The Merchant of Venice is Not About Jews

The statement, “The Merchant of Venice is not about Jews”, while basic and not very expounding, correctly attempts to lay to rest one of the major misconceptions that some audiences have about the play, that The Merchant of Venice is in fact all about Jews.

In this essay I will endeavor to explain with further detail why this opening statement is true, with particular attention being paid to how some productions of The Merchant of Venice have been successfully produced with the Jewish aspect of the characters removed and how the play would still read just as well if Shylock were not Jewish, but a different race or religion altogether. I will also show that the other characters in the play would not treat the Shylock any differently than if he were not Jewish.

Finally I will show that the play is not about Jews or Judaism but is instead a play with themes and a plot that do not hinge on the fact that some of it’s characters are of a certain religion, and in this regard I will be looking at the key theme of justice and mercy in particular. To say that The Merchant of Venice is a play only about Jews would be a massive disservice to its author, William Shakespeare, “the world’s greatest playwright.”

If in The Merchant of Venice the central character of the Jew Shylock were to be replaced with a figure of another race or religion different to those of the Christians of Venice, the play would not lose much in terms of its themes or plot. For example if Shakespeare had chosen another minority group from which to draw the figure of the money lender, from which could inspire the same amount of derision from the Catholic Christians in his play, he could just have easily have chosen a Muslim, a protestant or even an atheist to play the role of Shylock.

For the main character device on which this play works is that Shakespeare has positioned characters representing a majority group against characters representing a minority group. In the case of the play’s setting of Venice, Shakespeare sets the Catholics of Italy against the outsider minority group of the Jews. However if he had chosen to set the play in London, Shakespeare could quite as easily have set London’s majority group of Protestants against the minority group of Catholics. This idea of the character of the money lender not having to be Jewish has been taken on by many theater producers and critics.

One run of performances of The Merchant of Venice saw the Christians of Venice played by an all Black cast with the Jews played by Caucasians, a different take on the majority versus minority theme of the play. Going back a little further in time, one critic even suggested in a study on the character of the Shylock that “for Jew, read German, time 1914-18, place, Belgium or France, England or America.” (Stoll, 54) Furthermore one production of The Merchant of Venice put on at the National Theater in 1974 did not concentrate on the religion of the Shylock but instead “emphasized Shylock’s humanity and saw the basic conflict of the play as economic, not religious.” (Whigham et al, 106).

Another strong argument that persuades us that if we were to take out or change references to Jews in The Merchant of Venice that the play would still work, can be made when examining the treatment of the play in countries where Jewish people are something of an enigma, such as in Japan.

To the Japanese, especially in the 19th century, Jews and the religion of Judaism would have been completely foreign concepts. So in one of the first adaptations of The Merchant of Venice on Japanese soil titled Zeni, the play is set not in Venice but in Osaka during the feudal era and the Shylock does not appear as a Jew but rather as a Japanese money lender named Gohei.

If the play had been a failure then there would have been grounds to argue that changing the character of Shylock from Jewish to Japanese was to blame, however “Zeni was a great hit both in the newspaper and on stage.” (Ryuta et al, 22) “In one revival, Shylock was called Yokubari Gampachi (Stubborn Tightfist), in that way identifying the character’s nature while hiding his western origin,” (Ryuta et al, 39) and this also proves that in the nature of the Shylock’s character being a Jew was not necessary in conveying the play’s central themes or plots. If being a Jew was necessary to the play, it would not have been as successful in Japan as Ryuta states it to have been.

For further proof that Shakespeare could have used another minority group instead of the Jews in The Merchant of Venice I shall examine the lines spoken by Shylock in Act 3, Scene 1.

Shylock:”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, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled 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, shall we not revenge?”

(The Merchant of Venice 3.1.57-66)

Now imagine that the play was set in South Africa during the years of apartheid, and instead of the dominant group of Christians as they were in Venice, we instead have the dominant group of White South Africans represented in the play. Now imagine that instead of Jews, the suppressed group in the play were represented by Black South Africans. In replacing the two groups, the play would then read something like this:

Shylock: “I am a Black man. Hath not a Black man eyes? Hath not a Black man hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? Fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a White man 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, shall we not revenge?”

(Adapted by Andrew Porteous from The Merchant of Venice 3.1.57-66)

As you can see from the example given above, the play still makes sense even when all references of Jews have been taken out and replaced with a different group, this time a different race. This shows that The Merchant of Venice can not be just about Jews if the play still works when all references to Jews in the play itself, have been replaced by something else. Paradoxically if the play were about Jews, the adapted version given above would have the audience confused, and would not make any sense at all, which it does not.

If Shylock were not Jewish the actions of the other characters in the play would also not change beyond recognition of that of the original version. For example if Shylock were merely an atheistic money lender, Bassanio and Antonio would still have sought him out for the loan of three thousand ducats, as it was against Christian beliefs to make financial gain from loaning money to people, and so Christian money lenders were few and far between. Therefore instead of seeking out a fellow Christian for the money, they would still have been forced to turn to a character such as the Shylock, although as stated he does not necessarily have to be a Jew.

The character of Lancelot Gobbo begins the play as the Shylock’s servant. By the end of the play he transfers his allegiance to Bassanio and gives as one of his reasons to his father Gobbo for leaving Shylock’s service as “for I am a Jew if I serve the Jew any longer.” (The Merchant of Venice 2.2.111-112) Taken at face value Lancelot’s remark could be seen as a stark fear of himself becoming a Jew, which comes across as a terrifying proposition, and some may argue as an indication as to how important the Shylock being a Jew is to the play. However it is not because the Shylock is a Jew that Lancelot leaves his service, rather that he can see advancement through serving Bassanio.

In modern terms it would be similar to someone changing employers for a better title, job or pay in the same field, but taking all their former employers secrets with them. Lancelot is simply “a sly rogue with an eye for the main chance,” (Moody, 13) and is not forced into the employment of Bassanio simply because he cannot stomach working for a Jew. “Lancelot’s journey (is) undertaken for his own benefit,” (Levin, 34) not to merely escape the Shylock because of his religion or the risk that he himself may turn into a Jew if he remains with the usurer.

So as one can see, if we take away or alter the Jewish aspect of the Shylock’s character, the play still works in terms of the money lender and the other supporting characters around him, and so it also does in terms of the play’s themes and plot. If William Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice was merely a play that concentrated solely on Jews, it would be a very dull play indeed and the simple theme of Jews would have been most out of character with Shakespeare’s other comedies, and indeed his plays of other genres, for “a Shakespearean comedy is not, of course, “laughs all the way.”” (Brown, 10) Stating that The Merchant of Venice is only about Jews is akin to saying that Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream is a play only about fairies. Neither statement takes into account the central themes and plots behind each play and in particular the themes and plot in The Merchant of Venice. Merely attacking Jews and Judaism, or perhaps even promoting them, would have made The Merchant of Venice stand alone amongst Shakespeare’s stable of works for being so simplistic.

For “Shakespeare’s comedies … do not … teeter on the edge of calamity here and descend to farce there” (Ornstein, 21) as you would expect a comedy which is based only on Jews to do in order to keep up its comedic value from beginning to end. However in his comedies, and in particular The Merchant of Venice, Shakespeare avoids “the danger of superficiality” (Brown, 11) and hence one of the themes central to this play does not concentrate on the subject of Jews but rather the theme of justice and mercy.

The Shylock represents justice and the law in the play while the Christians stand for mercy. He “stands for the Law: for the legal system which, to be just to all in general, must only approximate to justice in particular cases.” (Bradbrook, 133) There is an old saying that states that the Law is blind, which generally means that all people are seen as equal under the eyes of the law regardless of race, sex or religion. Hence the fact that the Shylock is Jewish does not affect the legal proceedings of the court scene carried out in Act 4.

Some may point to the fact that because the Shylock is a Jew that the court punishes him when he refuses to take his forfeiture from Antonio. However Portia’s speech in the court clearly states that the punishment is being meted out to the Shylock, not because he is a Jew, but because he is an alien, or in other words a foreigner, and the letter of the law which Shylock has begged the court to adhere to must be followed exactly. The Shylock could have been from Morocco, as indeed was one of Portia’s potential suitors in Act2 Scene 7, and the same verdict would have been reached.

Portia:”The law hath yet another hold on you. It is enacted in the laws of Venice, If it be proved against an alien that by direct or indirect attempts He seek the life of any citizen, The party “gainst the which he doth contrive Shall seize one half his goods … And the offender”s life lies in the mercy of the Duke only, gainst all other voice”.

(The Merchant of Venice 4.1.362-371)

This sentiment of the Shylock being viewed as an alien and not as a Jew is one supported by Patrick Stewart, a Shakespearean actor who has played the part of Shylock in The Merchant of Venice as directed by John Barton. “Shylock is essentially an alien, an outsider. I think if you see him as a Jew, first and foremost, then he”s in danger of becoming only a symbol. Shylock is an outsider who happens to be a Jew.” (Stewart, 171)

Unfortunately it is the Shylock’s stubborn alignment with the law that proves to be his downfall. As we see “Shylock’s own insistence upon the letter of the law will be turned against him … and will bring its own retribution.” (Palmer, 127) Some critics however, may point to the fact that Antonio orders the Shylock to convert to Christianity as being only able to happen because the Shylock is a Jew, but in Antonio’s speech (4.1.396-406) he makes no reference at all to the fact that the Shylock is a Jew. If the Shylock were a Muslim he would still be ordered to convert to Christianity and if he were already a Christian, Antonio would come up with some other way to break the man, as this is what Antonio really wants – to break the Shylock once and for all.

So, as stated in my opening paragraph, to say that The Merchant of Venice is a play only about Jews, would be to serve a massive disservice to its author, William Shakespeare, “the world’s greatest playwright.” (Eds. Mowat et al., xxx) Although many audiences do misconceive that the play is about Jews, performances of The Merchant of Venice have been successfully produced without any Jews or references to Jews in them and the play still reads just as well if the Shylock were not Jewish, but a different race or religion altogether. The other characters in the play would also not treat the character of Shylock any differently if he were not Jewish.

Finally this is a play with themes and a plot that do not hinge on the fact that some of its characters are of a certain religion, especially the key theme explored of justice and mercy in particular. For if justice (the law) is truly blind then a man’s religion will not alter the outcome of its findings.