The Medieval period, which is also known as the Dark Ages, was an era in the history of humanity where the knowledge of the world was sought in myth, religion and superstition. The period is infamous for incredible isolation and xenophobia, and it is known that people almost never left their villages during their lifetimes. Renaissance, on the other hand, was a period in which this cultural attitude was quickly being abandoned, and the Ancient Greek and Roman ideals were filling its place. Shakespeare lived and created during the Renaissance period in which despite all the changes, the cultural heritage of the Dark Ages was still alive and functional. This is why his plays are often filled with details which are suggestive of racism or anti-Semitism.
His play The Merchant of Venice is one example of such play. Even though Shakespeare’s apologists often defend him by claiming that there was no anti-Semitic intention on his part and that the play only seems to be anti-Semitic on a superficial reading, I believe that due to the cultural context in which he created anti-Semitism in his writing reflects the collective subconscious biases of the time. This is by no means a reason to reject his writing as racist. On the contrary, in addition to their enormous cultural and artistic value, we can use his plays to analyze the cultural setting of the late Renaissance.
The most famous example of Shakespeare’s anti-Semitic views is in the character of Shylock in The Merchant of Venice. In the play, Shylock, or as he is also referred to Shylock the Jew, is a Jewish usurer in the city of Venice. There is much debate around Shylock’s original physical appearance. Some authors hold that he was originally presented as a hook-nosed and slim old man. Others say that this representation is a nineteenth century modification caused by widespread stereotypes about Jewish usurers. We can all recall Dickens’ representations of Fagin and Stingy Scrooge who are both, although disputably, held to be based on the stereotype of the Jewish usurer. Many authors also find the origins of this stereotype in the Elizabethan theatre, precisely in characters such as Shylock; however, this claim is quite controversial. Nonetheless, it is certain that characters like Fagin have physical characteristics which are a lot more exaggerated than those of Shylock, particularly because Shakespeare does not dwell on his physical appearance at great length. On the other hand, his personality is not that disputable. He is very straightforwardly presented as a revengeful, materialistic and Machiavellian character, but he also has some positive characteristics.
First off, from what we can see in the play, it is evident that Shylock is a revengeful person. This is most easily seen when he is ecstatic about the prospect of ruining Antonio’s life because he had openly expressed his anti-Semitic views. In the following lines, Shylock expresses his joy about the prospect of revenge: it will feed my revenge. He hath disgraced me, and hindered me half a million; laughed at my losses, mocked at my gains, scorned my nation, thwarted my bargains, cooled my friends, heated mine enemies; (Shakespeare 56-60)
This act of Shylock’s has, for the most part, been the source of the debate around Shakespeare’s anti-Semitism. Some authors believe that since most of Antonio’s contempt towards Shylock was based on merely racist and nationalist views, Shylock’s will for revenge is natural and justified. However, I find this idea problematic because the kind of revenge that Shylock wants for Antonio is clearly disproportionate with the Antonio’s insult. What Shylock wants from Antonio is a pound of his flesh, which was stated in their contract as a guarantee that the loan would be returned. It is needless to say that such an act of retribution is unbelievably brutal and barbarous. In addition, from Antonio’s speeches, it is easy to conclude that what he really hates is the kind of business in which Shylock is engaged and not the fact that he is Jewish.
On the other hand, many influential authors hold that Shakespeare presents the case in the defense of Shylock. “Shakespeare put one of his most eloquent and best known speeches into the Jewish “villain’s” mouth” (Falk 2). The speech in question goes as follows: I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, heal’d by the same means, warm’d and cool’d by the same winter and summer, as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die?And if you wrong us, do we not revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that. (Shakespeare 4.1 58-68)
In this speech, Shylock makes a comparison between Jews and Christians suggesting that there is no difference, and that humans are humans no matter the color, race or religion. Some authors believe that this is enough to conclude that Shakespeare intended Shylock to be the most ethical character in the play. However, such an account disregards the fact that he is engaged in an immoral business and that he is revengeful and materialistic. The fact that he correctly sees racism and nationalism as wrong is not enough to compensate for the abovementioned negative traits.
Since we have established that Shylock was a negative character, we need to say something about the way in which that fact can be related to Shakespeare’s anti-Semitism. First off, it seems to me that Shakespeare held very ambivalent views towards the Jews. This is quite evident because we see that he does give his Jewish characters positive traits. We can see that Shylock is quite proud of his identity and heritage, and he is also not afraid to confront those around him if he realizes that they are wrong. What Shakespeare tries to present is the idea that Jews have quite different moral views in which an agreement between two people is something that cannot be broken. This is in contrast with the Christian view that people should forgive one another.
It would be possible to say that Shakespeare wanted to convey that message while remaining neutral towards it. However, the overwhelming cultural biases which were functional in England at that time simply had to project themselves in Shakespeare’s writings. To prove this, I will disregard Shakespeare’s intentions and talk about the way in which the play functions in the real world. When discussing the parts of a message which are unintentional, it is useful to consider how people react to it. Since most people experience negative feelings towards the character of Shylock, I believe that we should take that fact as a clue when thinking about Shakespeare’s subconscious anti-Semitism. In this light, I feel that we have to conclude that due to the cultural attitude towards Jewish people prevalent in Elizabethan England, Shakespeare expressed his anti-Semitic biases through characters such as Shylock.
Finally, when taking into account the historical context and the fact that only two centuries prior to his period, the English expelled all the Jewish people from their country, one can say that Shakespeare was fairly progressive in terms of his racial views. However, given today’s standards and the obvious reactions that people have towards the character of Shylock, I have to say that Shakespeare could not get away from anti-Semitic elements that pervaded the cultural setting.
In conclusion, in this paper, I have presented a view which is different from the usual claims that Shakespeare was an anti-Semite in that it holds that anti-Semitic elements were mostly products of unconscious biases and cultural conditioning. The view is also different from those that aim to reject any claims about Shakespeare’s anti-Semitism claiming that he only tried to present the prevalent stereotypes about Jews and then ridicule them. This account seems to be prima fascia false because the attitude that we have towards those characters is overwhelmingly negative. Finally, the fact that his works marginally reflect anti-Semitic biases does not make them worthless. Their artistic value is only greater because they can serve as a document about the culture of a certain period in human history.
Works Cited
Falk, Avner. Anti-Semitism: A History and Psychoanalysis of Contemporary Hatred. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, 2008. Print.
Shakespeare, William. The merchant of Venice. London: Printed for T. Witford, 1769. Print.