unworthier may attain,
And die with grieving.’
Here we see his arrogance, as he states that anyone other than himself is unworthy of Portia; and so when he and Arragon chose the caskets of precious metals, it is not surprising that their chance of marrying Portia is not there too. When Bassanio arrives in Belmont and chooses the lead casket, Shakespeare is showing us that in Belmont, love is more important than any sum of money. Here there is a great contrast between Venice and Belmont, as Venice requires great monetary muscle to create influence or allow power, whereas in Belmont love is of far greater importance and also want. Perhaps one could argue that Shakespeare wants Belmont to appear as a paradise, where life is an ideal. Regardless of this however, it is clear that the value of money and love is very different between the settings.
With all these points in mind and thinking of the title, it is difficult to agree with the statement that the two settings are worlds apart. They are of course different in many respects, especially when regarding morals, relationships and life values, yet at the same time there are also some strong, and very noticeable similarities. This mainly regards the themes of deception and appearance (or more specifically, the mistrust of appearance). It could be argued that Belmont is almost the paradise, where as Venice is a place of cruelty and sin. In Belmont we never see anything especially cruel which brings lasting damage, and so it could be said that Shakespeare is attempting to teach us a form of moral lesson by showing us the differences between a place that is happy, Belmont, and a place which appears far less so, Venice. On the whole though I would not say Venice and Belmont are worlds apart, but there is certainly a rift between them.
