Please I need to do the research again, the tutor I hire di copy a similar work from some website and give me trouble I got a zero. the professor gave me the opportunity to redo this.

British Villainlockd anti-Semitism in the ‘Merchant of Venice’

In the Merchant of Venice, Shakespeare inflexibly veers toward the demonstration of anti-Semitism, which makes the play one of the most critiqued after Othello and the Sonnets on the Dark lady. The principal antagonist, Shylock, and his cunning yet humiliated relation with the Christian world aptly embody the Elizabethan audience perception about the Jews living in England at the time. However, the research paper seeks to illustrate that while Shakespeare’s racist and anti-Semitic stance appears vivid throughout the text, it is a reflection of the development of English identity which this far cannot be distanced from xenophobic tendencies and anti-Semitism.

There is no doubt that the Merchant of Venice was a play on the triumph of good over evil. The challenge, however, was to whom evil is attributed. The development in the play points continuously to the fact that the darkness is incarnated in Shylock, who represents Jews and goodness in Christians who serve the civilized world; drifted apart from Jewish savagery. Shylock, the lead antagonist, is involved in vengeance ad hatred for the Christian, as is the same for the Christians as well. However, it is the usury that shylocks engages in, charging Christians exorbitantly and looking forward to their inability to pay back that stands out. The practice of usury, which Shylock involves in, was frowned upon as a Jewish practice that was far much removed from the norms and values of Christianity. When shylocks lend money to Antonio, he desires only the worst for him, a desire that is achieved when Antonio argosies delays in the sea. Shylocks apprehend the opportunity to exact his revenge and utterly refuse to forgive Antonio despite Portia’s plea for mercy. In the end, however, the Christians British world and word prevail over the cruelty of the Jews after Portia incredibly plays the cunning cards with Shylock.

Shakespeare paints the image of two nations with different ideals and believes living in the same land. The historical context of the play was a time when a Jewish physician was accused of plotting to kill Queen Elizabeth the great. It all proceeds from a free loan. It ends up being a protracted legal battle between Antonio, who guaranteed a loan for Bassanio, his friend, and Shylock, a Jew seeking revenge against Christians for all manner of insults as well as offences. Shylock, with an ulterior motive, includes a clause’ pound of flesh ‘in the loan agreement with Antonio, which come to haunt both of them at the end. It is, however, the utter depiction of the principal antagonist that has made several critiques to consider the work as highly anti-Semitic. Shakespeare presents Shylock as the devil incarnate. His desire to exact a pound of flesh proceeds from a cunning and cruel heart and hope to revenge against Antonio. The imagery of pound of flesh nevertheless was not unfounded, for it had roots in monstrous tales told of Jews by the Christians who often blamed Jews for cannibalism and all sorts of misfortunes including deaths. Shylocks hatred for Christians, however, is not far much removed from what the Christians felt about the Jews. It can be argued that the feelings were mutual. Shylock laments that his daughter has eloped with a Christian and robbed him. It is the Christian part; however, that makes him sadder. On the other hand, the Jews are presented as utterly condemned by the Christians.

The feelings of hatred are mutual between the two races. Shakespeare did not paint the feelings inadvertently. He recognizes that Jews are hated in the same manner they hate Christians. It is the same hatred that fuels anti-Semitism and historical events involving mass expulsion of Jews from countries such as Spain. Shylocks, for example, laments that he hates Antonio because he spits on him in the market place. He frowns that Antonio merely hates him because he is a Jew wondering whether Jews do not have a heart as well.

On the other hand, Christians believe that Jews are damned. Lancelot the fool for example when joking with Jessica, Shylocks daughter alludes to the motif of eternal damnation, for which Jessica responds that she had been delivered due to her marriage to Lorenzo. Shakespeare also appears to paint the image of an incorrigible Jew when in the courtyard; Shylock refuses to give in to all the pleas for mercy. Shylocks are highly driven by highly entrenched hatred that his vengeance is no longer driven by economic rather than personal pursuits for revenge against a Christians he hated. His hatred is further fuelled by the memories of her daughter eloping with Christians. The blinded nature depicted in Shylock was nevertheless not alien to Elizabethan Britons who felt that Jews were eternally incorrigible as a result of their role in the crucifixion of Christ.

Nevertheless, Shakespeare demonstration of anti-Semitism was not an isolated incidence, preferably one that was also firmly rooted in the historical developments. Shakespeare might have been influenced or instead was given a neutral account of the xenophobia that had wrapped the English society in the era. It was not uncommon for English literature of the age to paint the image of Jewish otherness. From the lenses of Merchant of Venice; however, the otherness appears so much engraved in the British amidst to the extent that Shakespeare was confident that the audience would not find the play repugnant. The British of the era had already apprehended the idea that they were the new Israel and concomitantly relegated the Jews to eternal damnation. It explains why the theme of doom is prevalent throughout the play, obviously depicting Christians as the chosen people of God who knew values of humanity such as love, forgivingness and mercy against Jews who derided in cursing, plotting and revenge.

Critiques of the play are however divided on whether the merchant of Venice should be read as a purely racist book. One school of thought postulates that Shakespeare made it very clear who the villain was, and for what reasons and for whose purpose. The Villain was the Jews, the reason for their vile treatment was practiced, such as usury, which Jews were fond of, and the intention was to please the British audience with what they already knew. The timing of the play might also have served to augment Shakespeare motive, and as a playwright who knew how to appease the audience with what they desired and wanted to see and hear, the play is not unlikely anti-Semitic. It is also not the same time that authors have been accused of feeding the audience with ideas they like. A perfect example is how the Wright describes Huston novel, an African American author. Wright speaks of the author as one revolving around the narrow orbit prescribed to her by the expectations of a white audience.

Some feel that Shakespeare inevitably rises above the anti-Semitic tendencies of his day and with a masterly unseen before, attempts to balance between both worlds in clearly chosen word. For the critiques, Shakespeare choice of words for example when Shylocks lament whether if Jews are hurt they would not bleed is a clear demonstration that Shakespeare sympathized with the hatred that Jews suffered at the hand of the British society. There is no doubt whatever the course took that Shakespeare tried as much as possible to paint that the hatred that occurred between the Jews and Christians were mutual, which delineates the text from the traditional conception of a racist author. If Shakespeare then rises beyond the intrigues of racism and xenophobia in his era, he must then be philosophically rallying against it. His inclusion of intermarriage for example and the allusion to the fact that Shylock would never commune with Christians points to the fact that other than racism, Shakespeare is more concerned with the persistence of two incompatible people in one nation. It is against the background that the play is to be perceived as seeking to mortify the development of the concept of British identity through stringent anti-Semitism.

In summary, the play merchant of Venice aptly shows how the development of British identity is refracted through the theme of anti-Semitism. The projection of Jewish otherness is prevalent in the play and is strongly codified in the character and thoughts of the principal antagonist. It is right to say that Shakespeare aptly captures the feelings of mutual hatred between Jews and Britons at the time and hence provides the groundwork for understanding how modern British identity developed from anti-Semitism. The ability by the playwright; however, to rise beyond the racial connotations and hatred that surrounded Jews at the time is phenomenal toward an understanding that most of the animosity was diabolical and unfounded is phenomenal.

British Villainlockd anti-Semitism in the 'Merchant of Venice' In the Merchant of Venice, Shakespeare inflexibly veers toward the demonstration of anti-Semitism, which makes the play one of the most critiqued after Othello and the Sonnets on the Dark lady. The principal antagonist, Shylock, and his cunning yet humiliated relation with the Christian world aptly embody the Elizabethan audience perception about the Jews living in England at the time. However, the research paper seeks to illustrate that while Shakespeare's racist and anti-Semitic stance appears vivid throughout the text, it is a reflection of the development of English identity which this far cannot be distanced from xenophobic tendencies and anti-Semitism. There is no doubt that the Merchant of Venice was a play on the triumph of good over evil. The challenge, however, was to whom evil is attributed. The development in the play points continuously to the fact that the darkness is incarnated in Shylock, who represents Jews and goodness in Christians who serve the civilized world; drifted apart from Jewish savagery. Shylock, the lead antagonist, is involved in vengeance ad hatred for the Christian, as is the same for the Christians as well. However, it is the usury that shylocks engages in, charging Christians exorbitantly and looking forward to their inability to pay back that stands out. The practice of usury, which Shylock involves in, was frowned upon as a Jewish practice that was far much removed from the norms and values of Christianity. When shylocks lend money to Antonio, he desires only the worst for him, a desire that is achieved when Antonio argosies delays in the sea. Shylocks apprehend the opportunity to exact his revenge and utterly refuse to forgive Antonio despite Portia's plea for mercy. In the end, however, the Christians British world and word prevail over the cruelty of the Jews after Portia incredibly plays the cunning cards with Shylock. Shakespeare paints the image of two nations with different ideals and believes living in the same land. The historical context of the play was a time when a Jewish physician was accused of plotting to kill Queen Elizabeth the great. It all proceeds from a free loan. It ends up being a protracted legal battle between Antonio, who guaranteed a loan for Bassanio, his friend, and Shylock, a Jew seeking revenge against Christians for all manner of insults as well as offences. Shylock, with an ulterior motive, includes a clause' pound of flesh 'in the loan agreement with Antonio, which come to haunt both of them at the end. It is, however, the utter depiction of the principal antagonist that has made several critiques to consider the work as highly anti-Semitic. Shakespeare presents Shylock as the devil incarnate. His desire to exact a pound of flesh proceeds from a cunning and cruel heart and hope to revenge against Antonio. The imagery of pound of flesh nevertheless was not unfounded, for it had roots in monstrous tales told of Jews by the Christians who often blamed Jews for cannibalism and all sorts of misfortunes including deaths. Shylocks hatred for Christians, however, is not far much removed from what the Christians felt about the Jews. It can be argued that the feelings were mutual. Shylock laments that his daughter has eloped with a Christian and robbed him. It is the Christian part; however, that makes him sadder. On the other hand, the Jews are presented as utterly condemned by the Christians. The feelings of hatred are mutual between the two races. Shakespeare did not paint the feelings inadvertently. He recognizes that Jews are hated in the same manner they hate Christians. It is the same hatred that fuels anti-Semitism and historical events involving mass expulsion of Jews from countries such as Spain. Shylocks, for example, laments that he hates Antonio because he spits on him in the market place. He frowns that Antonio merely hates him because he is a Jew wondering whether Jews do not have a heart as well. On the other hand, Christians believe that Jews are damned. Lancelot the fool for example when joking with Jessica, Shylocks daughter alludes to the motif of eternal damnation, for which Jessica responds that she had been delivered due to her marriage to Lorenzo. Shakespeare also appears to paint the image of an incorrigible Jew when in the courtyard; Shylock refuses to give in to all the pleas for mercy. Shylocks are highly driven by highly entrenched hatred that his vengeance is no longer driven by economic rather than personal pursuits for revenge against a Christians he hated. His hatred is further fuelled by the memories of her daughter eloping with Christians. The blinded nature depicted in Shylock was nevertheless not alien to Elizabethan Britons who felt that Jews were eternally incorrigible as a result of their role in the crucifixion of Christ. Nevertheless, Shakespeare demonstration of anti-Semitism was not an isolated incidence, preferably one that was also firmly rooted in the historical developments. Shakespeare might have been influenced or instead was given a neutral account of the xenophobia that had wrapped the English society in the era. It was not uncommon for English literature of the age to paint the image of Jewish otherness. From the lenses of Merchant of Venice; however, the otherness appears so much engraved in the British amidst to the extent that Shakespeare was confident that the audience would not find the play repugnant. The British of the era had already apprehended the idea that they were the new Israel and concomitantly relegated the Jews to eternal damnation. It explains why the theme of doom is prevalent throughout the play, obviously depicting Christians as the chosen people of God who knew values of humanity such as love, forgivingness and mercy against Jews who derided in cursing, plotting and revenge. Critiques of the play are however divided on whether the merchant of Venice should be read as a purely racist book. One school of thought postulates that Shakespeare made it very clear who the villain was, and for what reasons and for whose purpose. The Villain was the Jews, the reason for their vile treatment was practiced, such as usury, which Jews were fond of, and the intention was to please the British audience with what they already knew. The timing of the play might also have served to augment Shakespeare motive, and as a playwright who knew how to appease the audience with what they desired and wanted to see and hear, the play is not unlikely anti-Semitic. It is also not the same time that authors have been accused of feeding the audience with ideas they like. A perfect example is how the Wright describes Huston novel, an African American author. Wright speaks of the author as one revolving around the narrow orbit prescribed to her by the expectations of a white audience. Some feel that Shakespeare inevitably rises above the anti-Semitic tendencies of his day and with a masterly unseen before, attempts to balance between both worlds in clearly chosen word. For the critiques, Shakespeare choice of words for example when Shylocks lament whether if Jews are hurt they would not bleed is a clear demonstration that Shakespeare sympathized with the hatred that Jews suffered at the hand of the British society. There is no doubt whatever the course took that Shakespeare tried as much as possible to paint that the hatred that occurred between the Jews and Christians were mutual, which delineates the text from the traditional conception of a racist author. If Shakespeare then rises beyond the intrigues of racism and xenophobia in his era, he must then be philosophically rallying against it. His inclusion of intermarriage for example and the allusion to the fact that Shylock would never commune with Christians points to the fact that other than racism, Shakespeare is more concerned with the persistence of two incompatible people in one nation. It is against the background that the play is to be perceived as seeking to mortify the development of the concept of British identity through stringent anti-Semitism. In summary, the play merchant of Venice aptly shows how the development of British identity is refracted through the theme of anti-Semitism. The projection of Jewish otherness is prevalent in the play and is strongly codified in the character and thoughts of the principal antagonist. It is right to say that Shakespeare aptly captures the feelings of mutual hatred between Jews and Britons at the time and hence provides the groundwork for understanding how modern British identity developed from anti-Semitism. The ability by the playwright; however, to rise beyond the racial connotations and hatred that surrounded Jews at the time is phenomenal toward an understanding that most of the animosity was diabolical and unfounded is phenomenal.

description Check New Text

41

Plagiarised text

Sources