Act 1 Scene 1

He has often been compared to Jason in the Quest for the Golden Fleece, namely a risk-taker.
Bassanio

Act 1 Scene 2

Portia as a character is an odd mixture of various traits. She is first presented as the ruler of
Belmont, clearly in charge of both herself and those around her. However, we soon discover that she
is not in charge, indeed it is "the will of a living daughter curbed by the will of a dead father" (1.2.21).
Portia's reliance on the wishes of her dead father therefore contradicts the image of her as
Belmont's ruler. Indeed, like many of the women in Shakespeare's plays, she will be unable to alter
the plot around her as long as she is a woman. It is only later in the play, by dressing as Balthasar, a
man, that she will finally be able to really command events and manipulate the play.

Act 1 Scene 3

The use of a Jew as the central villain was not unknown to Renaissance comedy, as evidenced by The
Jew of Malta, a wildly popular play by Shakespeare’s contemporary Christopher Marlowe, which
revolves around a malevolent, bloodthirsty Jewish character named Barabas. Shylock, however,
differs in that his malice seems to stem, at least in part, from the unkindness of his Christian
colleagues. Exactly how to read Shylock has been a matter of some debate, and even the most
persuasive scholars would be hard-pressed to call him a flattering portrait of a Jew. One could
certainly argue, however, that Shylock receives far less of a stock portrayal than what was common
in Shakespeare’s time, and that, given the constant degradation he endures, we can even feel
something akin to sympathy for him.

At the heart of any sympathy we might feel for Shylock lies the fact that the bonhomie and good
nature that so mark Antonio’s appearance with Bassanio disappear, and his treatment of Shylock is
unexpectedly harsh and brutal. Even though Bassanio and Antonio require a favor from Shylock,
Antonio’s is still a tone of imperious command, and his past, present, and future attitude toward
Shylock is one of exceptional contempt. Shylock vividly illustrates the depth of this contempt,
wondering aloud why he should lend Antonio money when Antonio has voided his “rheum,” or spit,
on Shylock’s beard, and he kicked Shylock as he would a stray dog (I.iii.113–114). The repeated
mention of spittle here sharply differentiates Antonio’s Venice, where even shipwrecks seem like
spice-laden dreams, from Shylock’s, where the city is a place of blows, kicks, and bodily functions.
Without these details, Antonio’s haughty attitude toward Shylock could easily be forgiven, but the
very visceral details of spit and kicks show a violent, less romantic side to Antonio, and our
sympathies for him cannot help but lessen.

Though the Christian characters of The Merchant of Venice may view Jews as evil, Shylock does not
see himself in that way. His views of himself and others are rational, articulate, and consistent. Also,
Shakespeare’s other villains are generally more deceitful, passing themselves off as loving and
virtuous Christians while plotting malevolently against those around them. Shylock, on the other
hand, is an outcast even before the play begins, vilified and spat upon by the Christian characters.
Shylock’s actions are relatively open, although the other characters misunderstand his intentions
because they do not understand him. – Different from other villain in other Shakespeare plays

Indeed, Shylock understands the Christians and their culture much better than they understand him.
The Christian characters only interact with Shylock within a framework of finance and law—he is not
part of the friendship network portrayed in Act I, scene i. As we see more of Shylock, he does not
become a hero or a fully sympathetic character, but he is an unsettling figure insofar as he exposes
the inconsistencies and hypocrisies of the Christian characters. Shylock never quite fits their
descriptions or expectations of him. Most significantly, they think he is motivated solely by money,
when in fact his resentment against Antonio and the other Christians outweighs his desire for
monetary gain.

His words are controlled but carry a cold menace that silences Antonio at once. At the phrase "You
call me misbeliever, cutthroat dog," Shylock reveals to us that Antonio did "void your rheum upon
my beard / And foot me as you spurn a stranger cur / Over your threshold!" This is a vivid dramatic
change, climaxing in his taunting lines: "Hath a dog money? Is it possible / A cur can lend three
thousand ducats?"

Antonio and Shylock are diametrical opposites. Shylock is cunning, cautious, and crafty; he belongs
to a race which has been persecuted since its beginnings. As a Christian, Antonio is easy-going,
trusting, slightly melancholy, romantic, and naive. Shylock trusts only in the tangible — that is, in the
bond. Antonio trusts in the intangible — that is, in luck. Here, Shylock seems almost paranoid and
vengeful, but on the other hand, Antonio seems ignorantly over-confident — rather stupid because
he is so lacking in common sense.

It is necessary to focus on the conflict between the Christians and the Jews throughout this play.
Although the twentieth century has altered the way western civilization portrays the Jew in The
Merchant of Venice, the compelling character of Shylock still disturbs and entices his audience.
Shylock has historically been portrayed as a comic character, and in Shakespeare's day would have
dressed quite differently from the other characters in order to distinguish himself from the
Christians. The image of Shylock changed rapidly over the years, first making him a villain in the
1700s, a man to be pitied in 1814, and finally a tragic character in 1879.

Shakespeare draws on Francis Bacon's statement, "It is against nature, for money to beget money,"
when he portrays the Christians as unselfish givers of all they have. Shylock defends his taking of
interest by quoting the passage where Jacob is given the striped lambs. Antonio immediately rejects
this as nonsense, asking, "Was this inserted to make interest good, / Or is your gold and silver ewes
and rams?" (1.3.90-91). Shylock replies that, "I cannot tell. I make it breed as fast" (1.3.92).

All the sheep imagery is on Shylock's side throughout, for he is fleecing the Christians, breeding the
ewes. He therefore mentions Jacob as his defense for taking interest, and we can note later that
Shylock's wife is named Leah, the same name that Jacob's first wife had. Shylock is also able to make
his money breed like sheep through the charging of interest. On the other hand, the Christians have
Jason and the Golden Fleece. This image is used in connection with Bassanio, the risk-taker, who
risks everything to gain everything. The same image will figure later with Antonio, who is
represented as a wether, a castrated sheep. Thus the concept is reinforced that Antonio does not
make his money breed because he refuses to charge interest.

•We interrupt this program for a history snack about the Elizabethan attitude toward money-
lending. The Church believed that interest should never be charged when one Christian loaned
money to another Christian. The idea comes from Deuteronomy 23:19-23: "You shall not lend upon
interest to your brother, interest on money, interest on victuals, interest on anything that is lent for
interest. To a foreigner, you may lend upon interest, but to your brother, you shall not lend upon
interest." Christians were allowed, however, to borrow money (with interest) from foreigners. Since
Jews were classified as "foreigners" in England, they were encouraged to set up banks when they
arrived in the country.
Act 2 Scene 1

Anticipating the prejudices that Portia and the other Christian Venetians hold, Morocco's talk of skin
color and red blood reduces human beings to meat, recalling the pound of flesh Shylock wants from
Antonio. At the same time, Morocco's words establish a basis for equality among all people.

Portia's explanation of the terms of her father's riddle shows the strict legal structure of the riddle.
By cutting off the scene here, before Morocco chooses a casket, Shakespeare makes Morocco's
eventual reading and interpretation of the riddle much more dramatic and suspenseful.

Act2 Scene 2

Although Launcelot has no specific complaints, he seems troubled by the fact that his master is
Jewish, or, as Launcelot puts it, “a kind of devil” (II.ii.19).

The Merchant of Venice does not derive all of its comic moments from the malapropisms and double
entendres of this odd father-son pair, but the humor here is more crass and vulgar—so simple that it
is hard to overlook and mistake. Seen in this light, we forgive things that might otherwise seem cruel
to us, like Launcelot’s shabby treatment of his blind and doting father. This humor is comedy at its
simplest, where laughs are derived not from quick wit but from confusion and foolery.

The clowns, though, were great favorites with the Elizabethan audiences. Their parts involved a
great deal of comic stage business — improvised actions, gestures, and expressions — and they had
their own special routines. Launcelot, for example, would be given a great deal of leeway in using his
own special comic devices. Much here depends on the actor's "business" — mime, expressions of
horror or stupid self-satisfaction, burlesque or parody movements around the stage, and so forth.
This sort of scene is not written for verbal comedy (as Portia's scenes are); rather, Shakespeare
wrote them to give his actors as much scope as was necessary for visual antics. The dialogue itself is
not particularly witty because the comedy was meant to be mostly physical

There is more visual comedy when the two Gobbos confront Bassanio at line 120. Here, it is
suggested by the lines that Launcelot bends down behind his father, popping up to interrupt him at
every other line and finishing his sentences for him. This kind of comedy depends on visual and
verbal confusion, especially mistaking obvious words and phrases. Particularly characteristic of this
clowning is the confusion of word meanings. Here, Launcelot speaks of his "true-begotten father,"
and he uses "infection" for affection, "frutify" for certify, "defect" for effect, and so on.

First, Launcelot leaves Shylock's household for that of Bassanio; this prepares us for a similar, if a
much greater defection from Shylock by his daughter, Jessica, in the following scene. It also makes it
possible for Launcelot to appear at Belmont in the final act, where a little of his clowning adds to the
general good humor. Second, Gratiano announces his intention of going to Belmont with Bassanio;
he must be there to marry Nerissa and take part in the comedy of the "ring story," which ends the
play with lighthearted teasing wit.

This scene of cruelty, in which a child abuses his parent, foreshadows how Shylock's daughter,
Jessica, will abandon him.

Launcelot also brings up an important question about identity: Can one become a Jew, or is
Jewishness inborn and inescapable.
Prejudice against Jews is used to cement bonds between Venetians of different social classes. It
seems unlikely that Bassanio would have hired Launcelot away from another Christian. Launcelot
seems to feel no bond to Shylock despite having served him for years.

By applying the animal word "wild" to Gratiano, when most animal abuses are directed at Shylock,
Shakespeare narrows the gap between Venetians and Jews. That Bassanio is willing to take Gratiano
on as a companion, despite his evident bad behavior, shows the strength of social bonds among
Venetian Christians.

Act 2 Scene 3