Act I scene ii,

PseudoErasmus reminds us Message #74 " Then the waiting

woman [Nerissa] fires a battery of maxims, the gist of which is that

the ideal in all things is the mean between two extremes."

This subtle statement also is a powerful message in the play. I notice that Antonio, in the first act, fluctuates between extremes -- first he is unnaturally melancholy, and then he is in a riotous rage with Shylock. Antonnio makes his regretable and disasterous decision to put up a pound of flesh when he is in one of his extreme states of mind. In this state he is easily manipulated by Shylock who uses an offhand jest to talk him into exposing himself to great danger. Antonio has set himself up, unnecessarily, for calamity when he made a fateful decision when in an extreme state of mind. He should have been there to listen to Nerissa's advice.

Later on we also see Shylock hold to an extreme position that leads to disaster for himself. Shakespeare was subtley pointing out the wisdom of the Buddhist Middle Way philosophy.

CoralReef and nedfagan

I have had the pleasure of crossing swords with PseudoErasmus on the Religion thread back when it was interesting and on the now defunct History thread. My Message #87 was intended as a jest.

I can assure you that it is far more enjoyable to be attacked by PseudoErasmus, who uses his wit, than by persons who (perhaps in the the abscence of that very quality?) automatically resort to name-calling like "dumbass" and "moron".

In any case this thread is about the Merchant in Venice not about PseudoErasmus or myself. I am sorry that my attempt at a mild jest stirred up your emotions.

Message #93Indeed Venice and it's dependence on the trade in glass is analogous to Sodom & Gommorahs trade in salt. It is not the Biblical farming community, not tied to the values of the land. It depends on commerce like Sodom did and Shylockcould be a fourteenth century version of Lot. The motto of the town of Venice which I will now misquote is "Exploit the sea and leave the land alone."

pellenilsson -- Message #102

My emotions ARE delicate and volatile. I am one of the Fray's most notorious hysterics.

I accept your explanation. Sardonic humor is always a risk, absent recent previous posts to provide context.

I do, however, question your artistic judgement. You lean toward parochialism, IMO. I thought "precious moron" was rather fun.

Message #100The Flying Lizzards? "I want the money, honey" was their hit cover of the Beatle tune.

Great Khan:"'your prophet the Nazarite', by which Shylock refers to Christ, is an epithet used in Matthew 2:23 by Jews who refuse to acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah."

Interesting observation, I knew witches in Salem, Massachusetts that always refered to Jesus as "The Pale Galilean" a reference to his white appearance in chistian artwork and it's inconsistency with his desert home. The reluctance to refer to Jesus as the christ is common among infidels. I share that feeling myself. Shakespeare had a real understanding of the non christian mentality. Along with the Bacon rumors he might be accused of plagarizing a Jewish author.

Godlessclif,

Message #103

Symbology is literally charged with meaning; your reference to salt, Soddom and Gomorrah, Lot and his wife, is more apt than you may realize.

From a metaphysical (mystical) point of view, salt is a very earthy symbol. Salt equates with the idea of selfhood and reminds mankind of the need to have the self retain the savor (Matt. 5.13) of its Divine Source in preference to the crystallization of identity with the Sodom and Gomorrah of materiality indicated in the historical figure of Lot's wife ( Gen. 19.26).

Shylock, who built his identity with a framework of materialism, cared more about his bags of ducats than his daughter, cared more about revenge than noble friendship, was in constant contrast with Portia -- who built her identity within a spiritual framework e.g., her selfless willingness to give up her money to rescue Bassanio's friend in need, her spiritual willingness to be ( ostensibly) merciful and show forgiveness -- is a latter version of Lot's wife who was crystalized into a pillar of salt.

As was usually the case, IMO, Shakespeare was reinforcing subtle Biblical messages in this play.

FrankieLaine (100) : You ask you would be best suited to sing "The Merchant of Venice" theme. Why, YOU, of course!

Well, I am going to jump the gun here and start with Act II:

Act II, scene I

This scene has a nice symetry with the ending of Act I. Act I ends with the Venetian friends exiting to complete "this merry bond" ( I.iii 170) at the notary's office. As they exist, the Prince of Morrocco enters, dressed all in white, along with Portia and Nerissa. Since there is no break in the action, the audience cannot help but see the relationship of this scene with its predecessor. The Prince, whose dark complexion is emphasized by his contrasting costume, immediately begs that he not be judged by his outward appearance. Unlike Antonio, he is conscious of the tricks Fortune can play ( 36-38). And Portia makes no effort to deceive him about the seriousness of the bargain he is about to enter into (38-42). Thus the two stories are knit together by related ideas as well as common characters; the relationship is made plain when Portia and Morocco exit to prepare for the decisive act, as did Antonio and Bassanio in the preceeding scene. The theme of false appearances and inner reality is touched on here with the Prince of Morrocco, and is reinforced again more forcefully in the next scene.

Act II. scene ii,

The stage is immediately taken by Laucelot, the Clown, and he identifies himself at once as Shylock's servant. He performs a lengthy and hilarious routine, debating with his good and evil angels about leaving Shylock's employ. His sililoquy is full of blunders and malapropisms, but it is not unrelated to one of the principal themes of the play. Lines 33-113 extroploates in action this farcical version of the problem: Old Gobbo can be decieved because he is physically blind, as other characters are spiritually blind through self-delusion and false values. There is even a foretaste of the courtroom scene as Launcelot, having convinced his father that his son is dead, has some difficulty escaping from his own trap (88).

The comic problem resolved, Bassanio enters with several young men. It is evident that Antonio has signed Shylock's bond, since Bassanio is preparing for his trip to Belmont. In lines 114-65 the Gobbos accost him and beg that Launcelot may become his servant. Bassanio accepts him and this marks the first of Shylock's losses in the play.

Gratanio returns, and the business of the major action of the play resumes, for Gratanio, too, has business in Belmont. Bassanio adds him to the party, but only aftersome cautionary remarks which continue the play's concern for false appearance and inner reality (178-86). Gratanio promises to suit his behavior to the demands of the situation, and the friends part, planning to meet again at the bon voyage dinner.

i am coming to this discussion rather late; i hadn't read or seen the play in years so needed to refresh my memory. my recollections were limited to an admiration of Portia, letter vs. spirit of the law, a pound of flesh, three caskets, Shylock failing as a tragic hero, and the ability to recite Portia's speech on mercy in addition to sundry and various miscellaneous lines. what a great discussion thus far! lots of spit talk, but i don't think anyone posted this great line:

"You, that did void your rheum upon my beard,

And foot me as you spurn a stranger cur" (I.iii.118-119).

i have no real commentary on that line; i just liked it!

however, i do have some discussion on Portia. QueenBeverly in Message #52 rather glibly states that she has "always thought Portia was a bitchy sort...." without giving any substantiating details for such an assertion. Unlike tmachine inMessage #68 who gives a reason for her dislike of Portia and for calling her a prig: she doesn't change--she goes from right to right. phillipdavid was the first to mention the Portia as Bitch Interpretation in Message #47. His concerns centered around the diminishment of Portia's quality of mercy through both her harsh treatment of Shylock in the end, leaving him with nothing, and through the trick with the ring.

let us not forget that Shylock *does* want Antonio dead and his doinghis best to make it so. why shouldn't the law apply to him as well? so he is sentimental about his dead wife. and he "has tremendous feeling for his daughter" Message #86. (such strong feeling in fact that he cries, "I would my daughter were dead at my foot, and the jewels in her ear" (III.i.88-89).) these details just make him interesting; they do not make him innocent. it is not Portia who is harsh, but the law. Indeed, the final arbiter of Shylock's fate is not Portia, but the Duke who says, "thou shalt see the difference of our spirit,/ I pardon thee thy life before thou ask it" (IV.1.368-9).

Portia's ring trick is also necessary. CoralReef points out in Message #61 how Portia is the instrument ofAntonio's (arguable, i know) change. he must admit his wrong in encouraging Bassanio to break his faith. Bassanio, in turn, realizes his own error in breaking faith. Thus, marriage and friendship are relegated to their proper order and harmony ensues.

Re: Message #102

this little exchange reminded me of this passage:

"But hear thee, Gratiano:

Thou are too wild, too rude, and bold of voice--

parts that become thee happily enough,

and in such eyes as ours appear not faults,

But where thou art not known, why, there they show

Something too liberal" (II.ii.180-185).

aside to PseudoErasmus: i hope you can appreciate the restraint i had to use to not use any of the words from your Index Verborum!

I had written all this before, but went to previous

page and it disappeared! (in case anyone may happen

to be in this situation...):

FrankieLaine's computer broke and he won't be around

for some time. He asked me to thank Ernest for his

kind words.

'The world's a stage where each man must play a part'

I read TMOV when I was 12, but I didn't recognize

the line when Elvis used it in "Are You Lonesome

Tonight".

PhilipDavid: I don't see it quite as you say, the

world as a testing place. I feel it has to do more

with the mask or 'persona' each one of us has to use

in the 'world/stage'in stead of his/her real self,

until they both become one and the same.

I recently read about a book entitled Shakespeare and the Jews by James Shapiro in the New York Review of Books which argues that when Shylock demands a pound of Antonio's flesh, we only assume because we have seen or read the play so often that he isreferring to the area next to his heart. In fact, Shapiro states, it would have suggested to Elizabethan audiences castration, since "flesh" often meant that part of the anatomy. It is only made clear toward the end of the play where the pound of flesh is to come from. Castration, moreover, perhaps insinuates a negative feminization of Antonio that puts a sort of different spin on the punishments doled out in the play. Any thoughts?

thejackcat,

Two things :

You make an excellent point in Message #112 The law was harsh, the Duke had to uphold it, and Portia was just the law's instrument. The image of Portia, the exemplar of charity and mercy, being so brutal in the courtroom is hard to digest. But your explanation is perfectly right.

Message #111 Those lines you quoted didn't come from Act I scene 3, 118-19......you don't often spit and kick people do you?

Act 2 Scene 1

For a synopsis, see Philip David's Message #109.

1) What PD calls the "theme of false appearances", which was inaugurated in Act 1 Scene 3 with the contrast between Shylock's aside and his "kind offer", is laid on thick in this scene. The scene opens as the Moor makes a mock-heroic speech, in which, basically, he begs Portia not to judge him according to his appearances. Portia obliges by assuring him that she is not led only by "nice direction of a maiden's eyes".

2) This scene reveals that what a skilled ironist Portia is. Notice the desert-dry wit in her "reassurance" to the Moor: "Yourself, renownèd Prince, then stood as fair / As any comer I have looked onyet / For my affection" (20-23). Hahahahaha!

3) On the other hand, we are treated to an amusing caricature of the Prince of Morrocco. He barks that, in order to win her, "I would o'erstate the sternest eyes that look.../ Pluck the young sucking cubs from the she-bear /...mock the lion when ‘a roars for prey...." How can he not be a huff-snuff blusterer, and a severe contrast to the humble gentlemen of Venice?

Act 2 Scene 2

I will defer to PD's Message #110. A few items to supplement his commentary.

1) Notice Launcelot's erroneous use of the word "ergo" in [52] and [55]. In [33], he mentions that "he will try confusions with him". Couldn't "confusions" be a malapropism for "conclusions"? I have consulted several editions of the M of V, including the Riverside Shakespeare, but none gives us such a gloss on "confusions". In the Renaissance, a "conclusion" was often the term used to mean "syllogism". Is it not possible that Launcelot's use of "ergo" signifies a mockery of logical pedantry?

2) The principal purpose of this scene, besides introducing low comic relief, is to develop the anti-semitic imagery of Act 1, Scene 3. In the debate Launcelot has with himself, he arrives at a paradox: the devil himself tempts Launcelot to leave his master Shylock, but conscience counsels and servile fidelity suggests that he stay with Shylock, who is a kind of devil himself. Further, in 95-104, the idea of Jew as an ungenerous miser who maltreats his servant, is introduced.

3) Notice that until now, the M of V has portrayed faith as *virtuous*: Antonio's loyalty to Bassanio and Portia's to her father. In Launcelot's defection to Bassanio's household, we see an example of virtuous *infidelity* --- that is the upshot of Launcelot's "debate".

Act 2 Scene 3

In this brief scene, we are introduced to Jessica, Shylock's daughter. When Launcelot returns to Shylock's house to say goodbye, he finds Jessica alone. She talks of how sorry she is to see him leave and how his devilish merriment had relieved the tedium in Shylock's dreary household. She also asks Launcelot to deliver a missive to Lorenzo, who is staying at Bassanio's house. After Launcelot's departure, Jessica wonders aloud how sinful it is to feel shame for being her father's child. She avers, however, that she is completely alien to his ways and swears that she will marry Lorenzo and become a Christian.

In a way, Jessica is here shown as a serious counterpart to Launcelot, whose own moral conflict was given comic expression in Act 2 Scene 2. Like Portia, Jessica has a grave sense of filial piety. But unlike Portia and very like Launcelot, she is conflicted. Jessica's marriage to Lorenzo is another instance of virtuous infidelity.

Act 2 Scene 4

Gratiano, Lorenzo, Salanio and Salarino make plans for the evening's masque, a semi-dramatic spectacle featuring lots of music, dance, disguises and colourful proecessions. Scholars have supposed that an earlier version of the play may have actually included a full-fledged masque, a masque-within-the-play, which would have served a function similar to "The Mousetrap" in _Hamlet_. All the same, in the typical overstated Renaissance fashion, we are being told that the masque is a Symbol.

Otherwise, in this scene, the Jessica-Lorenzo subplot is advanced. The plan for their elopement: Jessica, having packed up her father's gold and jewels, will don a page's suit and be a torchbearer in the procession that night.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

The previous post was directed at PseudoErasmus.

OK> PseudoErasmus is doing a good job when he stays within the subject

he knows something about.

Carry on, boys & girls.

PseudoErasmus,

It's nice to have you back.

I must admit that I have read M of V four times in the last two years with my various eighth-gradrs, and I never noticed the point of "virtuous infedility" before. It certainly fits in with the larger ideas already discussed and being developed in the play, and I believe that Shakespeare was doing a little moralizing here. It is certainly better to hitch your wagon to a rising star than to keep it attached to a falling one, right?

It also occured to me that the subplot of Jessica and Lorenzo is, in a nutshell, a conventional plot for an entire romantic comedy. If I may jump ahead to scene vi, this is brought to a climax as the very masquers Shylock so despised appear under his "penthouse" (1), (that is, before the upper stage of the theatre). {I'll wait for further comment on II.vi).

These little scenes in act II also reinforce the idea of loss; Shylock is in the process of his second loss here (first Launcelot, then Jessica) and he is certain to be destined to lose more as the play progresses. This is happening at the same time his revenge and hatred are in the process of being fed. One thing leads to another; Shakespeare's moralizing is getting hard to miss here.

It's almost too surreal that chowyunfat shows up when we are talking about Shylock! hahahaha.

PseudoErasmus,

"All the same, in the typical overstated

Renaissance fashion, we are being told that the masque is

a Symbol."

Can you explain this to me? A symbol forwhat? And how are we told this?

Act 2 Scene 5

Launcelot runs into Shylock in the latter's house. The former master warns his former servant that in Bassanio's service, there will be neither "gormandizing" nor much sleep nor any luxury, as there had been in his service. Although by this remark Shylock implies that gentile temperance is tantamount to lack of generosity, he contradicts himself by calling Bassanio the "prodigal Christian". When Jessica enters, Shylock tells her to look out for the house while he's out for supper at Bassanio's, for he dreamt of money-bags, which he interprets as most inauspicious. Shylock is displeased when he hears from Launcelot that there will be a masque, and instructs Jessica to basically shut out the world from his housewhen the revelers come its way. Launcelot whispers to Jessica that she should be on the lookout for Bassanio in the revelry. After Launcelot leaves, Shylock admits that his former servant was nice enough but too lazy and given to overeating. He is glad that the clown could now help waste Bassanio's money.

1) The scene is full of word-play. Launcelot seems to parody Shylock's knack for repeating words and phrases, gleaned in Act 3, Scene 3, when he echoes Shylock's call for his daughter. When Shylock chides him, "I did not bid thee call", Launcelot replies, "Your worship was wont to tell me I could do nothing without bidding". Later, the former servant, committing the characteristic malapropism, substitutes "reproach" for "approach" [21-22]: "My young master doth expect your reproach." Shylock, true to form, retorts acidly: "So do I his." But Launcelot gets the last word in verbal brinksmanship. Mocking Shylock's superstitious discernment of a bad omen in his dreams about money bags, Launcelot claims, nonsensically, that his nose-bleed is an omen of the masque!

Act 2 Scene 5

[commentary continued]

2) PD should be excited by the words of Launcelot's whispered message to Jessica in [40-41]: "There will come a Christian by / Will be worth a Jewess' eye." PD argues that the M of V represents a conflict between the values of the Old Testament and those of the NT, with Shylock representing the "eye for an eye" cruelty of the OT. Is not the "Jewess' eye" remark an ironic inversion of that idea? The eye is used as the metaphor, not of punishment, but of love and reconciliation.

3) Shylock interprets his dream about money bags as inauspicious, but he doesn't realise that the omen is of his daughter's elopement. The fact that a dream about money bags should be the omen of a dissolution in family ties is telling. It's as though Shylock's witticism about money-breeding in I.iii.92 has come back, so to speak, to haunt him.

4) More possible insinuation of cannibalism in [13-14]: "...I'll go in hate to feed upon / the prodigal Christian...."

PseudoErasmus,

I don't know about that "Jewiss' eye" metaphor. The eye makes me think of losing an eye, just like she will lose her father by taking up with the Christian.

Shylock's next lines are also telling : "What says that fool of Hagar's offspring, ha?" Hagar is a reference to Ishmael, who was cast out of Abraham's home.

There is also something to Shylock's comments to Jessica to shut the doors after him, and bind them fast (52-53). It keeps the music of the masque at bay, outside. I remember a line later on by Lorenzo that Shylock "hath no music in himself", which contrasts with the closing scene where Jessica and Lorenzo are outside, with music as a background for Lorenzo's thematic speech about harmony maintaing the proper oreder of things in the heavens, in nature and in society. Shylock being a man averse to music is another signal to the audience of what a cold fish he really is.

Act 2, Scene 6

Costumed for the revelries, Salarino and Gratiano are waiting for Lorenzo in front of Shylock's house. They marvel at how Lorenzo could be so tardy to a rendez-vous with his lover. Gratiano concludes the conversation, which is full of proverbs, by noting that "All things that are / Are with more spirit chased than enjoyed". The cynism of this remark gives way to the exuberant romance of the union between Jessica and Lorenzo, in a scene reminiscent of the nocturnal trysts in _Romeo and Juliet_. Basically, Lorenzo comes up to the window to find Jessica, disguised in a boy's clothing, which she calls "shames", because she is embarassed. Jessica then hands over the casket full of treasure he has stolen from her father. Then there's some swearing of love, and the scene ends.

1) The Jessica-Lorenzo subplot is, essentially, at an end. Its basic purpose of mirroring the Portia-Bassanio plot has been served. Recall that both involve considerable enrichment for the males involved; that both women end up masquerading as men; both men profusely swear fealty and love to the women; and caskets are part of both plots.

2) Jessica's repeated use of the word "shame" is ironic. On one level, her shame is mere embarassment of wearing boy's clothes, which she dubs an "exchange" (of clothes). But this is a double entendre for what she probably considers to be the shameful deceit and betrayal of her father. She also calls the boy's clothes "shames". The irony is that all this shame is leading her to a condition of love, an "exchange" of filial piety to a Jewish villain for a uxorious fidelity to a Christian gentleman.

PHILLIP DAVID - Re: Message #128

Regarding music, Lorenzo's lines in question are:

--- The man that hath no music in himself,

--- Nor is moved with concort of sweet sounds,

--- Is fit for treasons, stratagems and spoils. (V.i.83-85)

I wasn't going to comment on Shylock's aversion to music until later on, in Act 5, because I thought it would be more interesting that these lines were a post hoc commentary on that aversion than that the aversion foreshadowed these lines. All the same, one thing a late 16th century or early 17th century Englishman would have found mean-spirited was an aversion to theater and music, which are combined in a masque. The Puritans banned theater (including masques) less than 50 years after the M of V was first staged.

Act 2, Scene 7

In Belmont, the Prince of Morrocco must now choose which of the three caskets contains image of Portia, as the condition of his being allowed to marry her. Each casket contains an inscription. a) The lead one reads: "Who chooseth me must give and hazard all he hath"; b) The silver one: "Who chooseth me gets as much as he deserves"; and c) the gold one: "Who chooseth me shall gain what many men desire". Clearly, (a) can't possibly appeal to the grandiloquent Moor, who will not take chances on mere lead. But he picks (c), because gold is becoming so noble and virtuous lady as Portia and because he reasons, rather doltishly, that there is a golden coin in England with an angel's likeness engraved on it. When he opens the gold casket, the Moor discovers a picture of Death, with a nasty but silly-didactic fairy tale message, to the effect that wonderment for lustrous outward appearance can lead men astray.

Not much to comment on here, except to say how terribly obvious it is that the bombastic and arrogant Prince of Morrocco would have looked down on the leaden casket and chosen the golden on. What's reflected is the age-old Christian (and other) belief that modesty is better than showiness, wretchedness is more deserving than splendour. Virtue is always encased in plainess, like Jesus. I'll return to the subject of the Three Caskets after Bassanio chooses the right one.

Note also that the Moor's rhetoric is full of commercial language,such as "hazard", "rate", "coin", "value" and "advantages". Maybe PD has something here. And lo and behold, the Moor is deceived by appearances! Theme! Theme! Theme!

PseudoErasmus,

Yes. Watching the Prince of Morrocco's downfall, as he interprets the inscription on one casket after another, I was reminded of Shylock's interpretation of the Old Testament story. Each had interpretations to accord to their own mistaken values.

Act 2, Scene 8

In Venice, Salerio and Solanio report on several events which took place in the entr'acte. Although Shylock suspected Bassanio of harbouring his daughter Jessica aboard his ship bound for Belmont, the ship had already left Venice. Antonio swore that Jessica and his lover were not aboard, and the Duke of Venice learned that they had been seen together in a gondola. Salanio then cruelly describes Shylock's reaction to his daughter's betrayal. What he describes is the "passion so confused" of the "dog Jew", a jumble of short exclamations alternating between screams about his daughter and screams about his fortunes. The point of the quick alteration between daughter and ducats is that Shylock supposedly cares more about his ducats than about his daughter. Salerio describes how "...all the boys in Venice follow(ed) him / Crying his stones, his daughter, and the ducats." Here, "stones" is a lewd double entendre, meaning both the gems Shylockhas lost as well as testicles he has figuratively lost.

Salanio, changing the subject, mentions that he has received report of a Venetian ship which foundered in the English Channel. He hopes that the ship is not Antonio's. Salerio and Salanio agree that, because Antonio is such a gentle fellow, they will have to be delicate in breaking the news about the ship. Then Salerio relates the story of how Bassanio and Antonio parted, using it to illustrate how generous Antonio is. Though Bassanio promised to return to Venice quickly from his expedition to Belmont, Antonio urges him to take all the time in the world and that he should not worry about Shylock's bond. This sketch of Antonio's generosity and amiability is obviously, even mechanically, juxtaposed with Shylock's more passionate and confused behaviour. The juxtaposition is starker for the fact that all the events are related second-hand.

Act 2, Scene 9

In this perfectly predictable and boring scene, the Prince of Aragon takes the Three Caskets Challenge. Suffice it to say the guy doesn't choose the right casket. He chooses the silver one, which discloses a portrait of a blinking idiot.

1) Note that the inscription on the silver casket - "Who chooseth me shall get as much as he deserves" - was what motivated Aragon to choose it. In effect, he suffered from the folly and sin of presuming to judge his own worth, something Portia says as much. Another theme! Portia had earlier referred to herself as "worthless self". Theme! The virtue of humility.

2) Aragon eschews the gold casket explicitly because, he says, it is folly to judge by appearance alone. Only the "barbarous multitudes" are prone to this folly. Another theme! Pride in one's wisdom, rather foolish wisdom. Cf. Gratiano's little satirical sketches about old men in Act 1 Scene 1.

3) Aragon's metaphor the above-mentioned folly is the martlet, a bird which builds its nest on the outside of buildings. There is in Macbeth a much more famous reference to a martlet, betokening a graver case of foolish security and wisdom:

--- ..................................This guest of summer,

--- The temple-haunting martlet, does approve

--- By his loved-mansionry that the heaven's breath

--- Smells wooingly here. No jutty, frieze,

--- Buttress, nor coign of vantage, but this bird

--- Hath made his pendent bed and procreant cradle.

--- Where they most breed and haunt, I have observed

--- The air is delicate. (Macbeth, I.vi.4-11)

the jackcat, #112,

I think Portia is bitchy because she's always *trying* Bassanio's love. The ring exchange is all about a woman's jealousy of men's lives when without them and totally unnecessary. She needs no proof of Bassanio's love and,as a joke, it's just cruel..As far as her being right, she can be bitchy and still be right..

I'm enjoying the exchange about the masque and appearances deceiving us. Perhaps Shylock's appearance of cruelty, meanness, and greed deceive as well? After allhis grief over the loss of his wife and daughter seems quite real.(even the interjections over his moneybags seem almost perfunctory)

Act II Scene 8: We don't see Shylock saying the words, we see the report of two wiseguys who freely admit their dislike for him. Shakespeare was fishing for laughs here. But the text is ambiguous, and can be interpreted otherwise.

Caulfield - Re: Message #136

As I said, however, the words of *both* Shylock and Antonio are reported by these two same "wiseguys". So I fail to see what the significance is in your pointing out that "we don't see Shylock saying the words". The reportage - as opposed to the enactment - of the events in question is, IMO, primarily to contrast Antonio and Shylock. How is the text ambiguous, and how else can the text be interpreted?

Act 3, Scene 1 --- Synopsis

Salanio and Salerio are once again discussing the fortune of Antonio's ships. The news are not good: Antonio has probably lost a ship in the English Channel. Salerio hopes that the rumour is false and compares Report (or rumour) to a lying gossipy bar-hag who drinks ale and prattles about how she weeps for her dead third husband. But Salanio is convinced that the ship is lost. At this moment, Shylock, who for these two is a devil incarnate in a Jew's likeness, appears.

Shylock accuses these two of complicitity in his daughter's elopement. Salerio happily confesses to being aware of the plans in advance, and Salanio offers that Shylock must have known that a daughter, like a bird fledged, was wont to leave its dam. Shylock, true to clever form, retorts that, well, she is damned. Indignant and aggrieved, Shylock turns suddenly to cry incredulously, "My own flesh and blood to rebel!" Then Salanio taunts him by deliberately misconstruing the exclamation as evidence of sexual excitement. (Very cruel but VERY amusing!) After Shylock corrects the misimpression, Salanio replies that "there is more difference between thy flesh and hers than between jet and ivory".

The conversation turns to the fate of Antonio's ships. Shylock announces that Antonio is quite bankrupt and that he should "look to his bond", for Shylock intends to wreak vengeance for the past. When Salanio suggests that Shylock must be jesting, for a pound of flesh is good for nothing, the Jew assures that he is quite earnest.

Act 3, Scene 1 --- Synopsis [continued]

Then Shylocks bursts into the speech that has made him famous. He will use the pound of flesh if for nothing other than fish-bait. It will feed his revenge. He recounts the wrongs and injuries Antonio hasinflicted upon him. "Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions?.....If you prick us, do we not bleed?....." Shylock ends by proclaiming that revenge is his motive, his desire, his longing.

Salanio and Salerio leave, whose presence is required by Antonio, just as a friend of Shylock's, the Jew Tubal, enters to bring news of Jessica. Tubal offers that he often heard of Jessica in Genoa but was unable to find her. Shylock bewails plaintively that huge sums of his money are being spent by Jessica as well as in his search for her. To what end? No satisfaction, no revenge, nothing. He would rather that his daughter were dead at his feet, bejewelled in a coffin. As far as he is concerned, the curse never fell upon the Jews until now, when he has lost his fortune.

Then Tubal proceeds to mix news of Antonio's misfortunes with news of Jessica. Good news alternate with the bad, sending Shylock now to highs of vengeful glee, now to lows of sullen lamentation. The intelligence that another of Antonio's ships has run aground near Tripoli has Shylock beaming. But Jessica's expenditure of 80 ducats in Genoa returns him to despondency. Shylock is then cheered up once again by Tubal's report that Antonio's other creditors are convinced of his bankruptcy. But Jessica's sale of his wife's ring (for a monkey) horrifies him, only to be confirmed in his hatred for Antonio. Shylock instructs Tubal to send for an officer who would arrest Antonio once the bond is due.

Act 3, Scene 1 --- Commentary

1) Note that Report is a variant name for Rumour or Fame, the classical personification of news in general. This conceit, which compares the "gossip Report" to an Elizabethan tavern crone, primarily so thatthe audience remember it later on, when they discover that Antonio's ships had never been in any real danger at all. Antonio's misfortunes are an important part of the plot contrivance. His ships *must* be delayed or thought lost, in order for the trial to take place and the plot to move forward inexorably to its happy conclusion. But the general-all-around happiness of the end requires that Antonio's bad news had been premature. The conceit, therefore, exists to paper over this contrivance. The muddle was all thanks to the fatuous lying whims of the goddess Fame!

2) The depiction of the "dual" Shylock - buffoon and villain - is developed here. In Act 1 Scene 3, Shylock's constant repetition of words and phrases made him appear both eccentric and threatening. And in the "passion so confused" of Act 2 Scene 8, he was portrayed as both ridiculous and concerned more for his money than for his daughter. In this scene, Shylock experiences constant and rapid shifts in mood. His jerky motions alternating between despair and vindictive triumphalism suggest an emotional instability both comic and sinister.

3) In Message #86, Caulfield instances the "Hath not a Jew eyes?" speech as evidence for Shylock's humanity and complexity. But one can also read the speech as supporting the play's theme of "deceptive appearances". Shylock's argument for his humanity and essential sameness with others is based entirely on physical factors. These are, the playright might be saying, mere appearances. Shylock and the other characters are the same on the outside, but vastly different on the inside. Shylock supposedly lacks the gentile ways, and the constant pun on the

TAWANG --- Re: Message #115

James Shapiro's _Shakespeare and the Jews_ is reviewed in the June 12, 1997 issue of _The New York Review of Books_. According to the review, the book argues that, until the trial scene, the Elizabethan audiencewould not have known where on Antonio's body the pound of flesh was to be extracted from. In fact, the audience may have interpreted "flesh" to refer to the sexual organs. This argument rests on the following observations:

1) In the Leviticus of the Geneva Bible that was in use at the time, "flesh" is consistently used to mean "penis".

2) In Alexander Silvayn's _The Orator_, the probable source of _The Merchant of Venice_, the bond refers explicitly to "privy members".

The article goes on:

"Shapiro subtly relates this to Saint Paul's redefinition of religious identity, a passage crucial to Christian understanding of the meaning of religious identity....: 'He is not a Jew which is one outward, neither is the circumcision, which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Jew which is one within, and the circumcision is of the heart.' [Romans 2:28-29] Saint Paul moves the true significance of the circumcision from a visible sign to the an invisible one, from the penis to the heart, from the outside to the inside."

This intepretation of Antonio's "pound of flesh" actually adds fuel to PD's interpretation that _The Merchant of Venice_ is an allegory of the conflict between the Old Testament and the New Testament. Shylock wanted, symbolically, to "convert" Antonio to Judaism by contractual circumcision! Hahahaha.

Tawang in Message #115 goes on to say that "Castration, moreover, perhaps insinuates a negative feminization of Antonio that puts a sort of different spin on the punishments doled out in the play." This "feminisation" could ofcourse have something to do with Threadbert's interpretation in Message #97, where he says ---

"Some critics think the reason for Antonio's unhappiness is that Bassonio is getting married. They point to I.i.138-9 and other quotes to establish their proposition that he has more than friendship feelings for Bassonio."

This I assume Threadbert culled from Graham Midgeley's essay, "The Merchant of Venice: A Reconsideration". Midgeley argues, essentially, that Antoniois gay, and, therefore like Shylock, excluded in a way from the society he lives in. Recall that in the explosion of matings at the play's end, Antonio is conspicuously mateless. _The Merchant of Venice_, Midgeley argues, is about exclusion.

Of course, I think this is bunk.

Act III.ii Summary:

The increasing importance of the bond adds a new tension to the third casket scene, which might otherwise be anticlimatic. Portia makes it very clear that Bassanio is the only venturer to her taste, and their witty exchange (24-38) informs the audience that they are properly suited.

Portia, however, does what she can within the limiltrations of her father's will. She provides a musical background for the choice and an extended comparison between Bassanio and Hercules. (Hercules!?) Within the musical accompaniment are recurring words rhyming with "lead" which seem to be giving Bassanio a clue. But, the song is more cautionary than revealing, its theme the distinction between true love and mere fancy. Bassanio is more than ready to develop the theme and relate it to one of the principle themes of the play : the difference between appearance and reality, "The seeming truth which cunning times put on/ To entrap the wisest" (100-01). Knowing himself, he chooses the leaden casket and wins Portia.

-more-

continued:

Portia eagerly accepts her fate in *Venetian* terms ("accont," full sum," "converted," 155, 157, 167) and symbolizes their union with a ring wich will enable the comedy to end ( to use Gobbo's term ) in happy "confusions."

Gratanio and Nerissa now announce their betrothel, and, Lorenzo and Jessica arrive to complete the assembley of lovers. Salerio is there, also, with a message from Antonio. While Fortune has smiled on Bassanio, she has frownedon his friend; his bond, and therefore his life, are forfeit to Shylock. Altough Antonio asks nothing of Bassanio, Portia determines that the money shall be payed twice over and the bond redeemed. The wedding ceremony performed, bassanio and Gratanio areto depart at once for Venice.

Regarding Act II, viii

Message #137 and # 136,

I always wondered why Shakespeare lets two "utility" figures, Salerio and Salanio, give an exposition here instead of creating effective dramatic scenes. PseudoErasmus says it is to contrast Antonio and Shylock. I think it may be just to shift focus. After the resolution of the elopement subplot, the audience is to focus on the resolution of the casket story. Yet the suspense of Bassanio's trial will be weakened if the three scenes of choosing are played without interuption; likewise will they be weakened if too many incidents are allowed to intervene. Thus the spectacular scene of Morrocco's choice, with it's rich imagery, is followed by a narrative of events, in a lower key, which keeps the story alive of the bond (25-32) without seriously detracting from the suspense of the story of the caskets.

Thank you, PD, for the synopsis of this particularly uninteresting scene.

Act 3, Scene 2 -- Commentary

1) The contrast between the earlier suitors' choices and Bassanio's is childishly obvious - obvious in a fairy-tale-parable kind of way. The Moor, with his braggart superlatives and sensuous imagery, chose the lushness of gold. Aragon's argent decision was motivated by pride and complacency. Paradoxically but not so paradoxically, Bassanio found in lead the confirmation of the virtue of humility. Moreover, Bassanio uses his "second head" - which may mean intuition guided by his heart. Yikes!

2) The amorous language that passes between Portia and Bassanio follows many of the conventions of Courtly Love. For example, love is linked with torture. After Bassanio says he must be allowed to choose the casket, for he cannot bear the "rack", Portia playfully accuses him of admitting to love only in order to end torture. Bassanio's choice, subtly guided by Portia, is compared to a "deliverance".

3) The fact that Bassanio chooses the leaden casket, with the inscription "Who chooseth me, must give and hazard all he hath", signifies that he accepts the exigencies of what a Christian quest:risk, humility, sacrifice, self-abnegation. And this was foreshadowed in I.i.169-77, where he proposed to venture (quest) for Portia like Jason for the Golden Fleece. And this illuminates the purpose of Portia's comparison of Bassanio to Hercules in III.ii.57-60. The reference in question is about Hercules's rescue of Hesione from a sea-monster, yet another quest.

Act 3, Scene 2 -- Commentary [continued]

4) In III.ii.57, Portia claims, "she stands for sacrifice". My obliging Oxford edition has an interesting short gloss on this line: "stand for" here denotes both "occupy the position of" and "represent". If true, this is an important ambiguity. The first meaning is obvious in the context of the mythological allusion. Portia compares herself to the sacrifical victim. However, as a "representation" of sacrifice, she becomes an overt symbol of Christian love, whose core has been sacrifice in the sense of self-sacrifice. Portia places herself squarely in the ancient tradition of symbolising divine love through romantic love.

BevCrusher Message #135

well, i appreciate that you try to substantiate your assertion, but you do so with ill success. are you deliberately being silly? Portia does not "always" do anything with Bassanio; their interaction is limited to the casket scene outlined above, the court scene where Portia is disguised as Balthazar, and the final scene. and how can the ring exchange possilby be about "a woman's jealousy of men's lives when without them"? Portia is there all along! indeed, the ring incident *is* necessary. when Bassanio marries Portia, he enters into a sacred contract, a new covenant, if you will. note the language used when the ring is initially given to Bassanio:

Happiest of all, is that her gentle spirit

Commits itself to you to be directed,

As from her lord, her governor, her king.

Myself, and what is mine, to you and yours

Is now converted (III.ii.163-7).

Bassanio breaks this contract by mistakenly putting Antonio above Portia.He states,

But life itself, my wife, and all the world,

Are not with me esteem'd above thy life.

I would lose all, ay, sacrifice them all

Here to this devil, to deliver you (IV.i.284-288).

Bassanio must be made to satisfy his bond. he clings to the old and resists the new. but because love for Antonio prompts this mistake, not greed or revenge, justice is merciful. Portia gently teases Bassanio into ceding his love for her to its rightful place.

cont.

Antonio also acknowledges his error in encouraging Bassanio to part with the ring. in the final scene, he states,

I once did lend my body for his wealth,

Which but for him that had your husband's ring

Had quite miscaried. I dare be bound again,

My soul upon the forfeit, that your lord

Will never more break faith advisedly (V.i.249-253).

this corresponds to PseudoErasmus's point #3 in Message #140 where he rightly points out that Shylock's arguments for humanity are solely based on physical factors--he lacks the Christian spirit that Portia exemplifies and Antonio comes to recognize.

Re: "As far as her being right, she can be bitchy and still be right.."

i assume this is in response to my comparison of your post to tmachine's, who give this reason why she thinks Portia is a bit of a prig: "She starts off being right, and by golly she's still right in the end." are you saying that being a bitch doesn't preclude being right? i still fail to see howthat substantiates your claim that she is bitchy.

i admire Portia who is smart and resourceful, has a good head for business, plus a kind heart. i have no problem with her being right. that is as is should be. she is not a bitch; she must be a cat!

I have within my mind

A thousand raw tricks of these bragging Jacks,

Which I will practise (III.iii.76-78)

so do i win a prize or something for luring BevCrusher back to the fray?!

No. But jack, you've convinced me. Portia is a cat....<grin>

Message #142 I think it's bunk too, just mentioned it for the provocative possibility of it. It was from the Penguin Critical Studies of MoV by Graham Holderness (which I have since tossed aside in favor of actually thinking for myself! hahaha)

Antonio's differences with Shylock are mostly over Antonio's 'Christian charity' versus Shylock's occupation as a userer. Antonio lends out money freely damaging Shylock's means of living which he says in the court scene is tantamount to killing him. Portia does not represent the spirit of the law but rather fights back against Shylock with the letter of the law, pressing him to the letter of the bond and nothing more. She did make a plea for mercy but this was merely a hopeful thing on her partsince she was clearly prepared with her secondary line of attack.

I don't think Portia represented anything other than clear-minded practicality where the men Antonio and Shylock were full of pride.

Act III, Scene iii

Shylock sends out the jailer after Antonio, whose bond is now forfeit. Antonio wants to discuss the matter with his creditor, but to no avail. Shylock constantly repeats the phrase, "I'll have my bond!" and shouts down anything Antonio has to say. After Antonio tries to parley one last time, Shylock makes Antonio wish he had never called the Jew a dog before. In a series of sardonically witty references to being a dog, Shylock warns, "Since I am a dog, beware of my fangs". And in defiance and glee, he continues, "I'll not be made a soft and dull-eyed fool / To shake the head, relent, and sigh, and yield". Antonio resigns himself to this intransigence and predicts that the Duke of Venice will rule in Shylock's favour, in order to maintain the sanctity of Venetian contracts. He then expresses the hope that Bassanio arrive hastily to pay off the bond.

Two quick thoughts regarding III.iii,

We have an instant juxtaposition here of related events ( which may be the essence of Shakespearean dramatic structure). Antonio's unhappy fortune is represented right after Bassanio's happy fortune in winningPortia.

Another reference to the idea that Venice is the local of trade and law is revealed in line 30 ; Salanio assures Antonio that the Duke will not permit such barbarity, but Antonio knows that the Duke is bound to uphold the law, lest Venice lose its "trade and profit."

Summary of III.iv :

I know PseudoErasmus hates suffering through these trifling scenes, so I thought I'd save him the tedium.

The action returns to Belmont where a carefully inverted scene prepares the audience for Portia's entry into the story of the bond. She first invests Lorenzo with responsibility for the management of her estate, pretending to retire to a monastery until her husband's return. She next sends her servant to Padua to fetch "notes and garments" (51) from Dr. Bellario, a lawyer and her relative. Finally she reveals to Nerissa some of her true purpose. Disguised as men, they will follow their husbands to Venice, for sport.

P.S. why does Shakespeare always make all the Italian names end in "io"? It is an amusing affectation.

Act III Scene iv

1) The scene establishes Portia as more of a devious do-gooder than the boring do-gooder than she has been portrayed as thus far. Yes, her male disguise is another manifestation of the "false appearance" theme, which isquickly becoming tiresome. But more interestingly, she once again displays the sharp wit we were introduced to in Act II, Scene i. Her caricature of male vanity and swashbuckling brogadoccio in 60-78 is the work of a very clever wag. I would be extremely happy to report that this speech resembles in some way the Prince of Morrocco's bombastic speech in II.i, but alas, there is little resemblance.

2) PD likes to talk about juxtapositions and implicit comparisons in the play, and there seems to be one here. Note how much courtesy and pleasantry pass between Portia and her servants (Balthasar and Nerissa), and contrast that with the talk of revenge and cruelty in the exchanges between Shylock and Launcelot.

3) Another tidbit which might support the ridiculous interpretation of the Merchant of Venice as the castration-circumcision parable mentioned initially by Coral Reef. In 78, Nerissa asks Portia, "Why, shall we turn to men?" and Portia, surprised, replies, "If thou wert near a lewd interpretor!" If Shylock is symbolically castrating Antonio, then why not sex reversals for Portia and Nerissa? Well, that's preposterous, especially since the more likely interpretation of the exchange is suggested by I.iii.77. In Shylock's Biblical defense of usury, he uses the term "turn to" to mean "copulate", as when "...the ewes being rank / ....turnèd to the rams".

In keeping with the juxtaposition theme, I will summarize the next scene, III.v :

This scene is only a few lines of seemingly vacuous conversation; it serves as a buffer between the happy end of Bassanio's quest and the high events preparing in Venice. Involving Gobbo the clown (Launcelot), Jessica and Lorenzo, characters whose fate can have caused little anxiety to the audience, it has only the minimum of dramatic tension. The only purpose I can discern is as a dramatic buffer, preparing the way for the courtroom scene to follow.

Maybe one explanation of this scene is that time was needed for Portia and Jessica to change costumes? Or maybe it was needed to cover the passage of time, while the Belmont ladies journey to Venice -- but Shakespeare was never bound by the clock, and his audience was only aware of passing time if it was dramatically significant (as in the Winter's Tale). The relevance of the buffer scene is in the idea which is at its heart.

Gobbo, as has been pointed out, is a malaprop, yet in his attempts at wit and his misuse of words he associates himself with the play's concern with appearance and reality, mask and face, outward show and inward fact, letter and spirit. "How every fool can play upon the word!" exclaims Lorenzo (43) and fall to "quarreling with occassion!" (55), refusing to "understand a plain man in his plain meaning" (57-58). After Gobbo's exit, Lorenzo explicitly joins the semantic issue with imagery (and action) of disguise that has run through the play. In lines 64-69 he says, in effect, that if Gobbo's diction disguises what he would really say, many men of greater power and status deliberately choose to hide the truth behind false verbiage. And thus is the way prepared for the legal quibbling of the fourth act.

Act IV, Scene 1

It's the famous court scene in Venice. The Duke of Venice presides. The scene opens as the duke takes pity on Antonio and bemoans Shylock's ruthless. Antonio has been resigned to his fate and Shylock's revenge all along, since he understands the bond is legally binding. When Shylock enters the court, he is implored by the Duke to show mercy, for even the savage Turks and Tartars are not always closed to the idea. Using the not-so subtle pun on "gentile", the Duke proclaims, "We all expect a gentle answer, Jew". Shylock is nonetheless resolved to have his bond. Confidence in Venice's laws, he warns the Duke, is also at stake. And what of it if he wants Antonio's "carrion flesh" instead of thricethe amount owed, as has been offered by Bassanio? It is his pleasure to want the pound of flesh and not the money. When Bassanio objects that this is wanton cruelty, Shylock's repartee begins an exchange of wit between the two.

B: Do all men kill the things they do not love?

S: Hates any man the thing he would not kill?

Antonio intercedes to say that it's no use arguing with his creditor's obdurate "Jewish heart". The Duke asks, what mercy could Shylock expect when he himself gives none? Shylock indignantly replies that he should dread no judgment for he has done no wrong. Moreover, the pound of flesh to which Shylock is entitled is no different from the slaves these Venetian gentlemen owns. Why should they not show mercy for the slaves if Shylock must show mercy to Antonio? Shylock has duly and legally bought his due. When Bassanio swears plaintively that he should like to take Antonio's place, the disregarding Shylock draws his knife to whet it in preparation for cutting out Antonio's flesh. Unable to contain himself at this sight, Gratiano bursts into vitriol, complete with more comparisons of Jews and dogs.

Act IV, Scene 1 [continued}

Shylock, Gratiano says, sharpens his knife not on his "sole" but on his "soul". To this torrent of abuse, Shylock calmly retorts, "I stand here for the law". Then, Portia, disguised as the lawyer sent from Padua, shows up to plead the merchant's case. After she hears Antono admit that he signed the bond in question, she pronounces that Shylock must show mercy. When asked why, she delivers the famous "Quality of Mercy" speech.The true sign of grace is mercy, not the ability to dispense justice; power is nobly exercised when mercy is shown, not punishment meted out. Unmoved by the speech, Shylock demands his due. A plea for special clemency from Bassanio prompts Portia to argue that an exception from strict application of Venetian law would set a dangerous precendent for Venice. She then concludes that Antonio must surrender the pound of flesh if Shylock insists. When Portia asks Shylock to provide a doctor at his side, he refuses, claiming that no such provision is in the bond. Throughout this time, Shylock, excited that Portia is ruling in his favour, keeps crying "Daniel", a reference to the judge of the Old Testament who saved Susanna from the false accusations of the Elders.

Antonio bids farewell to his friend Bassanio, who aggrived and guilt-ridden declares that he would sacrifice all, including his life and his wife Portia, in order to save Antonio. Portia, still diguised, remarks that his wife would be none to happy to see her husband sacrifice her life so casually. (Gratiano and Nerissa, also married, repeat this Bassanio-Portia motif here.) Shylock would rather have his daughter marry a thief than any gentile, since gentiles seem so ready toabandon their wives.

Act IV, Scene 1 [continued}

Portia renders judgment: the Jew is entitled to his pound of flesh. But Shylock's elation is short-lived. Portia demands that not a drop of blood be spilt in retrieving the flesh, for that wasn't stipulated in the bond. If Shylock spilt any Christian blood, Venetian law would permit that his property be confiscated and he executed. Confronted with this, Shylock retracts the claim on Antonio's flesh and accepts Bassanio's earlier offer of three times the value of thebond. But Portia insists that Shylock can get nothing but the pound of flesh and the consequences. Abandoning his claim altogether, Shylock prepares to exit the court but is balked by the insistent Portia, who declares that any alien who conspires against the life of a Venetian citizen, will have his property divided between the state and the victim. The guilty party, furthermore, can be executed at the Duke's discretion. All this time, Gratiano has been howling and crowing in delight at the sudden reversal in Shylock's fortunes

Before Shylock has a chance even to protest, the Duke, in order to show what "difference of spirit" there is between Shylock and the Christians, spares his life and reduces the state's share of Shylock's property to a small fine. Antonio will still get his half. When Portia asks Antonio whether he would show mercy, he proposes to use his half of Shylock's property until his death, at which time Jessica and Lorenzo would inherit all. Antonio stipulates thatShylock must also convert to Christianity and bequeath everything to Lorenzo. The Duke agrees to the terms and threatens Shylock that, if he doesn't agree, he would revoke the pardon. Shylock of course agrees and asks to be dimissed.

Act IV, Scene 1 [continued}

The grateful Bassanio offers a reward to the lawyer, but the lawyer refuses, claiming that Antonio's happy deliverance is his reward. When Bassanio insists that the lawyer accept some token of remembrance, the laywer then asks for, virtually demands, the ring on Bassanio's finger, which Portia herself had given him. The distressed Bassanio tries to dissuade the lawyer, for the worthless ring has precious personal value for him. The lawyer pretends to be offended, accusing Bassanio of hypocrisy and ingratitude, and exits. Chided by Antonio for not surrendering the ring and persuaded that now he should surrender it, Bassanio sends Gratiano after the lawyer and the clerk (Nerissa in disguise).

Act 4 Scene 1: Commentary

1) One of the most blatant puns of the play is given another airing in this scene. When the Duke says, "we expect a gentle answer, Jew" [33], it's both foreshadowing Shylock's forced conversion as well as the intimation of PD's interpretation that the Old and the New Testaments are being opposed. Note that Shylock swore by the "holy Sabbath" [36]. Was not swearing in the temple proscribed specifically in the NT? If so, this may be a direct textual reference to PD's allegorical interpretation!

All the same, the Duke wants Shylock to show mercy, and Shylock's swearing seems opposed to II Corinthians 3: --- "Forasmuch as ye are manifestly decalred to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart".

A sidenote: at Portia's instruction, all her suitors also swear in the temple.

Act 4 Scene 1: Commentary [continued]

2) The speech [262-79] where Antonio bids farewell to Bassanio and begs him not to grieve, contains a gentle irony:

--- Commend me to your honourable wife.

--- Tell her the process of Antonio's end,

--- Say how I loved you, speak me fair in death;

--- And when the tale is told, bid her be judge

--- Whether Bassanio had not once a love.

--- Repent but you that you shall lose your friend,

--- And he repents not that he pays your debt;

--- For if the Jew do cut but deep enough,

--- I'll pay instantly with all my heart. [270-79]

It is ironic (in the dramatic sense) that Antonio should want Portia to judge his love for Bassanio, for not only is she present in the court to witness this display of love, but Portia is also playing "judge". But there is in the speech a less gentle irony, a bit of gallows humour. Antonio's token of friendship, the payment with all his heart, is about to be taken literally by Shylock!

3) Of course there is yet another irony in this scene. It is the legalism, carried to its absurd conclusion by Portia, which ultimately confounds Shylock's absurdly literal interpretation of the law. "....as thou urgest justice, be assurèd/Thou shalt have justice more than you desir'st", warns Portia [315-6]. When the Duke had asked Shylock what mercy he could hope when he showed none, the reply, "What judgment shall I dread, doing no wrong?" But the irony is more than mere comeuppance for cruelty, it is the visitation of justice.

Act 4, Scene 2

Not much happens here. Gratiano catches up with the lawyer and the clerk, Portia and Nerissa in disguise, and hands over Bassanio's ring and his own to the two respectively.

Act IV.i,

some additional observations:

Shylock must seem to have the upper hand because the playwright intends the audience to experience one of the the most satisfying of dramatic situations: the villian defeated by his own devices, the biter bit, or as the title of a popular play in Shakespear's time puts it, "Wily Beguiled."

After Shylock has ben engulfed in and defeated bu his own trap, it is the duty of the court to exercise the mercy so frequently advocated. The Duke and Antonio allow Shylock the use of some of his money and confer upon him the grace of Christian baptism. They thus, from the point of view of the play and its times, effectively answer Shylock's charge (III.i 65) that a Christian will avenge any wrong done to him by a Jew.

And with Shylock's submission the matter of the bond is happily resolved.

Message #165 IV.ii

The delivery of the ring is central to the events in the final act; it is, therefore, allowed a brief scene to itself.

When Gratanio overtakes Portia and Nerissa and hands Portia Bassanio's ring, there is an echo here of Shylock handing her the bond which will be his own undoing. Nerissa requests him to escort her, for this will be her chance to reclaim her ring, and thus continue the parallel between her romance and Portia's.

What is this, now? A dual-track plot summary? You guys have become derailed. Get back on-track!

I believe PseudoErasmus must be tired of Portia and Shylock, out of town, or unable to come up with an alternative interpretation opposed to the idea that _M of V_ is a play about The Old Testament vs. The New Testament.*

So I will summarize Act V:

The final scene resolves the action instsituted by Portia's gift of her ring to Bassanio, sums up and restates the unifying ideas of the play, and restores the tone of gaiety and romance that may have been threatened by the menacing presence of Shylock. The dialog between Jessica and Lorenzo establishes the time of the action as night; this must , of course, be done with words. Their dialog, though jesting, reminds the audience of the Elizabethan convention that night was a time of confusion, if not chaos and downright evil. Sounds of music from the house provide the text for Lorenzo's thematic speech about the harmony which maintains the proper order of things in the heavens, in nature, in society, and within the individual. It has its most domesticand familiar manifstation, of course, in the harmonious relationship of man and wife, the business of this act. Shylock, "The man that hath no music [i.e., harmony] in himself" (83), has been defeated; only the rings remain to be accounted for.

They are accounted for rather quickly. Neither Portia nor Nerissa is inclined to do more than tease, though the teasing touches on the major ideas of the earlier action: the inviolability of a bond, the difference between appearance and reality, letter and spirit (for example, 192-208). That the confusions are not more spun out, and that Portia refuses to tell Antonio how she has come by her happy news for him (278-79) are evidence of the playwright's purpose in adding this coda to the play. he would reesablish the world of Belmont as the final dramatic experience for his audience. Even Gratanio's concluding, characteristic, and rather adolescent pun is no more than the final tootle of a pennywhistle to signi

Even Gratanio's concluding, characteristic, and rather adolescent pun is no more than the final tootle of a pennywhistle to signify the play's end. The mood is unbroken.

*Actually, if anyone can articulate an alternative interpretation, PseudoErasmus can. This was just a gentle nudge offered in good humor to inspire him to return and finish this play off -- it has been languishing for a while.

PseudoErasmus, it looks like you'll need an extension beyond this weekend to finish this thread. (It also looks like enough people didn't pick up their Shakespeare this time around -- tsk tsk.) A few more days?

A fascinating new development in the world of Shakespearean theater:

A new Globe theater just opened up recently in London; a replica of the original "Wooden O" -- actually, a 20 sided polygon.

The experience in this theater willbe very different from any other, especially from what most are used to in darkened theaters in the US. The sky is open, 1000 seats curve around the stage, every audience member sees the action from a different angle, 450 groundlings standing in the yardcan rest their arms on the stage's edge.

According to Time Magazine, during the opening the audience members occassionally participated in the action as they did in Elizabethan times: when a French officer in *Henry V* suggested that "England shall couch down in fear and yield," an English patriot in the audience shouted back,"Never!"

PseudoErasmus. Where's PseudoErasmus? Has he abandoned his thread?

back
home