Category: Merchant of Venice

“Fathers, you are the head and strength of the family unit. If you are not in place, there is a weakness in the link.” (Marinoff). This quote signifies that a father must be present for his family. If a father is absent, he becomes the least dependable member. In “To Kill A Mockingbird” by Harper Lee and “The Merchant Of Venice” by William Shakespeare, the two main antagonists destroyed their reliability, which in the long run ruined their father-daughter relationship. In the same fashion, both characters lost assurance in their daughter by disapproving of their love choice. However, their differences are shown through how parenting ruined their daughter trust. Bob Ewell is more on the abusive side while Shylock shows more care.

To begin, both Bob Ewell and Shylock disapprove of their daughter’s love choice. Bob Ewell disapproves of Mayella’s relations with Tom Robinson in “To Kill A Mockingbird”. Bob witnesses the pair together and he is furious. Tom Robinson states the disturbing words that he heard Bob Ewell say: “He says you goddamn whore, I’ll kill ya” (Lee, 198). Bob Ewell, as well as the rest of the town of Maycomb, have an enormous hatred toward the black community. Despite this fact, the Ewells are considered the uneducated “white trash” of society, Bob will not let his family name be ruined more so because his daughter wants to caress a black man. Mayella was so lonely, she didn’t have many friends, only Tom whom she considered as a potential lover. On the other hand, Bob physically harmed his daughter for her betrayal and tried to make Tom look like a monstrous individual to keep him out of his daughter’s life for good. Similarly, Shylock disapproves of Jessica’s affair with Lorenzo. Shylock expresses his detest for Christians because of the abuse and ways they mistreat the Jews. When Jessica falls in love with a Lorenzo, a Christian, Shylock is incredibly angry that his daughter is unfaithful to his wishes. For example, in “The Merchant Of Venice”, Shylock lost everything during his trial and declared to the court: “These be the Christian husbands . I have a daughter; Would any of the stock of Barabbas. Had been her husband rather than a Christian!”( Shakespeare, 4, 1, 79-81). The biblical reference of Barrabas, a dangerous criminal, who was chosen to be released instead of Jesus Christ by a Jewish crowd that lead to Jesus’s crucifixion has a deep significance. It clearly shows Shylock does not want his daughter to associate with a Christian but rather a criminal. Thus, both antagonists oppose their daughter’s love choice based on their biased opinions against their child’s lovers race and religion.

Secondly, both characters show a contrast in their parenting. Bob Ewell demonstrates more abusive attributes. For example, Atticus is describing Robert Ewell’s method of parenting to Scout. He says: ‘. . . it’s certainly bad, but when a man spends his relief checks on green whiskey his children have a way of crying from hunger pains. I don’t know of any landowner around here who begrudges those children any game their father can hit. . . but he’ll never change his ways’ (Lee, 31). Despite being a very poor family, Bob is supposed to use the money he receives to help aid his family even though he uses the money to support his alcoholism. In fact, he leaves them with very little food and puts his kids through very intense labour while excluding more and more their education. Bob neglecting his children’s lives and needs represent how terrible he maltreats his family. Yet, Shylock’s method of parenting shows more tender and care. Salonio describes Shylock’s reaction when he loses both his money and daughter as so: “My daughter! O my ducats! O my daughter, Fled with a Christian! O my Christian ducats! Justice, the law, my ducats, and my daughter! (Shakespeare 2, 9, 13). This quote shows that Shylock is more concerned about his daughter who fled with a Christian than his money. He even shouts for his daughter, which means he cares more about the wellbeing of his child. Given that, as a father, he is very worried that his child is gone, he wishes his daughter to return and be safe with him. Unlike Bob, he portrays a more caring and father-like figure. Therefore Robert Ewell and Shylock have a dissimilar approach to their parenting.

In conclusion, both antagonists similarly disapprove of their daughter’s love choice. Bob Ewell opposing Tom Robinson and Shylock disliking Lorenzo. In a similar matter, their reasonings are based on biased opinions against both men’s race and religion. Nevertheless, the two have a different approach to their parenting, Bob Ewell being more abusive and apathetic while Shylock is more tenderness and considerate. In the end, Bob and Shylock are more similar in the way they lost trust towards their daughters and how they destroyed their father-daughter relationship.

One of the most controversial plays of its period, The Merchant of Venice remembers many question. When the reasons are addressed, it can be said that The Merchant of Venice is a rich work on religious, moral, class and gender discrimination. When the work is examined on different topics as stated, the aim of the play and the writing purpose of Shakespeare can be grasped. First of all, in this essay, it is aimed to reveal the characteristics of the main character Shylock and the messages he wants to give, and to bring the goals of Shakespeare to light. In addition, verses, showing the conflict between Christian and Jewish in the play, will be specified and the atmosphere of the period will be reflected.

The Merchant of Venice is a striking work written by Shakespeare in the 16th century. While the exact date of writing of the work is uncertain, it is not known whether Shakespeare personally witnessed the religious features of the period. The conflict between Christianity and Judaism, which are familiar in every period, has been a hostility for centuries. The beginning of the conflict dates back to the crucifixion of the prophet Jesus. According to the medieval conception, Jews are the murderers of Jesus and this conception continues even today. We consider that the 16th century Venice, Venice is the most powerful and liberal place of the period and it has become famous all over the world by legal rules. In addition, ghettoization first appeared in Venice. Jews who were excluded as minority groups in Venice, were ghettorized through legal means. Jews, who were prevented from getting a profession and were prohibited from seisin, were isolated from the society. As a result, they started to use usury and interest. According to the Christian people, interest was regarded as ill-gotten. People who opposed this understanding were accused of irreligion and isolated from the society. The conflict between Christians, who adhere to religious values,and minority group Jews is a major event witnessed by history. It is possible to clearly see this conflict and hostility in The Merchant of Venice.

Even though The Merchant of Venice is a comedy genre, it is closer to the tragedy. The reason for being called comedy might be to hide the real tragedy behind comedy elements in the play. The humiliation, abstraction, marginalization and suffering of people who have opposed religion are the elements that feed the tragedy. The character Shylock is clearly experiencing this tragic flaw in the play. Whether the play is anti-Jewish or pro-Jewish can be interpreted differently according to the reader or the audience. It is possible to see both the humanity of the Jews and the injustice and ugly face of Christians in the play. The characters that give life to opposing religions reflect this in a realistic way. For instance, Shylock is a Jew and Antonio is a Christian. The conversations between them prove the hostility. Both characters argue that their religion is the best. Shylock hates Antonio throughout the play. The main reason for hatred is, of course, religious conflict.

When the characters are analysed, Shylock is the antagonist of the play. He is a stingy and greedy interest. He boasts of being Jewish, and Judaism is a source of pride for him. He is a hateful character against Christians. The major reason of his hatred against Christians is that he is a humiliated, scorned and isolated person. Antonio is the person who despises, teases and isolates him. He is a Christian trader. Because of Antonio’s behavior, Shylock puts all Christians in the same equation. According to him, all Christians are cruel, dislike, disdain and despise Jews. Being a heartbroken person feeds his hatred and hostility. In court, his lack of compassion makes him a bad and ruthless character, but Shylock is seeking his right by observing the agreement. This behavior also shows that he is fond of justice. How shylock was broken, he was right to enmity against Christians, and the brutal treatment he faced can be explained by his words:

SALARINO. Why, I am sure, if he forfeit, thou wilt not take his flesh: what’s that good for ?

SHYLOCK. To bait fish withal: if it will feed nothing else, it will feed my revenge. He hath disgrac’d me and hind’red me half a million; laugh’d at my losses, mock’d at my gains, scorned my nation, thwarted my bargains, cooled my friends, heated mine enemies. And what’s his reason? I am a Jew. 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. If a Jew wrong a Christian, what is his humility? Revenge. If a Christian wrong a Jew, what should his sufferance be by Christian example? Why, revenge. The villaiy you teach me I will execute; and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction. (III.i.40-57)

Although Shylock is shown as a brutal character in the play, it is the treatment he experienced. As a result, it can be said that Christians are as brutal as Jews. The play seems to be anti-Jewish, but from the point of view of Jews, it can be said to show the brutality of Christians to people and to draw attention to what Jews actually live.

Introduction

William Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice, tells the story of a 16th-century merchant who secured a loan from a Jewish moneylender for his friend. Considered as one of William Shakespeare’s most contemporary works, The Merchant of Venice covers various aspects, from religious to poverty, greed to bitterness. It has been viewed as either a tragedy or a comedy or both. Though several factors influence the reasoning, the elements, characters, and how the play ends are significant to its classification. The main characters Antonio, the Christian merchant, and Shylock, the Jewish moneylender, portrays an abusive and prejudicial relations between both men, with Shylock, determined to teach his Christian ‘ neighbor’ a lesson. Shylock schemes and plans his revenge against Antonio for the abuse and injuries that were inflicted upon him for being a Jew. (Shakespeare)

Reason for viewing this play

This essay is for literary research to analyze and evaluate the different viewpoints. The Merchant of Venice though classified as a comedy, comprises of various themes ranging from humor to great disappointment and sadness. The overall story was melancholic in nature as it presents unrequited love, greed, bitterness, and the anti-Semitic treatment towards Jews. Arguably, this play is neither tragedy nor comedy as it resonates with intricate details of Shakespeare’s view on society.

Shakespeare opened this play with two of its main characters Antonio, a Christian Merchant, and Shylock, a Jewish moneylender. The relationship between the two may be considered antagonistic and precarious. “Though Shylock only appears in five scenes of twenty, his story and how it is presented defines the tone of each production of this problematic play. By keeping the production in an Elizabethan setting, Shakespeare’s Globe Company has stressed the sociological mindset of that audience, making a clear connection between today’s marginalization of immigrants and the treatment of minorities in the past” (Gelber).

Bassanio, a young noble, seeks financial assistance from Antonio as his extravagant living has made him somewhat of a pauper. Antonio is unable to assist, as he has overextended himself in various ventures. He agrees to the terms of the agreement set out by Shylock and secured the loan of 3000 ducats for Bassanio. Shylock uses this opportunity to remind Antonio of his treatment towards him in the past, when he stated, “You call me misbeliever, cut-throat dog / And spit upon my Jewish gaberdine / And all for use of that which is mine own” (l.iii.108-110)

There many moving parts to the play, Bassanio wants to court and marry Portia because she is wealthy, Jessica Shylock’s daughter runs off with Lorenzo, a Christian, with some of her father’s money; Antonio’s motive for selflessly offering a pound of his flesh to secure the loan is still questionable. Was this out of loyalty or because he was in love with Bassanio? Portia was racist towards the Prince of Morocco because of the color of his skin. These are a few takeaways from the play in its entirety, which in itself made it more controversial to the viewer.

Is it a comedy?

The Merchant of Venice is considered a comedy; however, it lacks the satirical sketches and jokes that would classify it as comedic to some extent. Nonetheless, the stage set for this comedy could not be relied on for the happy-ending effect if it endorsed the maltreatment of people. There were some aspects of the plot that were light-hearted, such as scene 2, where Launcelot’s father Gobbo did not know that he was talking to his own son, said: “Lord worshipped might he be, what a beard hast thou got! / Thou hast got more hair on thy chin than Dobbin my fill-horse has on his tail” (II.ii.94-95). However, this production by William Shakespeare was more controversial in the feelings that it prompted. Gelber expressed at the close of his article that “despite the humor that can still be wrung from this ‘comedy,’ the production closed on a very dark note.”

Significant points of tragedy

Shakespeare’s skillful ability of interweaving of the main stories and characters created complexity in the symmetrical structure of the Merchant of Venice (Fujimura). The question one asks is: How is tragedy defined in the theatre? Dictionary.com defines tragedy as a form or base of human suffering. The somber theme that was portrayed in this classic was evident from the beginning to the end. It incites a sympathetic response from the viewer to the circumstances and characters that were brought to life. Considering Jessica’s scheme with Lorenzo and Shylock’s lack of mercy towards Antonio and vice versa, every act presented some form of tragedy.

What was learned from the play?

Is there any difference in society then as persons who were considered inferior were treated and how they are treated today? There was a strong sense of loyalty and romance, but there was also victimization, prejudice, greed for wealth, and religious indifference throughout the entire play. Act 4, scene 1, which takes place in the Venetian Court of Justice, was remarkable, as both men who consider themselves as God-fearing, were unyielding and hypocritical in their beliefs and practice. After Portia/Balthazar urged Shylock to have mercy on Antonio, he refuses to do (IV.i.180-183). Antonio was no different when he forced a Christian conversion on Shylock and decided the division of his wealth. In an article titled Pity Silenced, Alessandra Marzola states:

“Unlike the virtue extolled by Portia/ Balthazar in her initial speech, the mercy finally rendered to Shylock is harshly conditional, cruelly exacting and utterly penalizing: life and half of the capital are forgiven, but under the provisions minutely listed by Antonio. And, under the circumstance, Antonio gives proof of unprecedented exactness: the fine is retracted for one-half of Shylock’s goods, provided that the Jew lets Antonio have the other half in captive use.” (Marzola)

The term ‘all is fair in love and war’ could be used to represent the relationship between all the parties in this play as each individual acted in their own interest and by their own moral code.

Conclusion

William Shakespeare being the absolute genius as a classical playwright used the Merchant of Venice as a tool to educate on the social standings of his time, both economically and religiously. Done in the Elizabethan era, Shakespeare may have written this to expose how the minorities were oppressed and the stereotypes that were prevalent. Today, the play still resonates with the happenings in current society. The Merchant of Venice may be considered as a social commentary, controversial and/or anti-Semitic but the classification of a comedy or tragedy is still to be justified.

Works Cited

1. Fujimura, Thomas H. ‘Mode and Structure in The Merchant of Venice.’ PMLA Vol. 81.No. 7 (Dec.1966): 499-511 (13 pages). 23 February 2020. .
2. Gelber, Bill. ‘The Merchant of Venice.’ Early Modern Literary Studies, vol. 19, no. 2, (2017): 1-3. ProQuest, https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/docview/2135049112?accountid=8289. 19 02 2017.
3. Marzola, Alessandra. ‘ “Pity Silenced: Economies of Mercy in The Merchant of Venice.” .’ Critical Survey 30.3 (2018): 17. http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=003e2e19-c4ca-477d-a0e2-817dd33ebc9f%40sessionmgr4008.
4. Shakespeare, William 1564-1616. The Merchant of Venice. We are Classic Ebooks 2010, n.d. https://read.amazon.com/?asin=B004LB5EG4.

The human experience is the perception of human emotion, encompassing a wide range of conceptions about life and loss. Our capability to love and hate allows writers such as William Shakespeare to construct a world with binaries that highlights how experiences and motivations affect human behaviour. Shakespeare’s 16th-century play ‘The Merchant of Venice’ a comedic tragedy, discovers self-interested behaviours amidst prejudice within anti-Semitic values shaped by context in Roderigo Lopez and Christopher Marlowe’s ‘Jew of Malta’, featuring extensive racial prejudice in context of the ‘Civil Rights Movement’. Shakespeare uses contrast, dramatic irony and symbolism, to develop the theme of love and hate, throughout the central character, Shylock. Thus, the play has an abundance of multifaceted characters in exploring their individual scenarios, ultimately, revealing motivations behind indecisive and deceitful behaviours, allowing the audience to gain a complex perspective of important concepts about the world of human experiences.

The collateral human experience of prejudice in ambition for revenge, reveals sympathetic motivations behind character scenarios in the text, that assists in conveying the intricacies of human behaviour. Within the Merchant of Venice, Shakespeare’s’ courtroom scene dramatises a conflict between justice and mercy. While law and revenge are j The human experience is the perception of human emotion, encompassing a wide range of conceptions about life and loss. Our capability to love and hate allows writers such as William Shakespeare to construct a world with binaries that highlight how experiences and motivations affect human behaviour. Shakespeare’s 16th century play ‘The Merchant of Venice’ a comedic tragedy, discovers self-interested behaviours amidst prejudice within anti-Semitic values shaped by context in Roderigo Lopez and Christopher Marlowe’s ‘Jew of Malta’, featuring extensive racial prejudice in the context of the ‘Civil Rights Movement’. Shakespeare uses contrast, dramatic irony and symbolism, to develop the theme of love and hate, throughout the central character, Shylock. Thus, the play has an abundance of multifaceted characters in exploring their individual scenarios, ultimately, revealing motivations behind indecisive and deceitful behaviours, allowing the audience to gain a complex perspective of important concepts about the world of human experiences.

The collateral human experience of prejudice in ambition for revenge, reveals sympathetic motivations behind character scenarios in the text, that assists in conveying the intricacies of human behaviour. Within the Merchant of Venice, Shakespeare’s’ courtroom scene dramatises a conflict between justice and mercy. While law and revenge are juxtaposed, they overlap within the text. Shylock’s argument for justice upon pursuing Antonio’s pound of flesh alludes to the connection between law and revenge. His rhetorical question, ‘On what compulsion must I?” is juxtaposed by Portia’s call for the Christian value of mercy to be upheld. Thus, By pitting mercy against justice, Shakespeare shows the audience they are destined to have disputes as it is hardwired in one’s mind. Throughout the play, the value of money corrupts man through the characterisation of Shylock and Antonio. Shylock who is of Jewish faith manipulates religion to justify his taking of insurance which can be seen through his retelling of the story of Jacob in Act 1, Scene 3, “This was a way to thrive, and he was blessed/ And thrift is blessing, if men steal it not.” The biblical allusion demonstrates a spiritual human experience that Shylock has with his faith. The justification given by him is an act of manipulation of religion representing human behavior and motivations, invoking the displeasure of Antonio, “the devil can cite Scripture for his purpose/ an evil soul producing holy witness/ is like a villain with a smiling cheek/ a goodly apple rotten at the heart.” The use of similes and metaphors draws attention to Shylocks actions while contrasting his behaviour and motivations. Shakespeare contrasts this with the characterisation of Antonio, “Therefore my merchandise makes me not sad” . Through this we see that Shakespeare is portraying Antonio who has not been corrupted by the value of money unlike Shylock, portraying a bias towards the Christian faith. Furthermore, the actions of both Antonio and Shylock demonstrate an aspect of emotional and spiritual human experiences within The Merchant of Venice.

Throughout Shakespeare’s play, the audience are shown many different types of relationships which are essential to the play and its story. A major relationship found inside the play is the resilient friendship between Antonio and Bassanio, where most of the story is formed around. In the first act, Antonio offers himself as a human bond for Bassanio’s debt alluding to the sacrifice of Christ. Without questioning the reason for Bassanio’s request, Antonio has already determined to give him all he desires, “Within the eye of honour, be assured/My purse, my person, my extremest means/Lie all unlocked to your occasions”. Here, the first-person pronoun ‘my’ is repeated to emphasise Antonio’s generosity, while the verb ‘unlocked’ also suggests freedom and openness, ironically contrasting with Antonio’s later arrest. The repetition and alliteration evokes the perception of the intense friendship having homoerotic connotations. Shakespeare displays the various dynamics of love by comparing love stories within the play. The first suitor who tries to win Portia’s hand, exemplifies arrogance and conceit, having no love for her but her wealth, serving as a reminder that the external appearance is not a reliable indication of its true nature. In contrast to this, Jessica and Lorenzo’s love juxtaposes Portias relationship as the irony of a Jew marrying a Christian indicates that love can be so strong it overpowers religious and cultural differences. The use of emotive language, “Love is blind and lovers cannot see”, personifies the emotion to demonstrate the metaphorically blinding power of affection.

The theme of appearance vs. reality is enhanced with the relationship between Shylock and Antonio. Shylock’s use of emotive words “ I would be friends with you and have your love” denotes coalition and loyalty. However, Antonio’s blindness to Shylock’s harbouring deceit conveys ignorance, as his ulterior motive is to take a pound of flesh from Antonio. Shakespeare employs many dramatic and language techniques within this scene in order to remind them that one’s actions can be contradictory to their seemingly honest motives. The choosing of the three caskets is also used as the main explanation of appearance versus reality. The suitor of Portia must choose either a gold, silver or lead casket, where the right choice will allow the suitor to marry her. The Prince of Morocco, on choosing the beautiful gold casket with the

inscription, ‘Who chooseth me shall gain what many men desire,’ sees the message, ‘All that glisters is not gold,’ and is thus turned away by Portia. Shakespeare makes it clear to his audience that being externally minded throughout life may bring satisfaction but will not bring contentment. The Prince of Arragon, on choosing the silver casket with, ‘Who chooseth me shall get as much as he deserves,’ receives a fool’s head, and leaves Belmont, much in the same way The Prince of Morocco did – a shadow of his former self. Bassanio however, on correctly choosing the lead casket with the

inscription, ‘Who chooseth me must give and hazard all he hath,” symbolically indicates that his love for Portia brought certain maturity that allowed him to realise “Look on Beauty,/And you shall see ‘tis purchased by the weight”. Through this, an idea of hypocrisy is introduced in which a person may go back completely on his ideals if he is in pursuit of something of great gain to himself, exemplified through Bassanio’s search of riches masked by the love that he intends to have for Portia. Furthermore, Shakespeare uses the relationship between Antonio and Bassanio, as well as the three caskets, to create further drama and show the audience that weakness is an immanent trait within us.

The basis of the human experience is found within its challenges. Furthermore, Shakespeare presents a variety of complex, flawed characters to examine questions which are often left unresolved about the human condition.

Uxtaposed, they overlap within the text. Shylock’s argument for justice upon pursuing Antonio’s pound of flesh alludes to the connection between law and revenge. His rhetorical question, ‘On what compulsion must I?” is juxtaposed by Portia’s call for the Christian value of mercy to be upheld . Thus, By pitting mercy against justice, Shakespeare shows the audience they are destined to have disputes as it is hardwired in one’s mind. Throughout the play, the value of money corrupts man through the characterisation of Shylock and Antonio. Shylock who is of Jewish faith manipulates religion to justify his taking of insurance which can be seen through his retelling of the story of Jacob in Act 1, Scene 3, “This was a way to thrive, and he was blessed/ And thrift is blessing, if men steal it not.” The biblical allusion demonstrates a spiritual human experience that Shylock has with his faith. The justification given by him is an act of manipulation of religion representing human behavior and motivations, invoking the displeasure of Antonio, “the devil can cite Scripture for his purpose/ an evil soul producing holy witness/ is like a villain with a smiling cheek/ a goodly apple rotten at the heart.” The use of similes and metaphors draws attention to Shylocks actions while contrasting his behaviour and motivations. Shakespeare contrasts this with the characterisation of Antonio, “Therefore my merchandise makes me not sad” . Through this we see that Shakespeare is portraying Antonio who has not been corrupted by the value of money unlike Shylock, portraying a bias towards the Christian faith. Furthermore, the actions of both Antonio and Shylock demonstrate an aspect of emotional and spiritual human experiences within The Merchant of Venice.

Throughout Shakespeare’s play, the audience are shown many different types of relationships which are essential to the play and its story. A major relationship found inside the play is the resilient friendship between Antonio and Bassanio, where most of the story is formed around. In the first act, Antonio offers himself as a human bond for Bassanio’s debt alluding to the sacrifice of Christ. Without questioning the reason for Bassanio’s request, Antonio has already determined to give him all he desires, “Within the eye of honour, be assured/My purse, my person, my extremest means/Lie all unlocked to your occasions”. Here, the first-person pronoun ‘my’ is repeated to emphasise Antonio’s generosity, while the verb ‘unlocked’ also suggests freedom and openness, ironically contrasting with Antonio’s later arrest. The repetition and alliteration evokes the perception of the intense friendship having homoerotic connotations. Shakespeare displays the various dynamics of love by comparing love stories within the play. The first suitor who tries to win Portia’s hand, exemplifies arrogance and conceit, having no love for her but her wealth, serving as a reminder that the external appearance is not a reliable indication of its true nature. In contrast to this, Jessica and Lorenzo’s love juxtaposes Portias relationship as the irony of a Jew marrying a Christian indicates that love can be so strong it overpowers religious and cultural differences. The use of emotive language, “Love is blind and lovers cannot see”, personifies the emotion to demonstrate the metaphorically blinding power of affection.

The theme of appearance vs. reality is enhanced with the relationship between Shylock and Antonio. Shylock’s use of emotive words “ I would be friends with you and have your love” denotes coalition and loyalty. However, Antonio’s blindness to Shylock’s harbouring deceit conveys ignorance, as his ulterior motive is to take a pound of flesh from Antonio. Shakespeare employs many dramatic and language techniques within this scene in order to remind them that one’s actions can be contradictory to their seemingly honest motives. The choosing of the three caskets is also used as the main explanation of appearance versus reality. The suitor of Portia must choose either a gold, silver or lead casket, where the right choice will allow the suitor to marry her. The Prince of Morocco, on choosing the beautiful gold casket with the

inscription, ‘Who chooseth me shall gain what many men desire,’ sees the message, ‘All that glisters is not gold,’ and is thus turned away by Portia. Shakespeare makes it clear to his audience that being externally minded throughout life may bring satisfaction but will not bring contentment. The Prince of Arragon, on choosing the silver casket with, ‘Who chooseth me shall get as much as he deserves,’ receives a fool’s head, and leaves Belmont, much in the same way The Prince of Morocco did – a shadow of his former self. Bassanio however, on correctly choosing the lead casket with the

inscription, ‘Who chooseth me must give and hazard all he hath,” symbolically indicates that his love for Portia brought certain maturity that allowed him to realise “Look on Beauty,/And you shall see ‘tis purchased by the weight”. Through this, an idea of hypocrisy is introduced in which a person may go back completely on his ideals if he is in pursuit of something of great gain to himself, exemplified through Bassanio’s search of riches masked by the love that he intends to have for Portia. Furthermore, Shakespeare uses the relationship between Antonio and Bassanio, as well as the three caskets, to create further drama and show the audience that weakness is an immanent trait within us.

The basis of the human experience is found within its challenges. Furthermore, Shakespeare presents a variety of complex, flawed characters to examine questions which are often left unresolved about the human condition.

The Merchant of Venice, a 16th century play penned by William Shakespeare, opens with Antonio, a Venetian merchant, sunk in gloom. When he finds himself unable to trace the roots of his seemingly endless melancholy, his friends attribute it to his ships at sea. Bassanio, Lorenzo and Gratiano arrive shortly after. Bassanio, who is in pursuit of a wealthy heiress from Belmont named Portia, asks Antonio for a loan in order to court her. By virtue of all his investments going toward cargo, Antonio is incapable of lending the money himself, but persuades Bassanio to secure a loan in his name from Shylock, a Jewish moneylender who detests Antonio in every respect (especially on grounds of religious affiliations). Shylock agrees to provide an interest-free loan of three thousand ducats on the condition that if the loan wasn’t repayed in the stipulated time of three months, he would be entitled to a pound of Antonio’s flesh. Antonio agrees to his bizzare as well as legally-binding term. It is important to note here that Shylock not only despised Antonio for his antisemitic outlook but also because he did not concur with his business practices, i.e., charging exorbitant rates of interest on loans.

In Act I, we’re also introduced to Portia, who is in conversation with Nerissa, her maid, about her potential suitors, most of who have already been disqualified on account of her deceased father’s will which states that she may only marry the man who chooses the correct one out of three caskets made from gold, silver and lead. Still in the running are two princes from Morocco and Aragon, who later meet the same fate as their precedents.

Mayhem breaks out in the Shylock household when his daughter, Jessica, elopes with a Christian man named Lorenzo, who also happens to be Antonio’s friend. On top of it, Jessica takes her father’s valuable possessions with her. Launcelot, Shylock’s servant, also leaves his former master to serve Bassanio.

Bassanio sets sail for Belmont with Gratiano. In Belmont, Bassanio chooses the right casket and wins Portia’s hand. As a symbol of love, Portia gives Bassanio a ring making him promise to never part with it. Meanwhile, Gratiano asks Nerissa to be his wife. Soon, word arrives that Antonio’s ships have been lost at sea and that he is now financially ruined. Shylock also gets Antonio arrested and intends to stick to his earlier terms.

Upon hearing the same, Bassanio and Gratiano immediately return to Venice in order to save their friend in peril. Portia and Nerissa made up their mind to follow them too.

Back in Venice, the scene shifts to the city court. Antonio’s trial is in order with the Duke overseeing the case. Portia and Nerissa, who are in a lawyer’s disguise, eventually save the day. Portia, disguised as a young lawyer named ‘Balthasar’, finds a loophole in the agreement and states that although the pact entitled him to a pound of flesh, it did not mention blood, without which it stands void. For scheming against a Venetian citizen, the court also orders that half his estate be handed over to the court, and the other half to Antonio. Antonio refuses his share of Shylock’s estate and asks for it to be put in a trust for Jessica and Lorenzo. In addition to that, he demands that Shylock convert into a Christian.

The play ends with the characters rejoicing in Belmont. A plot-thickening revelation comes to the fore towards the end that Antonio’s ships have safely arrived in port.

Upon examining the play closely, one would notice that most of the characters are directly or indirectly linked to Antonio. Though it is difficult to imagine a character who harbors anti-Jew sentiments as the protagonist, his notability throughout the course of the play cannot be ruled out. The rest of the characters almost serve as expedients toward Antonio’s cause. If it weren’t for Shylock’s abnormal clause, the plot would have remained stagnant. One might argue that Antonio’s inherent prejudice in the form of anti-semitism voids the possibility of him being a protagonist, but I like to think that it sheds light on the nuances of human bearing. It is revelant to the setting in which the play is based, and it does a praiseworthy job at illuminating the then-society’s vices.

Even though some critics have argued that Bassanio is the protagonist, I am convinced that the title of the play ‘The Merchant of Venice’ alludes to Antonio holding the designation. Others have hinted at Portia being the protagonist in wake of the play’s feminist undertones and her equally resounding presence throughout the play, and though it is more in keeping with the present socio-political framework, it still seems a prospect far too ideal to envisage in the 16th century. In my opinion, it is Antonio’s cargo ships which set the rest of the events in motion. As a character, he is part of a larger cause, one whose life is at stake and is ultimately freed from the shackles of death. In a certain sense, the play follows the story of a merchant who, even though is arguably not the finest at his profession (as demonstrated by his interest-free loaning), is a sincere breadwinner and an even more sincere friend – one who was willing to trade his flesh in the occurrence of a defaulted loan thereby redefining the parameters of friendship, love and humanity.

Compelling texts draw in the responder to confront new ideas regarding the inconsistencies within personal and collective experiences. The Merchant of Venice depicts the struggle of the individual against the imposed obligations of society, while To Kill a Mockingbird, explores the human morality where the distinction between right and wrong can be seen.

Throughout The Merchant of Venice, assumptions of women having less power than men are accentuated through gender barriers in the renaissance period, and how fate and destiny are the anomalies of human experience. This is evident in Portia’s reference to fate, ‘the will of a living daughter curbed by the will of a dead father’ (Act 1 Scene 2). Portia’s destiny is determined by her father’s will of her marrying the man who picks the right casket out of the three chests, showing the anomaly of passing one man’s control to the next while Portia is seen as an object. “As from her lord, her governor, her king. Myself and what is mine to you and yours is now converted” (Act 3 Scene 2), when Bassanio marries her, it draws the assumption that Portia remains at the mercy of men. Yet, this assumption is challenged in the courtroom (Act 4 Scene 1), where Shakespeare ignites ideas of the portrayal of women. Portia disguises herself as a male lawyer, becoming the hero as she emphasises the quality of mercy within the courtroom. As a woman, Portia is submissive and obedient; as a man, she demonstrates her intelligence and brilliance as the judge. Portia, the same person is now empowered by dressing as a man. This affirms how a woman with great intellect can accomplish tasks, even those that were regarded as a man’s job. During the final scene, Portia makes sure that Bassanio knows of her alter ego, ensuring that he gives her the ring, to later prove that she was the judge who saved Antonio’s life, showing that in this situation, she is in control over fate and destiny. Shakespeare represents the inconsistencies of human nature through portraying women as powerful characters who overpower men and defy the expectations of their time, ultimately positioning the audience to challenge their own understanding of women and their capabilities. The quote “You would not have parted with the ring. What man is there so much unreasonable” (Act 4, Scene 1), suggests a tone of strength and courage in Portia’s voice as she stands up to her husband, which very much defies the stereotype of women in the 16th century as being obedient. Shakespeare’s use of dramatic form and irony serves to awaken the numb judgements of his audience, emphasizing women should be perceived equal to men.

Harper Lee challenges cultural assumptions stemmed from society’s dogmatism of the individual experiences by revealing alienating assumptions of conformity in society and the injustice of minorities in which self-preservation has to be upheld in order to conform. One depiction of human experience is in the way in which minorities deceive and condemn for self-preservation. Mayella Ewell demonstrated self-preservation when she claimed to be raped by Tom Robinson, a black man. Atticus’s rhetorical question, “What did your father see in the window, the crime of the rape or the best defence to it?” brings attention to the real truth in which Mayella’s falsifications are trying to hide. The result of her tendency to self-preservation in order to refuge herself and her father, challenges the assumption that humans are naturally truthful, compassionate, and kind-natured. The film depicts Tom as an unfortunate scapegoat of a flawed legal trial that “has relied instead upon the testimony of two witnesses whose evidence has not only been called into serious question on cross-examination, but has been flatly contradicted by the defendant.” reveals the anomaly of the desire of doing the right thing can collapse when individuals are influenced by a mob mentality instead of their own assumptions and the paradox of human experience where humans contradict their own values to protect their reputation. Even if the jurors wanted to say that Tom was innocent, they would’ve faced the people of Maycomb and be shunned for letting a black man go, therefore Harper Lee effectively exposes human behaviour through the conformity of society.

Shakespeare and Harper Lee challenges both the conformity of society and the injustice for minorities through the inconsistencies in human behaviour and motivations that drive the responder to confront new ideas regarding the inconsistencies within personal and collective experiences.