CANS 406 Lecture 6: 6. Merchant of Venice
22 May 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
The Merchant of Venice, Janet Adelman
-Bloom argues that the Merchant of Venice is Portia’s play not Shylock’s
-Shylock would be bad news if he weren’t funny, he should be played as a comic villain
-Argues we make the play incoherent by portraying Shylock as sympathetic
-But Shakespeare is completely capable of pushing the envelope so far that we get
to the edge of incoherence
-Is the play Portia’s or Shylock’s?
-Evidence of it being Portia’s play:
-Saves Shylock from death, making her good
-She prevails and saves the day – she is the clever one
-She winds up on top, twists the rules in her own way
-The action starts and ends with her – without her, borrowing from Shylock wouldn’t
have been necessary
-Shylock acts exactly how a Christian at the time would expect a Jew to act: cruelly,
irrationally, selfishly, and it is his undoing
-Evidence of it being Shylock’s play:
-Portia objectifies herself as a prize
-Shylock carries the thematic weight
-Lack of energy in fifth act
-The story seems like an interlude in Portia’s life, but the end of Shylock’s
-Both Shylock and Portia seek recognition as humans rather than a dog or a prize, but the way in
which Portia goes about seeking recognition is more successful than Shylock’s, and Shylock’s
method leads to his undoing
-Both Shylock and Portia have presence, Shakespeare doesn’t hold them back at all
Adelman
-Jews provide an interesting test case for the nation as it shifts from land boundaries to kinship
boundaries – Shylock uses blood to describe his relationships
-The play produces an idea of nationhood that is blood-based, according to Adelman
-Counter – nationhood in this play might not be so blood-based
-Shylock is an English name, giving us a new angle on the play
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
