toexplore various incarnations of male–male relationships, from the negotiation of power and control to the simply romantic.
Despite Charles Edelman’s assertion in 2002 that “given the sensitivity of the play’s subject matter, it is very unlikely that [a major feature film] will ever be made,” 19 a full-scale film emerged only three years later, directed by Michael Radford and featuring an all-star cast including Al Pacino (Shylock), Jeremy Irons (Antonio), and Joseph Fiennes (Bassanio). Where the larger-scale Victorian stage productions had attempted to recreate the splendor of Venice onstage, Radford filmed on location in Venice itself, using dark alleys, open promenades, and claustrophobic courtrooms to impressive effect. Setting the production in the Venice of Shakespeare’s time, Radford re-created the historical realities of Jewish life in the city, with Jews forced to wear red caps and live in ghettos. On television, as well as the screened versions of Miller and Nunn’s National productions, the 1980 version for the BBC Shakespeare series directed by Jack Gold offered a very human, but not entirely sympathetic, Shylock in the Jewish actor Warren Mitchell, and drew attention for the uninhibited sexuality of Lorenzo and Jessica.
AT THE RSC
If ever there was a time when we should be asking the questions about humanity, greed, the outsider’s place in society that are in this play it is now, in a time of decay. 20
Race, Bigotry, and Alienation
The wrong question—“is it anti-Semitic?”—is always asked of
The Merchant of Venice
. The answer is: “only as far as is strictly necessary.” Ask another question—“is it offensive?”—and the answer is an unequivocal “yes.” 21
Whatever their race or religion, Jewish or Christian, Muslim or Hindu, a member of the audience watching
The Merchant of Venice
in modern times is going to feel slightly uncomfortable in their seat. There is no doubt that Shakespeare’s Jew is based on a stereotype, a vicious caricatureof a little understood and much maligned race. How does a post–Second World War director tackle a play that links villainy with religion without being accused of racism? The answer, more often than not, has been to make the Christian characters equally, if not more, horrible than the Jew who decides their fate. Is this an imposition of modern times? Does it distort the nature of Shakespeare’s original intention? The questions surrounding these issues have made
The Merchant of Venice
the real “problem play” of our times.
The playwright Arnold Wesker was compelled to give his opinion after going to see the RSC’s 1993 production directed by David Thacker, which proved one too many
Merchant
s for him:
The strongest evidence offered in support of the view that Shakespeare did not create a stereotype are those widely trumpeted lines which he gives to Shylock as special pleading for his humanity: “Hath not a Jew eyes? …” For [John] Gross, as for many others, it is a noble piece of writing. Not for me! Far from vindicating the play, the sentiments betray it—self-pitying, patronising, and deeply offensive. Implied within them is medieval Christian arrogance, which assumed the right to confer or withdraw humanity as it saw fit. 22
However, Shylock’s statement of common “humanity” is delivered with the express purpose of pleading his right to revenge, by very inhumane means. Taken out of context both this speech and Portia’s speech on mercy are wonderful statements of humanity; taken in the context of the play, however, they both echo with hypocrisy.
Shylock, unlike the Christian characters in the play, stands as an embodiment of his race. Common Elizabethan myths about Jews, which interestingly included the use of human sacrifice, of Christian blood, in their rituals, * have directly influenced Shakespeare’s characterization. The true offensiveness of this negative stereotype is evidenced when real Jewish beliefs are
Despite Charles Edelman’s assertion in 2002 that “given the sensitivity of the play’s subject matter, it is very unlikely that [a major feature film] will ever be made,” 19 a full-scale film emerged only three years later, directed by Michael Radford and featuring an all-star cast including Al Pacino (Shylock), Jeremy Irons (Antonio), and Joseph Fiennes (Bassanio). Where the larger-scale Victorian stage productions had attempted to recreate the splendor of Venice onstage, Radford filmed on location in Venice itself, using dark alleys, open promenades, and claustrophobic courtrooms to impressive effect. Setting the production in the Venice of Shakespeare’s time, Radford re-created the historical realities of Jewish life in the city, with Jews forced to wear red caps and live in ghettos. On television, as well as the screened versions of Miller and Nunn’s National productions, the 1980 version for the BBC Shakespeare series directed by Jack Gold offered a very human, but not entirely sympathetic, Shylock in the Jewish actor Warren Mitchell, and drew attention for the uninhibited sexuality of Lorenzo and Jessica.
AT THE RSC
If ever there was a time when we should be asking the questions about humanity, greed, the outsider’s place in society that are in this play it is now, in a time of decay. 20
Race, Bigotry, and Alienation
The wrong question—“is it anti-Semitic?”—is always asked of
The Merchant of Venice
. The answer is: “only as far as is strictly necessary.” Ask another question—“is it offensive?”—and the answer is an unequivocal “yes.” 21
Whatever their race or religion, Jewish or Christian, Muslim or Hindu, a member of the audience watching
The Merchant of Venice
in modern times is going to feel slightly uncomfortable in their seat. There is no doubt that Shakespeare’s Jew is based on a stereotype, a vicious caricatureof a little understood and much maligned race. How does a post–Second World War director tackle a play that links villainy with religion without being accused of racism? The answer, more often than not, has been to make the Christian characters equally, if not more, horrible than the Jew who decides their fate. Is this an imposition of modern times? Does it distort the nature of Shakespeare’s original intention? The questions surrounding these issues have made
The Merchant of Venice
the real “problem play” of our times.
The playwright Arnold Wesker was compelled to give his opinion after going to see the RSC’s 1993 production directed by David Thacker, which proved one too many
Merchant
s for him:
The strongest evidence offered in support of the view that Shakespeare did not create a stereotype are those widely trumpeted lines which he gives to Shylock as special pleading for his humanity: “Hath not a Jew eyes? …” For [John] Gross, as for many others, it is a noble piece of writing. Not for me! Far from vindicating the play, the sentiments betray it—self-pitying, patronising, and deeply offensive. Implied within them is medieval Christian arrogance, which assumed the right to confer or withdraw humanity as it saw fit. 22
However, Shylock’s statement of common “humanity” is delivered with the express purpose of pleading his right to revenge, by very inhumane means. Taken out of context both this speech and Portia’s speech on mercy are wonderful statements of humanity; taken in the context of the play, however, they both echo with hypocrisy.
Shylock, unlike the Christian characters in the play, stands as an embodiment of his race. Common Elizabethan myths about Jews, which interestingly included the use of human sacrifice, of Christian blood, in their rituals, * have directly influenced Shakespeare’s characterization. The true offensiveness of this negative stereotype is evidenced when real Jewish beliefs are
Similar Books
