In addition to your comments on self-selected text (see below), please feel welcome to comment on any of these questions publicly. You may simply use them as food for thought as well.
1. During Portia's first scene, the content is clear. But since this is a class for actors as well as readers, give some thought to what Portia could be doing physically in this scene. She can't just be standing there. What activity, or series of actions would be a good accompaniment to her thought process and her speech?
2. Does Shylock's language show what it's like to be an outsider? How so?
3.1.45-65
ReplyDeleteI thought that this part of the text was very interesting because of the commentary on the prejudice against Jews. Shylock's comment, "Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions?" strongly represents the frustration that came along with the religious divide during that era. It strikes me how incredibly targeted the Jews were, and how many Christians took advantage of them.
This is a particularly moving speech, I agree. "Aren't I human?" is a significant question for someone to feel they must ask and ask out loud. It no longer seems rhetorical at that point and seems to really demand an answer, or at least an awareness.
ReplyDeleteThanks for finding a place to post this prompt, Anna. I know there isn't a designated space for this request. If anyone else in the class is reading this, check the new syllabus, and post to that. Anna, you can make this your posting for the night unless you'd like to add another.
During Portia's first scene I envisioned her bathing and then getting dressed in her various rooms. I feel as though getting dressed would be an intimate act between her and her maid and in the scene her confidant. The scene could act as a way for audience members to see Portia's thought process when she is alone.
ReplyDeleteIn act 1 scene 3 lines 40-52 really displays his contempt for Antonio and Bassino, calling them Christians, speaking in a language like that suggest that he is not their friends. Also, he is joking to himself or with them in a manner that seems like a sarcastic taunt which demonstrates to readers that he is uncomfortable or resentful of them.
Also, Antonio's language shows Shylock is the antagonist by saying that the Devil tempts with the bible's scripture, referring to Shylock as a devil, a singular person/thing separating themselves from what is wrong being Shylock.
Thoughts for this week Act 2 scenes 8-9 + Act 3 scene 1
Similarly, I thought this monologue was very powerful in comparing the people of the religion instead of the religion themselves. The lines that caught my eyes were 59-63 when Shylock is talking about food, shelter, disease and saying that they are a like in so many ways except religion. I thought this passage was universal and can be used for so many persecuted people. So much of this passage is about judging people based on their character and not on an aspect of them.
I think this passage is Shylock's final plea or tipping point and in the upcoming scenes it will be interesting to see if his emotions get the better of him and lead him to disaster.
One thing I was wondering about was why Shakespeare to Shylock's plea? It is so hard to understand a man thinking just through his plays but this passage gives the audience some type of a devil's advocate to go home and think about. I think playing the devil's advocate is something that can be found throughout Shakespeare's writing with the role of women in Macbeth and this play. It will be something to watch out for in the rest of the play.
3.1.57-67:
ReplyDelete“Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs,
dimensions, senses, affections, passions? Fed
with the same food, hurt with the same weapons,
subject to the same diseases, healed by the same
means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and
summer as a Christian is? 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? If we are like you in the rest, we will
resemble you in that.”
Shylock has just pointed out how badly he has been treated solely for being a Jew. In this passage he explains that Jews no different from anyone else, specifically Christians. Because of this, Shylock feels justified in taking his “payment” from Antonio as revenge for what he’s been through. While you can sympathize with Shylock in this passage, once Solanio, Salarino, and Antonio’s servant exit and Shylock speaks alone with Tubal, another Jew, he changes his tone. He states: “I would my daughter / were dead at my foot and the jewels in her ear!” – essentially wishing for his daughter’s death just to get his jewels back. This section inclines me to believe that this play may in fact be anti-Semitic. It also reminded me of when Antonio stated that “the devil can cite Scripture for his purpose” – while Shylock may speak convincingly, he shouldn’t be trusted.
2.1.104-109.
ReplyDeleteIn this passage, Portia and Nerissa demonstrate a clear preference for Bassanio over the previously mentioned two suitors. When Portia meets the Prince of Morocco and Arragon, she seems unfazed by their presences. If anything, meeting the first two suitors and realizing that her future is no longer in her own hands is deeply concerning to Portia. She expresses her concern in Act 1, Scene 2, asking, "Is it not hard, Nerissa, that I cannot choose one, nor refuse one?" However, when the messenger mentions the arrival of Bassanio, the "young Venetian", Portia and Nerissa light up immediately. Portia admits, "...I long to see quick Cupid's post that comes so mannerly" (Bassanio). Nerissa even prays to Cupid, "Lord Love", that the visitor be Bassanio. It is implied that Portia and Nerissa want Bassanio to choose the right casket and, in doing so, win Portia's hand in marriage. I sense foreshadowing. It would be tragic for Bassanio to pick the wrong casket and go home to a life of celibacy given his and Portia's feelings for eachother.
2.8.38-52
ReplyDeleteGranted, I've read the "Racism and Homophobia in The Merchant of Venice" article (which everyone should look into, it's a wonderful analysis and provides great context for the play), but even if I hadn't, I wouldn't need much more than these lines to convince me of Antonio's homosexuality and his love for Bassanio. According to Salanio, "[Antonio] only loves the world for [Bassanio]", and when Bassanio departs for Belmont, Antonio is (reportedly) visibly saddened, crying and exchanging affectionate gestures with Bassanio. He even tells Bassanio not to worry about him while in Belmont, and to instead perform his business carefully. Moreover, Bassanio seems eager to return to Venice, as he will make "some speed of his return". The language between them, if not from a modern romance novel (as Reckas would suggest), then it is at least the language of a chick flick.
Shakespeare certainly plays on anti-Semtitic themes -- it seems Shylock's only attribute stronger than greed is vengefulness -- but, while Shylock is undeniably unsavory in many ways, he can be read in more sympathetic lights than the obvious one. His blatant hatred of Christianity and Christians is no more vicious than the play's Christians' hatred of Judaism and Jews. Its source is no real mystery. Considering the extent of persecution against Jews in the era, Shylock's hatred seems more justified than Antonio's. His reaction to injustice is not the healthiest, nor the wisest, choice, but it is a common and understandable one. How many persecuted people have responded to their lot with hatred and violence, malicious manipulation and underhanded taunts? Many strong, otherwise good people have caved to racism. This does not excuse racist behavior, but does help to explain it. Shylock is, as he has often argued, human. And despite the many anti-Semtiic stereotypes, and the protestations of the others ("The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose"), Shakespeare has provided a distinctly human side to Shylock. His words clearly show that he does not act without motivation, or even without humanity. Shakespeare provided his villain with depth, and in doing so, he made him human. And Shakespeare's moral universe, despite the characters' proclamations, is not really black-and-white. As the audience, we have the opportunity to redeem Shylock, at least partially, for his role in the play.
ReplyDeletePerhaps Shylock's most damning moment (so far) is his reaction to his daughter's disappearence. He seems to cry more for the loss of money than his daughter, and he tells Tabul he'd rather have the money than her life. I made a few angry annotations in the margins at this point, thinking of what good people my Jewish father and his family are, and jokes such as, "Want to see a fight to the death? Throw a penny between two Jews and watch the show!"
But there is another way to read this. Maybe it's wishful thinking, but I do think there is some textual evidence for an alternative reading. Shylock has just lost his daughter. She was not killed in an accident, or murdered helplessly by villains. Instead, she left, of her own free will, to elope with a man Shylock views as a bitter enemy. She rejected every aspect of her heritage, her culture: her father. Shylock is not only mourning his daughter; he is deeply, personally wounded. He is furious. I can absolutely believe that he truly hates her at this moment in the play. It is a hatred so deep, a sense of betrayal so profound, that it seems motivated by love. When he addressed her earlier, there were flashes of affection in his dialogue. He was strict, even domineering, but also protective. So, let us imagine Shylock discovering that his daughter has left. He is shocked. He is hurt. He is apopletic. He is deeply humiliated. He hardly knows how to respond. And then, inevitably, he discovers that she has financed his betrayal by stealing from him. Money is, no doubt, of immense importance to Shylock. It is the only possible kind of influence and importance he can achieve, and it represents survival, self-reliance, success, things he values even more acutely than others because of his persecution. (The textual notes point out that "stones" meant more than jewels.) Now his daughter has stolen from him, run off with a thriftless Christian, and rejected everything he stands for. It is easier, don't you think, to yell about the money? To focus on the smaller issue? The one more easily articulated? The one he can be angry about without shame? He clearly has trouble putting his feelings into words. He settles into yelling about the money because it's the first thing he can articulate, the first thing he can wrap his mind around. And it is the first thing he can legitimately bring to law enforcement. No wonder he focuses on his money.
I agree with Brodies statement. Shylock is definitely being portrayed here in a predominantly negative light. It is totally conceivable that, after reading this scene in act 3, one could completely believe that the author was, beyond any shadow of a doubt, anti semitic. While this conclusion can debatably be made after reading most of the other instances in which Shylock speaks or is spoken of, this idea is especially prominent here. The incredibly fast transition his mood takes from his state of being in lines 97-106 to his state of being in lines 107-129 (the end of the scene) exemplifies how predisposed he is to being hateful when he is reminded of possessions he treasured and then lost or of business with a man like Antonio. For me, that is one of the biggest instances that makes me believe Shakespeare had some anti semiticism in him.
ReplyDelete3.1.57-66
ReplyDeleteI am still trying to decide whether I like Shylock as a character because, as Anna and Brodie pointed out, he inspires sympathy sometimes and disgust at other times. I was appalled by the “pound of flesh” agreement that Shylock proposes, by the fact that he treasures jewels and ducats over his own daughter’s life, and by his excitement when he learns he will have a chance to remove a pound of flesh from Antonio’s body. In these instances, Shakespeare seems to portray the stereotypical Jew: greedy, devious, and perhaps cruel. Nevertheless, in Shylock’s “Hath not a Jew eyes?” speech, Shakespeare clearly diverts from this stereotype. Instead of denouncing Jews, he makes the audience sympathetic to one. As Jim mentioned, questioning the humanity of a group of people is not a light-hearted issue. Even with just the text we can detect a shift from simple derision of Jews to something far more serious. Perhaps with this speech Shakespeare is subtly challenging the persecution of Jews during his time period. We have to remember that these plays were Shakespeare’s source of income, so even if he opposed the popular Christian view of Jews, he might not be able to express openly his opinions. Shakespeare cleverly uses his audience’s prejudices to set up Shylock as a multi-dimensional character.
3.1. 83-100
ReplyDeleteQuite simply, Shylock's monologue was captivating because it illuminated that, although we all share a common human experience, he, along with other Jews, are persecuted for a superficial difference: their religion. However, due to the fact that there have been so many modern renditions of this idea, I did not find this monologue as interesting as the discussion that followed it. As Tubal relates recent events, he alternates between bad news for Antonio and bad news for Shylock. It was quite comical to see a man shift between such happiness and such despair so quickly. Even as Shylock's life was falling apart, he took joy in the fact that Antonio's life was falling apart too. Yet now Shylock's hatred of Antonio seems justified; it's no longer presented as a manifestation of his inherently evil ways. Shylock hates Antonio because Antonio has persecuted him.
3.1 66 - 72
ReplyDeleteThis monologue, especially this excerpt from it, by Shylock really captured my attention by exclaiming that if a Christian man is justified in seeking revenge against a Jew, then isn't a Jew justified in his revenge against a Christian? Leading up to this point, Shylock seems to be crying for equality, asking if Jews aren't the same people who have the same famines and problems as Christians do. Instead of ending with his powerful message of equality, Shylock uses it to explain his confrontational nature and ultimate justification for his maliciousness against characters such as Antonio. This part of the monologue shows that beyond some of Shakespeare's examinations of the injustice of anti-semitism, Shylock is at the end of the day a villain. Despite having logical points to make, the text still treats him as the 'bad guy' of this story.
It seemed to me that Shylock was perpetuating this idea of a "Jew" being different from the norm of this society. He is able to bring in his religion and culture into almost every conversation, exclaiming that he will not eat pork, or that he hates Antonio solely based on his religion, not character. While I admit that Antonio and others unnecessarily judge Shylock because of his Judaism, Shylock does nothing to stray away from these judgement, accepting them and building off of them instead of resolving them. Shylock demonstrates his role as an outsider because of his constant reminder of his Jewish background and his dedication to money and and control, fulfilling the stereotype that Antonio, Bassanio, and others see him as.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Johnny that Shakespeare portrays Shylock very negatively in act 3 scene 1. Although Antonio (along with much of the Christian community of the time) has maltreated Shylock, planning to take a pound of Antonio's flesh in response to an unpaid loan is an overreaction. Though it was part of their contract, this makes Shylock appear immoral and evil because it is such a gruesome act. Here, Shakespeare's antisemitic feelings are emphasized since Shylock, the Jew, is portrayed as the villain of the play.
ReplyDeleteI liked how in the movie they showed Portia getting dressed and looking down at the suitors in secret because it showed the power she had over the situation. But her speech and pacing indicate her worry of choosing the wrong husband. I also agree with jazzy that this scene could provide a way into Portia's head to understand how she really feels about the situation. I think the getting ready by putting on jewels is also essential for this scene because it shows not only the beauty but also the riches that come once Portia is courted.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that grabbed my attention from tonight's reading was the moment where Bassanio's relationship with Antonio and with Portia slightly collided when he received Antonio's letter. Particularly when Bassanio describes Antonio to portia (3.2.303-308) he spoke of him strictly as a friend, though he revealed a lot of admiration for him to his newly beloved wife-to-be. I hadn't quite imagined how their relationship might change once Portia was in the picture, and this particular segment of text provides a little glimpse, yet leaves me still questioning and wondering about what will happen. Considering the time this play was written, it is highly unlikely that Bassanio's love for Antonio will win out over this beautiful woman prize of his, though to see it in contrast comes off as a very real, while subtle display of emotion, friendship and love that Bassanio feels. I'm still wondering about how sincere his admiration/love for Portia is. It comes off as though he's truly taken aback by her beauty and committed her, yet this also exists side by side with what the relationship we have already encountered between him and Antonio. I sort of feel bad for Portia as Bassanio shares the letter with her, because she's oblivious to the fact that she is almost like a third wheel to their man-love, which seems to outweigh any of the other relationships in the play, even if it is not explicitly shown as romantic.
ReplyDeleteShylocks speech in Act 3 Scene 1 was a very revealing part of his character. Although what he is saying is cruel to a degree, I think that it is entirely human and understandable; especially for the time. I disagree with those above who say that Shakespeare is portraying him is a bad light, I see him as a very logical and human character. He has had bad things done to him by Antonio, and so he wants revenge...to me this seems plausible and logical. It is possible that Shylock can be understood as evil or cold hearted, but I think the fact that he feels so hurt by the pain that Antonio has caused him makes him an even more attractive character than Antonio, in the sense of being a sensitive human being. This speech shows how hurt he is by listing all of the horrible things Antonio has done to him, and then him talking about the revenge he seeks.
ReplyDeleteI'm inspired by this conversation about Shylock. The back and forth discussion seems particularly rich. If some of you didn't get all the way through Allie's posting, or if you were writing yours at the same moment, you really need to read it. Allie, I'm struck by you suggestion of Shylock as a villain who is human—that his behavior is motivated by recognizable triggers, and if he's not forgivable, then at least he's not some caricature of evil incarnate. He's angry, wounded (by Jessica's betrayal) and his reaction there is psychologically complex. It is easier to rant about money than his loss as a father. I think holding contradictory ideas about Shylock unresolved is difficult, but it is a good practice for now. Let's see where the play takes us. Thanks to all of you for thoughtful posting!
ReplyDelete