[Above: one of my favorite actors, F. Murray Abraham's Shylock (Salieri in Amadeus) during the famous trial scene, Act 4.1. Read an interview with Abraham about performing Shylock in the 21st century:
Answer TWO of the
following...
1. Discuss the humor in
Act 4, Scene 1: though a tense, nail-biting scene, it is shot through with
curious bits of humor and satire. What
should be played for laughs? Do the laughs
threaten to derail the tragedy (if it is tragic)? Who are we laughing at—or with? And what kind of humor is it?
2. In the showdown between
Shylock and Portia, she tells him, “Though justice be thy plea, consider
this--/That in the course of justice none of us/Should see salvation”
(59). What does she mean by this, and
how might this change how we read the entire scene—and indeed, much of the play
itself? Does this statement condemn or
somewhat exonerate Shylock?
3. Is Antonio redeemed in Act 4.1? For many he becomes
pitiable, and I doubt few audiences want to see him skewered (well, maybe a
few...). Is he changed by the end of
the play? Does he grant Shylock
mercy? Does he repent in some manner
for his crimes? Or does he glare
triumphantly over Shylock’s spoiled corpse?
4. Act 5, Scene 1 is a
strange scene, as it focuses on the power of music and its connection to
love. Lorenzo claims that “The man that
hath no music in himself...Is fit for treasons, strategems, and spoils” (69),
while Portia remarks that music “sounds much sweeter than by day...How many things
by season seasoned are/To their right praise and true perfection!” (69). What do you make of all this? How is music being used/discussed here, and
how might it reflect on the actions of the play—or the enchanted world of
Belmont?
5. Is the resolution of
the ring trick a satisfying way to end this play? In other words, after what happened in Act 4, The Merchant of
Venice seems to end as a farce—“I slept with the doctor, tee-hee!” Why do
you think Shakespeare wanted this ending?
How does it end the play, and is it really as light and comic as many
productions have staged it?
1. I don’t see Act 4 Scene 1 as being very funny at all. Maybe I am biased after seeing the movie we watched, as they did not play this scene out to be funny at all either. But this scene seems very serious to me, Shylock is gripping to his bond with dear life, wanting some kind of justice to prevail. And at the end of the Act, he is forced to lose everything and convert to the religion he loathes. The play seems to skim over that horrible outcome with Shylock’s response being “I am content.” I feel like the movie version we watched did a wonderful job of portraying that scene. The only part that I found a little funny was when Bassanio was saying that his wife and all of his money were nothing compared to Antonio’s life, and Portia’s like ohh hellllll no. (That’s how I read it anyway, hence me thinking it was somewhat funny).
ReplyDelete5. (I feel like a bitter old cat lady saying this) The resolution of the play seemed a bit ridiculous to me. We have these heartfelt scenes of brilliance with Shylock giving very insightful meaningful speeches, I feel like the scenes that are “funny” with Portia and the gang almost insult the rest of the play. I understand having comic relief, as Shakespeare has even in his most depressing dramas, but all the happy go lucky scenes with the married couples kind of piss me off. Shylock was just forced into converting to Christianity and lost everything he had, and we are reading about people arguing over rings…it was frustrating to me as a reader.
-Tori Watson
3. I don't consider him redeemed at all. He had the chance to show everyone that he could rise above Shylock, but instead chose to force Shylock to convert to Christianity, which to me is possibly the worst thing he could have done to Shylock. Previously, Shylock had already lost his daughter and a lot of his wealth (including his precious ring that was his wife's), and Portia only caused him further loss and grief by stripping him of the rest of his wealth and whatever dignity he had left. Antonio took his own pound of flesh. It wasn't Portia or the Duke who called out to have him convert, it was Antonio. For him to have been redeemed he would have had to have shown some sort of compassion or mercy for Shylock. Then again, Shylock was a Jew, so it wasn't necessary for him to show compassion; no one cared.
ReplyDelete5. I see the resolution as being foreboding and a precursor to a possible bad relationship. Portia, in pretending to be Balthazar, showed Bassanio that she's not only extremely clever, but manipulative as well. Portia served as the instigator for Shylock's demise, as she pushed things as far as she could in order to make Shylock pay. She did the same thing when she pushed Bassanio to give up his ring. Bassanio, past this point, should realize that Portia's game was essentially a threat. She showed Bassanio that she can get her way in any situation and that she's not to be trifled with. With the play, most of the drama happened with Shylock. When Shylock exited the play, it became less of a tragedy and more of a comedy. The ending with the rings showcases the “comedy,” as the moment is more exaggerated and trivial than any of the moments with Shylock.
- Casey Fowler
2. Portia means that if everyone pursued justice for everything done to them, all who commit the crime or sin are condemned. A cycle of vengeance is born. It keeps going and going. Outside of Shakespeare's play, blood feuds throughout history led to killing of entire families over wrongs done--think of Romeo and Juliet. The tragedy of their families is that they continue murdering each other until the deaths of the children beat them over the head with their own venom. More specifically, in Biblical times the law was the measure of justice, both God's and that of men--and many frequently died for the things they committed. In Christian view, Jesus died so that the need for justice unto death wouldn't be necessary, as God's grace commuted the sentence. She means that if he pursues his course of action (though he may not realize it at the time) he will condemn himself. If she is secretly sympathetic to him and is trying to warn him, this is his last-second chance to walk away from all that has happened to him. If not, she's just saying "On your own head be it." Following the aftermath of the play's events, everyone who ended scot-free may as well be caught up with in justice in some other manner. It could condemn Shylock, as legally he's hanging himself. Or it could exonerate him, in the sense that if he let well enough alone, the law would still be on his side--and in the characters' viewpoint, God as well--because everyone would know he how he was wronged and it could affect those around him.
ReplyDeleteJessie Randall
5. The ring trick is...one of the more ambiguous endings. It seems like Portia and Nerissa had opened another way to test their husbands by testing their faithfulness to their oaths. I'm not certain it really is as light and comic as it seems. Bassanio may have passed one test, but he fails another, one which he had no way of getting out of without seeming unfaithful. The obvious way is he would have been "unfaithful" to his wife, especially after promising her to NEVER give up her ring; the other, that he would insult the person who saved his best friend's life--and a stranger, at that. The test he does pass, however, is his motivation. Gratiano doesn't pass Nerissa's test, as he viewed it still as a trinket, trifling. Bassanio sees it as a divide that he must never cross again if he wants Portia's trust, love and faithfulness for himself. Finally, they relent and reveal their shenanigans in favor of their loved ones' good. Portia seems to want Bassanio to see her as her full self, not simply as a "trophy wife," and gets it after her charade, teaching him a somewhat harsh lesson on what he ought to consider as something he fulfill as worthy. Interestingly, their rings parallel Shylock's ring. Jessica seemingly giving it away signified to Shylock how everything he's known and cherished either being betrayed or defiled by those he once trusted. Nerissa may yet see, if Gratiano has not really learned his lesson, something similar, lest he be cowed into seeing it safe. Portia, on the other hand, has won again, making damn sure that the gravity of ring-oath and marriage be binding in her husband's mind and heart--especially after the debacle she witnessed and helped engineer after other oaths pertaining to her husband and his friends had been reneged on. She knows, I think, how Shylock fully ended up, and her charades ensured that if something similar might happen to her, she is forewarned by the characters of her husband and his friends, and that she will be able to prevent or find justice for it herself. But, being Portia, she's won and the play ends.
ReplyDeleteJessie Randall
Macy McDonald
ReplyDelete1. It’s hard to isolate just one view point of this scene as funny, because depending on how you played it or what your perspective was I think that a number of different things could appeal to you. Personally, the funniest of the lines for me is when Shylock claims that “no power in the tongue of man” will alter him, because I know that Balthesar is really Portia and the tongue of a woman is about to take everything, even his religion, if he doesn’t recant. However, this is probably only funny to me because I’m a feminist and also just a little bit mean. I think in some ways the humorous moments in this scene are meant to point out flaws in our preconceived notions about people. Everyone tells “the Jew” that he “must” show mercy and his refusals are sometimes funny, like when he turns Bassanio’s words back on him at the first of the scene. However, I think the laughter serves two purposes, one it points out that it’s ridiculous to think that Jews are any more merciful than Christians and that they would show mercy to those who have done them harm is a ridiculous expectation, as Shylock points out several times during the course of the play, like when he gives his dog speech. The other is to highlight how ridiculous these laws are. Shylock repeatedly references the fact that he is just following their laws, he isn’t doing anything remotely illegal and there is nothing that any man can do about it without breaking their own laws.
2. I think this statement ultimately condemns Shylock. It could be read literally as it is taken from the Bible, that those who do not show mercy will not be given God’s mercy and will therefore end up in Hell. However, I think that this is also a warning from Portia to Shylock. Either she cannot think of any middle ground or she does not wish to, but basically she is telling him that it’s in his best interest to be merciful right now. If he isn’t she will have no choice but to follow the letter of the law and condemn him to death. Ultimately the duke shows mercy and Shylock is not killed, but Antonio is not so kind. He certainly pretends to be kind, but allowing Shylock to keep the half of his money that Antonio is entitled to, but in doing so he stipulates that the money must eventually go to the man who stole Shylock’s daughter and that he must convert to Christianity. Forcibly taking away his religion strips him of his identity, which is much crueler than simply taking his money. If you believe as Jewish people do this is where the literal interpretation of the line comes in because Shylock could believe that he will now be going to hell for converting to Christianity.
(So side bar, for some reason when I click on the page hearts fly out of my cursor all over the page, not sure why just kinda cool.)
ReplyDelete4.
For a split second when Antonio begins to talk about his half of the fee there was hope he was going to have changed and show him mercy, but that was quickly squashed when he said “upon your death you will give it to the man who stole your daughter.” Antonio knows exactly why he was calling for his flesh instead of the money and this is just a stab in the back, and not even the final stab. Forcing someone to convert is terrible especially for a Jew being forced to convert to Christianity. You cannot change his mind about what is right and so for the rest of his life (though I am sure it was not a long life) he will believe himself to be living in sin and dammed to hell for all eternity. That is physiological torture and to top it off, should he had decided to kill himself he would know that by completing that act he would also be damned, there is not happiness for shylock and Antonio knows that.
2.
I take this as a warning not only to shylock but rather to all, including the audience. If shylock, a man of great faith, won’t show mercy, then who will? Without mercy justice becomes a bunch of people using the law for revenge. On top of this all, should Shylock take the pound of flesh everyone knows Antonio will die. Shylock would then be a murder, something no man of faith can be, and everyone would have s their friend. This leaves everyone to walk away sad and somber. Murderers do not gain salvation in heaven, so if we are taking this as by not showing mercy no one wins and shylock kills him, shylock is damned forever. Shylock up until this point was the once character, to me at least, who had the least blame upon him. He really just wanted to live in peace with these men. If our near blameless character turns to the dark side of revenge there is not hope for the world.
Great responses, but I forget who you are! :) Can you give me your name so I can attach that mentally to "MissLabeled"?
DeleteYes, Antonio's kindness is very cruel in this regard, though James Shapiro's essay (which you can read for Wednesday) suggests that Shylock intended to do the same thing to him: that is, the "pound of flesh" was his penis, meaning he would circumcise (or castrate him) and thus make him a physical Jew or an outright eunuch. Perhaps Antonio merely sees it as tit for tat?
3. Antonio seems to me to remain unchanged by the end of the play. Throughout the play, Shylock speaks of Antonio’s cruelty and his tendency to spit on him and treat him like a dog, and they enter into a bond as enemies. It could be argued that Shylock’s request of a pound of flesh in the event of forfeiture is overly cruel, but he is concerned with the principal of the situation: Antonio does not consider him to be a worthy human, so Shylock will consider Antonio the same. I find it commendable that Antonio does not make lengthy attempts to save himself, rather he obediently waits for the court to hand down his decision. I can see how this makes him appear pitiable, but I think that no one in that courtroom expected the duke to find favor in a Jew who was out for Christian blood, regardless of the legality of the bond. If anything, Antonio is given undeniable evidence that he has a rightful position above the Jews by being acquitted, then given the power to help determine Shylock’s punishment. Neither party ‘won’ in this situation: Shylock was left penniless and forced to convert, and Antonio had his problem dealt with for him as opposed to learning a lesson and allowing himself AND Shylock to improve as men. Antonio’s opinions have no reason to change, and Shylock is only given fuel for his fiery rage against Christians.
ReplyDelete5. The ring trick seems like a lead into another play about the two couples. Instead of leaving us with an ending that sympathizes with Shylock and makes the reader feel for him, Shakespeare took us away from that back into dreamy comedy land, Belmont. On one hand I think it was done specifically so the audience would be as accepting as possible of a play that is seemingly sympathetic toward Jewish people. Perhaps the audience required a fluff ending in order to stomach the more tragic events from the previous scene. The couples are reunited, Antonio gets his goods, and Jessica and Lorenzo get an inheritance. I think the last event is the most interesting to the scene: Jessica and Lorenzo (Christians) can now live happily ever after on her disgraced Jewish father’s fortune. For an anti-Semitic, dull, or cruel reader, this point adds to the comedy. The more enlightened and sympathetic reader will, however, appreciate how heartbreaking and straight up wrong it is for these people to proceed with life without acknowledging Shylock’s sacrifice.
2. When I first read the courtroom scene between Shylock and Portia, I honestly did not understand Portia's line "Though justice be thy plea, consider this--/ That in the course of justice none of us/ Should see salvation." I did not pick up on the fact that Portia was imply that this law Shylock seeks with a one-track mind cannot save him. It has never been on his side. In class discussion, I realized Portia tried many times to steer Shylock in the right direction. However, he was dead set on revenge. For me, taking a closer look at this exchange between them, my views of Portia have changed a bit. I feel like Portia was trying to hint at every possible loophole but Shylock never caught on. I think Portia intended to exonerate Shylock with this statement and her other hints.
ReplyDelete3. In Act 4, I do not think Antonio was redeemed or had changed at all. After Shylock does not get his pound of flesh, Antonio makes him convert to a Christian. So, after Shylock lost his daughter, ring, money, and house, Antonio thought it would be fitting to make him convert to a Christian as well. This act proves Antonio just wants to rub the fact that he "got away" in Shylock's face. If he had changed and realized that Shylock is human just like he is then I do not feel Antonio would have suggested this. I can't help picturing Antonio saying something like "Well that was a close one," and moving on with his life.
Sorry, forgot to put my name!
ReplyDeleteCourtney White
2. I think that this line from Portia, somewhat condemns Shylock. I read the line as saying that in the course of getting justice or revenge, you lose a part of yourself. Shylock became a very bitter man, and in many ways lost his sense of self before he was ordered to convert. I think that Portia's line draws attention to the progression of Shylock's emotions and realizations about his society. This line makes the scene very tragic, because Shylock in many ways, becomes the "Jew" that Antonio (and the rest of Venice) sees him as. In the end, his relentless pursuit of justice causes him to be denied some salvation. Although he is given some mercy, his identity is stripped from him.
ReplyDelete5. I think this ending does create the conclusion of a comedy within a very sad play. It also is somewhat satisfying, because we see what appears to be couples that are making oaths to be happily married. However, I think that Shakespeare is also making a point about taking oaths that you can't keep. It mirrors Antonio's bond to Shylock. Bassanio and Gratiano have already broken the ring bond once, so it is questionable whether they can keep it a second time. Antonio also "bonds" himself to Portia as a way to show Bassanio's devotion. This does give this somewhat comical scene a dark edge, because it appears like the character's have learned nothing from this ordeal. Instead, it seems like oaths in this play are farces. They are taken with the promise of faith, but they seem to be empty.
-Cayla O.
3.Despite what Shylock accuses and asserts about Antonio being a real bad piece of work, I can't help feel Shakespeare gives us n real examples of his terrible behavior. In fact, for the most part, Antonio's wronging of Shylock seems more incidental than anything, being based on unfounded accusations that he was responsible for the escape of his daughter. With this in mind, I remained rather sympathetic towards Antonio. In the end, do I feel he is changed in some way? He does grant Shylock half of his money back, which could be granted a mercy. In the end, I feel that the dueling pair of Portia and Shylock are far more interesting and sympathetic in this scene.
ReplyDelete5. Honestly, I was relived when we go to the end and returned to good old theatre stand-byes of puns and sex puns and crazy antics in the tail end of act 4 and act 5. Finally a return to the "comedic" for this play! While most of the interesting analysis of the play can be done on the earlier parts of the play, act 5 finally fulfilled on the promise of comedy. At least in the film, this transition was very much appreciated. I have to wonder if other adaptions haver done a better job with keeping a sense of "comedy" present throughout the play. I suppose it would also have been possible that at the time of its original performance, the "jew" and his follies could have been fundamentally much more comical and over the top. While Shakespeare likely did mean it as a somewhat subversive work, I can't help but feel he felt like he could get away with it mainly because his audience wouldn't recognize the criticism within it.
2. Portia is reminding Shylock that he has no right to take the law in his own hands, both legally and morally. It goes against the laws of man and Shylock's religion for him to take his "pound of flesh." I believe Portia is sympathizing with Shylock, but does not want him to go down the road of no return.
ReplyDelete3. I don't feel Antonio was redeemed by the end of the play. He took every opportunity to persecute Shylock and make his life miserable. He took it so far that he demanded at the trail that Shylock must give up his religion. I don't blame Shylock for wanting his revenge. He had lost everything that was important to him-his daughter, his money, his reputation, and his religion. Antonio seemed to have launched a one-man pogrom against Shylock.
Jennifer Wingard
2. When Portia states that, “Though justice be they plea, consider this--/That in the course of justice none of us/ Should see salvation” I felt that she was implying that you should give grace like how God gives us grace. One should not be so quick to only abide by the law without reason. God is better than the law and he has proven to be better. Shylock has not given or received grace so he is quick to stick to what he knows. From Portia’s words to Shylock I feel like it may have been the “aha” moment for the audience. It was a realization of how much the law affects the world that we live in. I felt like this statement condemned Shylock and immediately put the spotlight on Portia.
ReplyDelete3. I did not think that Antonio was redeemed in Act 4. I also do not believe he changed. Antonio forcing Christianity onto Shylock after knowing he had just lost his daughter, the ring, and his money. I felt like Antonio should have been more humble about the situation considering the fact that his flesh was not sitting in a bucket by Shylock’s feet. It was almost as if Antonio was beating a dead horse by taunting and forcing religion on him by showing off what he just got away with.
-Kayci Snider
Nikki Ennis
ReplyDelete1. I didn't personally see any humor in Act 4 Scene 1. I found the entire scene infuriating! However, I can assume that Portia's constant "Are you SURE you want to follow the law to the letter?" could be read by some as humorous and almost "slapstick". Only instead of a pie to the face, Shylock ultimately walks himself right into an alternate universe where he is penniless, homeless, and robbed of his religion. Hilarious...
5. I think Shakespeare had to end the play with this kind of scene to remind the audience this is a "comedy". If he had chosen to end the play with Act 4, it could be assumed that the entire play was wasn't a comedy at all and perhaps, a satirical message towards certain politics of the time. I think its entirely possible that Shakespeare used this play to say exactly what he wanted, then used the ending Act as a way to disguise the whole thing as just a another silly comedy.
1) Having watched the movie, my first instinct was to say the scene was not funny. The scene in the movie is quite tense and very dramatic. However, after reading the scene, I found a few moments that I found humorous. Gratiano, for instance, made me laugh through his absurd and obnoxious taunts. His character broke the tension, making the scene seem more like a rivalry between two school yard children rather than a life or death trial.
ReplyDelete5) "The ring trick" I found almost as silly as the ending of "As You Like It." It was convenient and light-hearted: enough to remind the audience that this is a "comedy" and perhaps to distract them from the heavy political themes. It's so farcical, in fact, I wonder if perhaps it's even a tongue-in-cheek stab at the superficial tastes of his audience. It's almost as if to say, "Here are my opinions, here is some politics, but if I tie it up with a big comedic ending and some sex jokes then no one will mind."
1) Having watched the movie, my first instinct was to say the scene was not funny. The scene in the movie is quite tense and very dramatic. However, after reading the scene, I found a few moments that I found humorous. Gratiano, for instance, made me laugh through his absurd and obnoxious taunts. His character broke the tension, making the scene seem more like a rivalry between two school yard children rather than a life or death trial.
ReplyDelete5) "The ring trick" I found almost as silly as the ending of "As You Like It." It was convenient and light-hearted: enough to remind the audience that this is a "comedy" and perhaps to distract them from the heavy political themes. It's so farcical, in fact, I wonder if perhaps it's even a tongue-in-cheek stab at the superficial tastes of his audience. It's almost as if to say, "Here are my opinions, here is some politics, but if I tie it up with a big comedic ending and some sex jokes then no one will mind."
Melissa Williams
ReplyDeleteDr. J. Grasso
Shakespeare
February 16, 2014
1. Basically, the humor in this act is supposed to be incredibly dark. When Portia tries to stall Shylock by asking him several questions, he stumps her at every curve. One page 60, we see her ask if he has a way to weigh Antonio’s flesh to make sure it is a pound, and Shylock pulls out of his clothes a set of scales for weighing meat. Of course, when Portia tries to ask for Shylock to bring a doctor to make sure Antonio does not die from bleeding, he says that was not an issue brought up in the bond and assumes the court should not care. Basically, the whole point of this scene is to laugh at just how far a “Jew” will go in order to complete his goal especially if that goal is violent revenge.
3. Antonio in this Shakespearian play was not meant to be seen as the villain. If we look at the scanned in copy of a pamphlet from the 1600s, it states that the play is about Antonio and declares that Shylock is the heinous villain out to torture a Christian merely because he is a Christian. For a modern audience, the scene where Antonio tells the duke, “So please my lord the duke, and all the court / To quit the fine for one half of his goods / I am content, so he will let me have / The other half to use (63).” It would be seen as incredibly cruel that Antonio is wanting to steal half of everything that Shylock owns even though it is still half of the suggested sentence that Portia gave. Now, to a 17th century person, this would be seen as an incredible act of kindness on Antonio’s part to so readily forgive a Jewish man who was about to kill him for being a Christian which was considered the height of good behavior.
3. While I don't want to see Antonio carved up, I don't feel that he has changed except that maybe he feels like he's got a new lease on life. He's riding the adrenaline buzz of almost being maimed or killed and coming out unscathed, and also Bassanio proving his love by being there. He's already trying to excerpt some control over Bassanio and make him prove his affection further by directing him to hand over his wife's ring by saying 'Let his deservings and my love withal be valued 'gainst your wife's commandment' (65). Throughout the scene in the courtroom, Antonio has begged mercy then played the martyr as Shylock pursued his vengeance/bond payment. I don't think he was worried about saving face by trying to look brave so much as working the crowd in his favor for the atrocious act. Then he gives the mercy he has begged for by making Shylock convert to Christianity. An act which will cause him to lose everything he has left. Antonio must not have known about the Golden Rule.
ReplyDelete5. I was thinking with all of the controversy of Act 4, Act 5 is to not only tie things up but to dissipate the tension. There was a lot of drama in the courtroom, and ideas about prejudice and women's roles were played with very openly. Despite being far, far away, Shakespeare must have known that he'd rouse a few people's emotions or even actions so the ring situation became the centerpiece of the conclusion. We leave behind the tense world of Venice and go to Belmont again. We laugh at Bassanio's and Gratiano's foolishness and their wives disdain. A funny moment is whenever Gratiano doesn't hesitate to throw his bestie under the bus when he says 'My Lord Bassanio gave his ring away unto the judge that begged it' (71) after his error was found out. Ultimately everyone is forgiven, and the couples are still experiencing marital content. The cake topper is whenever Antonio who has accompanied them discovers that his ships are actually okay.
haha, this is Kim McCreery
DeleteI couldn't find the movie clip to Adventureland with that specific scene, but I did find the dialogue which I feel like is completely appropriate!
ReplyDeleteEm Lewin: Was the sex good?
James Brennan: She was very sexy.
Em Lewin: You've been with a lot of girls?
James Brennan: Yep. Are we talking about intercourse specifically?
Em Lewin: [laughs] Yeah.
James Brennan: Yeah, yeah. No in that case there were actually a few times that I could have done that. But it wasn't, it wasn't exactly right.
Em Lewin: [shocked] Wait, so you're telling me you're a virgin?
James Brennan: There were circumstances.
Em Lewin: Oh my God.
James Brennan: No! Okay, alright for example, junior year I was dating this girl Betsy Cooke. Betsy was kind of like, she was kind of a prude actually. Anyway one day I was reading Shakespeare and I realized I don't really love this person. You know? It was one of the sonnets, "being your slave, what should I do but tend upon the hours and times of your desires?" And I realized I don't want to tend to Betsy's hours or her times. Alright that doesn't matter. Anyway, I drove to Betsy's house and I was literally about to tell her and that's the night she said she wanted to have sex. Can you believe it? It was the same night.
Em Lewin: And you didn't just fuck her anyway?
James Brennan: Hmm? No. So what about you and intercourse?
Em Lewin: Can you stop saying intercourse?
James Brennan: Sure, sure.
Em Lewin: I don't know. There were guys in high school and then, like, there were other ones.
James Brennan: Were you in love with any of them?
Em Lewin: No. Hell no.
James Brennan: Gotcha.
My take on Shakespeare’s ending is that he really wanted to bring the focus back to women and I think it fits perfectly. This play is really about minorities; people of different religion/race and gender role distinction. It is practical to learn this play to see the historical, political, and civil significance of our culture and where we are today. The issues Shakespeare is addressing in his times are the same civil liberties and rights that we so cherish today. Merchant of Venice is a comedy but one of solemn undertones and critical thinking. I think Shakespeare was having a rough time spoon feeding his audience new ways of thinking about their own culture and social class system.
Felicia D.
2. Portia is basically telling Shylock that to seek justice against Antonio is to seek revenge for the loss of his daughter and his wealth at this point in the play. She seems to be implying that there is little difference, and according to the Christian faith to act against someone in a vengeful manner is a sin against God. Therefore, Shylock would be damned to hell (not that, as a Jew, he isn’t already) as would everyone in the court who allows him to carry out his actions.
ReplyDelete4. I think that, given the time period in which the play was written, we’re meant to view the events in act iv as comedic in nature. Shylock wants a pound of flesh from Antonio and is literally moments away from cutting it off of him but Antonio is saved by Portia pretending to be a doctor who says that the law does not account for blood spilled and by spilling blood Shylock would be guilty of treason. Realizing he can’t have a pound of flesh, Shylock tries to take the previously offered money but Portia says no, he has to follow the law now. Either he takes a pound of flesh or he gets nothing. She basically destroys him and saves Antonio at the same time and you can just imagine how relieved Antonio must be at the time and how high she must feel. Plus the audience knows that she isn’t really Balthazar but Portia so, definitely the events are meant to be viewed as comedic in act iv, which makes the play even funnier to end it with Portia and Nerissa getting one up on their husbands. However, since this play was written in a completely different time period in which people were heavily devoted to the Christian faith, the comedic value of act iv for us is really a mixed bag, so to speak. You might read the play now and, if you think about the scenes in act iv in the context of the time in which it was written you can see how it would have been funny, but given modern beliefs and customs Portia’s defeat of Shylock seems extremely cruel. As modern readers of Shakespeare, we’re definitely inclined to sympathize with Shylock and consider him a victim rather than a villain and so, to us, the ending of the play seems out of place now when laughing at Portia and Nerissa having duped their husbands would’ve been natural.
-Mello