Antonio, a wealthy merchant and a generous man, has a friend,
Bassanio, likeable but reckless, and now penniless. Bassanio loves a
beautiful lady, Portia, who lives at a distance. He wishes to woo
and win her, but lacks travel money, and proposes to borrow from
Antonio.
Unfortunately, all of Antonio's money is invested in
merchandise now on ships at sea. When the ships return in two months
with the profits from the voyage, then Antonio will have an
abundance of money, but in the meantime he cannot help Bassanio, who
does not feel that he can afford to wait two months. Antonio
therefore proposes to go to Shylock the Jew and borrow the money
from him.
[It should be explained that the common view among Christians
in
Shakespeare's time was that it was immoral to charge interest on
a loan. Jews are allowed by the Law of Moses to charge interest when
lending to Gentiles (see Deuteronomy 23:19f), and in many countries
found that this was almost the only way of making a living that was
open to them.]
Shylock says (I paraphrase): Why should I lend you money? You
are no friend of mine. I know that you do not like Jews. You spat at
me yesterday.
Antonio replies: I am not asking for a favor. This is strictly
a business proposition. Three thousand ducats for three months, at
your usual rate of interest.
Shylock says: Forget the interest. Instead, agree that if you
fail to repay me in full by the deadline, I am entitled to one pound
of your flesh, said pound to be selected by me. Why? Call it a whim.
Take it or leave it!
Antonio takes the loan, and soon Bassanio is off to Belmont,
the country estate of his lady. She loves him, and readily agrees to
marry him. Her maid Nerissa likewise agrees to marry his servant
Gratiano. Each woman gives her suitor a ring as a token of her love.
Meanwhile, back in Venice, Shylock's daughter Jessica, his only
living relative (her mother is dead), falls in love with a Christian
youth called Lorenzo, and he with her. She becomes a Christian, and
the two of them elope together, with Antonio's assistance. Shylock
is furious, and when he hears that Antonio's ships have been wrecked
and that Antonio is bankrupt, he determines to exact vengeance.
Antonio sends a letter to Bassanio at Belmont, telling him what
has happened. Portia gives her new husband money and sends him back
to Venice in haste to rescue his friend, telling him to spare no
expense. Bassanio dashes off, and Portia determines on further
action. She and her maid Nerissa disguise themselves as men, and
travel to Venice to take a direct hand in the proceedings.
In Venice, the court assembles, with the Duke of
Venice on the
bench. Shylock presents his claim. Portia and Nerissa enter,
disguised as a learned Doctor of Laws and his clerk, and offer their
services on behalf of Antonio.
Portia says: Here is the money, three times the money, ten
times the money. Take it and tell me to tear up the contract.
Shylock says: The deadline is past. I am entitled to one pound
of flesh. I want what the contract entitles me to, neither more nor
less nor other.
Bassanio says: What is the problem? No one here (with the one
obvious exception) wants to see Antonio hurt. So, let us just throw
Shylock out of court, and all go home and forget the whole thing.
Portia says: Impossible. You cannot simply ignore the law when
its strict application is to your disadvantage. That is the same as
having no law at all.
Shylock says: Well spoken. You are a wise and upright judge.
Portia says: It is for you to be merciful.
Shylock says: I do not find anything in the contract obliging
me to be merciful.
Portia says: Mercy is not something you show because a contract
requires it. It is an act of generosity, done when you do not have
to do it. (Shakespeare's words follow:)
"The quality of mercy is not strained.
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
upon the place beneath. It is twice blessed.
It blesseth him who gives, and him who takes...
It is an attribute to God Himself;
and earthly power doth then show likest God's
when mercy seasons justice. Therefore, Jew,
though justice be thy plea, consider this,
that, in the course of justice, none of us
should see salvation. We do pray for mercy;
and that same prayer doth teach us all to render
the deeds of mercy." (IV,i,184-202)
Shylock says: You are wasting your time. I want what my
contract entitles me to.
Portia says: Very well. Your contract entitles you to one pound
of flesh, but not to a single drop of blood. So start cutting, but
if you shed any blood, your life is forfeit. There is more. You have
conspired against the life of a citizen. Your wealth is forfeit to
Antonio and to the state, and your life lies at the mercy of the
Duke.
The Duke and Antonio agree to spare Antonio's life, and to let
him keep half his goods, with the other half going to Jessica and
her new husband, on condition that Shylock put his daughter back
into his will, and that he become a Christian. The Duke agrees, and
Shylock is led off to be baptized.
Bassanio is profuse in his thanks to the "Doctor of Laws," and
promises to pay whatever he is asked.
Portia asks for the ring that Bassanio is wearing. Bassanio is
dismayed, but trapped. Nerissa similarly acquires Gratiano's ring.
They depart.
The scene shifts to Belmont, where Lorenzo and Jessica have
sought refuge. We see them in the garden, where Lorenzo says
(
Shakespeare's words here):
"How sweet the moonlight sleeps upon this bank!
Here will we sit and let the sounds of music
creep in our ears. Soft stillness and the night
become the touches of sweet harmony.
Sit, Jessica. Look how the floor of heaven
is thick inlaid with patines of bright gold.
There's not the smallest orb which thou beholdest
but in his motion like an angel sings,
still choiring to the young-eyed cherubim.
Such harmony is in immortal souls,
but while this muddy vesture of decay
doth grossly close it in, we cannot hear it." (V,i,54-65)
Soon Portia and Nerissa join them, having rushed back from Venice
ahead of their husbands. The husbands duly arrive, and their wives
first give them a hard time for losing the rings, and then produce
the rings and reveal their part in saving Antonio's life. Bassanio
and Portia embrace. Gratiano and Nerissa embrace. Lorenzo and
Jessica embrace. Antonio smiles and nods. Everyone is happy. The
End.
Now, how are we to interpret this play? If we are going to direct a
production of it, how do we approach it?
One way is to treat it straightforwardly as an anti-Jewish
play. There is precedent for this. We know that some early
productions had Shylock as a red-haired hunchback, which is the way
that Judas Iscariot usually appeared on stage. Villain plots to kill
hero, villain is foiled. Happy ending. Where is the problem? The
problem is that Shakespeare does not treat Shylock as simply evil
for evil's sake. He makes him human. He has good reason to resent
Antonio. He says:
"You call me misbeliever, cutthroat dog,
and spit upon my Jewish gabardine,
and all for use of that which is mine own." (I,iii,112ff)
"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?" (III,i,50ff)
Another wrong is suddenly added to the list. His daughter is
all he has in the world, and she is talked into running off. He
hears a report that, while traveling through a distant city, she has
spied a monkey that she fancied, and used a ring to purchase it. His
comment: "That ring--I had it of Leah (his wife) when I was a
bachelor. I would not have given it for a wilderness of monkeys!" To
him, the ring stands for the bonds of affection and loyalty that
ought to unite a family. It stands for what he has received from the
past. But thanks to Antonio and his friends, his only daughter (like
Esau trading his birthright for a mess of pottage--Genesis 25:29-34)
has learned to despise her heritage and to throw it away for a
trifle. And he is cut to the heart.
These scenes simply do not fit comfortably into an anti-Jewish
play. It might be well to omit them. But the need to ignore part of
your data to save your theory is always a danger sign.
Approach Number Two is to treat this as an anti-Christian play.
Shylock is despised and persecuted for being a money-lender. But the
Christians are happy to have him around when they need to borrow
money. It is when the time comes to repay that they complain. When
the law appears to be on the side of the Jew, Portia is eloquent in
speaking of the beauties of Mercy, but when the shoe is on the other
foot, it is cold mercy indeed that she and the other Christians have
to offer Shylock. The play is full of passing references to the
hypocrisy of Christians. Bassanio says in court, that he would
gladly sacrifice his own life to save Antonio's. So? He has a dagger
in his belt, and he is only a few feet away from Shylock. He has
only to draw his blade, stab Shylock, and hang for murder. Again, as
Shylock points out, the Christians of Venice have slaves. If they
are so enamored of mercy, why do they not free their slaves? Again,
we may contrast Portia's courtesy to her unsuccessful suitors with
her ridicule of them behind their backs. And so on. Yes, it would be
a pleasure to do this as an anti-Christian play.
unsecured loans
But with this interpretation, the whole final scene at Belmont
is a problem. It is full of moonlight and roses, and lovers
reunited. Everything about it moves us to rejoice with the
newly-wedded. If we are full of indignation at the cruel way that
the Christians treated Shylock in the preceding scene, how do we
react to the final scene? Do we simply wipe our memories clean and
rejoice in the happiness of the oppressors? Or are we supposed to
boo at them throughout the garden scene, and take the whole thing as
ironical? Once again, the scene simply does not fit. Perhaps we
should cut it altogether....
But there is a Third Approach. Throughout the play, but particularly
in the trial scene, we are told that the issue is one of Justice and
Mercy.
Shylock, the Jew, is the spokesman for Justice. He will have what
is his by right, under the law, under the terms of the contract that
Antonio freely negotiated with him, under the terms of the natural
right of a wronged man to seek a just retribution for his wrongs.
Portia, the Christian, is the spokesman for Mercy, freely given, not
because of the worthiness of the receiver, but because of the
generosity of the giver.
Now, every educated Christian in Shakespeare's day knew that
Justice and Mercy are both attributes of God, and every educated
Christian had been taught to associate the Old Testament with
Justice and the New with Mercy. The word of God to His people
through Moses was: "Keep my laws and you will live. Break them and
you will die." (See Deuteronomy 30:15-20) The problem was that no
one kept the Law perfectly. (See Psalm 19:12) But the word of God in
Christ is: "Be of good cheer--your sins are forgiven." (See M 9:2 =
P 2:5 = L 5:20) The epistles of Paul are full of passages that
contrast Law and Grace, and that associate Law with the Synagogue
and Grace with the Church.
But Justice and Mercy are not simply contrasted--they are
reconciled. In the poem
Piers Plowman, written in the late 1300's,
the issue of God's pardoning the sinner while still satisfying the
demands of Justice is argued out (Passus B XVIII) by four characters
known as the four Daughters of God: Mercy and Peace on the one side,
and Truth and Righteousness on the other. They get their names from
Psalm 85:10. "Mercy and truth will meet; peace and righteousness
will kiss." The same four characters appear in
The Castle of
Perseverance, a play written in the early 1400's. In the play, Man
has died, and his soul is on trial. Righteousness and Truth demand
his damnation as the only just verdict. Mercy and Peace plead the
Incarnation, and Man is accordingly saved.
Thus, an audience in Shakespeare's day would be familiar with the
idea that Justice and Mercy are both good things, both attributes of
God, and that the apparent conflict between them finds its
resolution in the Incarnation, in the perfect obedience of the Son
which satisfies the demands of Justice, in the blood of Christ which
cleanses us from sin. They would be open to the idea that Shylock's
insistence on Justice is a commitment to a good thing, and is to be
honored as far as it goes, but that it is defective in that it fails
to take one thing into account--the blood of Christ. And they would
be familiar with the presentation of these ideas in the form of a
trial, with prosecution and defense. And in the end, Justice is not
simply put out of court. It is reconciled with Mercy. Shylock is to
be baptized. The Law itself is to be made Christian. Thus, the final
scene in the garden at Belmont is simply the triumphant conclusion
of the trial scene. Here we see Jessica and Lorenzo, Jew and
Christian, united in love and marriage, and talking about music,
Shakespeare's customary symbol of harmony.
Some readers may object that they do not see any reconciliation
in the Trial Scene. Shylock is not brought into harmony with the
Christians. He is simply converted at sword-point. Back of this
objection, in most cases, is the notion that any religion is
acceptable to God if sincerely held. The Elizabethans did not, for
the most part, think in those terms. They interpreted quite
straightforwardly the words of Christ: "No one comes to the Father
except through Me." (J 14:5) Some theologians of the period may
argue for an implicit acceptance of the Gospel, but the popular view
is that Shylock baptized has some sort of chance of salvation, while
Shylock unbaptized has none at all. We may be uncomfortable at the
idea of Shylock's distress at being forced to give up his unfamiliar
way of life, but what an Elizabethan playgoer would see is that
Shylock has endeavored to take away Antonio's earthly life, and that
Antonio has responded by doing all in his power to bestow on Shylock
life and joy unending.
bad credit loans
At this point the reader may be restless and want to ask: "Are you
saying that the characters in the play are not to be thought of as
real persons at all, but only as symbols, as stand-ins for various
theological concepts? Ought Antonio helpy the audience out by
wearing a placard reading,
Mankind, while Shylock is labelled
Justice, and Portia
Mercy, and the Duke
God?
If so, then what is on
Nerissa's placard, or on Bassanio's, or Jessica's, or Lorenzo's?"
Rest assured that I am not arguing for the play as an allegory
in that sense. It is not that Justice and Mercy are acting out their
functions on stage unded the aliases of Shylock and Portia, but that
Shylock and Portia, considered as actual humans, by being what they
are, exemplify the themes of Justice and Mercy and their respective
claims.