The Merchant of Venice

By William Shakespeare and Paul Werstine

In The Merchant of Venice, the path to marriage is hazardous. To win Portia, Bassanio must pass a test prescribed by her father’s will, choosing correctly among three caskets or chests. If he fails, he may never marry at all.

Bassanio and Portia also face a magnificent villain, the moneylender Shylock. In creating Shylock, Shakespeare seems to have shared in a widespread prejudice against Jews. Shylock would have been regarded as a villain because he was a Jew. Yet he gives such powerful expression to his alienation due to the hatred around him that, in many productions, he emerges as the hero.

Portia is most remembered for her disguise as a lawyer, Balthazar, especially the speech in which she urges Shylock to show mercy that “droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven.”

The authoritative edition of The Merchant of Venice from The Folger Shakespeare Library, the trusted and widely used Shakespeare series for students and general readers, includes:

-The exact text of the printed book for easy cross-reference
-Hundreds of hypertext links for instant navigation
-Freshly edited text based on the best early printed version of the play
-Newly revised explanatory notes conveniently linked to the text of the play
-Scene-by-scene plot summaries
-A key to the play’s famous lines and phrases
-An introduction to reading Shakespeare’s language
-An essay by a leading Shakespeare scholar providing a modern perspective on the play
-Fresh images from the Folger Shakespeare Library’s vast holdings of rare books
-An annotated guide to further reading

Essay by Alexander Leggatt

The Folger Shakespeare Library in Washington, DC, is home to the world’s largest collection of Shakespeare’s printed works, and a magnet for Shakespeare scholars from around the globe. In addition to exhibitions open to the public throughout the year, the Folger offers a full calendar of performances and programs. For more information, visit Folger.edu.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Simon & Schuster
• Release date: Oct 15, 2014
• ISBN: 9781476788487

William Shakespeare

William Shakespeare was born in April 1564 in the town of Stratford-upon-Avon, on England’s Avon River. When he was eighteen, he married Anne Hathaway. The couple had three children—an older daughter Susanna and twins, Judith and Hamnet. Hamnet, Shakespeare’s only son, died in childhood. The bulk of Shakespeare’s working life was spent in the theater world of London, where he established himself professionally by the early 1590s. He enjoyed success not only as a playwright and poet, but also as an actor and shareholder in an acting company. Although some think that sometime between 1610 and 1613 Shakespeare retired from the theater and returned home to Stratford, where he died in 1616, others believe that he may have continued to work in London until close to his death.

Book preview

About this eBook

This eBook contains special symbols that are important for reading and understanding the text. In order to view them correctly, please activate your device’s Publisher Font or Original font setting; use of optional fonts on your device may result in missing, or incorrect, special symbols.

Also, please keep in mind that Shakespeare wrote his plays and poems over four hundred years ago, during a time when the English language was in many ways different than it is today. Because the built-in dictionary on many devices is designed for modern English, be advised that the definitions it provides may not apply to the words as Shakespeare uses them. Whenever available, always check the glosses linked to the text for a proper definition before consulting the built-in dictionary.

THE NEW FOLGER LIBRARY

SHAKESPEARE

Designed to make Shakespeare’s great plays available to all readers, the New Folger Library edition of Shakespeare’s plays provides accurate texts in modern spelling and punctuation, as well as scene-by-scene action summaries, full explanatory notes, many pictures clarifying Shakespeare’s language, and notes recording all significant departures from the early printed versions. Each play is prefaced by a brief introduction, by a guide to reading Shakespeare’s language, and by accounts of his life and theater. Each play is followed by an annotated list of further readings and by a Modern Perspective written by an expert on that particular play.

Barbara A. Mowat is Director of Research emerita at the Folger Shakespeare Library, Consulting Editor of Shakespeare Quarterly, and author of The Dramaturgy of Shakespeare’s Romances and of essays on Shakespeare’s plays and their editing.

Paul Werstine is Professor of English in the Graduate School and at King’s University College at Western University. He is a general editor of the New Variorum Shakespeare and author of Early Modern Playhouse Manuscripts and the Editing of Shakespeare, as well as many papers and essays on the printing and editing of Shakespeare’s plays.

Folger Shakespeare Library

The Folger Shakespeare Library in Washington, D.C., is a privately funded research library dedicated to Shakespeare and the civilization of early modern Europe. It was founded in 1932 by Henry Clay and Emily Jordan Folger, and incorporated as part of Amherst College in Amherst, Massachusetts, one of the nation’s oldest liberal arts colleges, from which Henry Folger had graduated in 1879. In addition to its role as the world’s preeminent Shakespeare collection and its emergence as a leading center for Renaissance studies, the Folger Shakespeare Library offers a wide array of cultural and educational programs and services for the general public.

EDITORS

BARBARA A. MOWAT

Director of Research emerita

Folger Shakespeare Library

PAUL WERSTINE

Professor of English

King’s University College at the University of Western Ontario, Canada

From the Director of the Folger Shakespeare Library

It is hard to imagine a world without Shakespeare. Since their composition more than four hundred years ago, Shakespeare’s plays and poems have traveled the globe, inviting those who see and read his works to make them their own.

Readers of the New Folger Editions are part of this ongoing process of taking up Shakespeare, finding our own thoughts and feelings in language that strikes us as old or unusual and, for that very reason, new. We still struggle to keep up with a writer who could think a mile a minute, whose words paint pictures that shift like clouds. These expertly edited texts are presented as a resource for study, artistic exploration, and enjoyment. As a new generation of readers engages Shakespeare in ebook form, they will encounter the classic texts of the New Folger Editions, with trusted notes and up-to-date critical essays available at their fingertips. Now readers can enjoy expertly edited, modern editions of Shakespeare anywhere they bring their e-reading devices, allowing readers not simply to keep up, but to engage deeply with a writer whose works invite us to think, and think again.

The New Folger Editions of Shakespeare’s plays, which are the basis for the texts realized here in digital form, are special because of their origin. The Folger Shakespeare Library in Washington, D.C., is the single greatest documentary source of Shakespeare’s works. An unparalleled collection of early modern books, manuscripts, and artwork connected to Shakespeare, the Folger’s holdings have been consulted extensively in the preparation of these texts. The Editions also reflect the expertise gained through the regular performance of Shakespeare’s works in the Folger’s Elizabethan Theater.

I want to express my deep thanks to editors Barbara Mowat and Paul Werstine for creating these indispensable editions of Shakespeare’s works, which incorporate the best of textual scholarship with a richness of commentary that is both inspired and engaging. Readers who want to know more about Shakespeare and his plays can follow the paths these distinguished scholars have tread by visiting the Folger either in-person or online, where a range of physical and digital resources exist to supplement the material in these texts. I commend to you these words, and hope that they inspire.

Michael Witmore

Director, Folger Shakespeare Library

Contents

Editors’ Preface

Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice

Reading Shakespeare’s Language: The Merchant of Venice

Shakespeare’s Life

Shakespeare’s Theater

The Publication of Shakespeare’s Plays

An Introduction to This Text

Characters in the Play

The Merchant of Venice

Text of the Play with Commentary

Act 1

Scene 1

Scene 2

Scene 3

Act 2

Scene 1

Scene 2

Scene 3

Scene 4

Scene 5

Scene 6

Scene 7

Scene 8

Scene 9

Act 3

Scene 1

Scene 2

Scene 3

Scene 4

Scene 5

Act 4

Scene 1

Scene 2

Act 5

Scene 1

Textual Notes

The Merchant of Venice: A Modern Perspective by Alexander Leggatt

Further Reading

Key to Famous Lines and Phrases

Commentary

Act 1

Scene 1

Scene 2

Scene 3

Act 2

Scene 1

Scene 2

Scene 3

Scene 4

Scene 5

Scene 6

Scene 7

Scene 8

Scene 9

Act 3

Scene 1

Scene 2

Scene 3

Scene 4

Scene 5

Act 4

Scene 1

Scene 2

Act 5

Scene 1

Editors’ Preface

In recent years, ways of dealing with Shakespeare’s texts and with the interpretation of his plays have been undergoing significant change. This edition, while retaining many of the features that have always made the Folger Shakespeare so attractive to the general reader, at the same time reflects these current ways of thinking about Shakespeare. For example, modern readers, actors, and teachers have become interested in the differences between, on the one hand, the early forms in which Shakespeare’s plays were first published and, on the other hand, the forms in which editors through the centuries have presented them. In response to this interest, we have based our edition on what we consider the best early printed version of a particular play (explaining our rationale in a section called An Introduction to This Text) and have marked our changes in the text—unobtrusively, we hope, but in such a way that the curious reader can be aware that a change has been made and can consult the Textual Notes to discover what appeared in the early printed version.

Current ways of looking at the plays are reflected in our brief introductions, in many of the commentary notes, in the annotated lists of Further Reading, and especially in each play’s Modern Perspective, an essay written by an outstanding scholar who brings to the reader his or her fresh assessment of the play in the light of today’s interests and concerns.

As in the Folger Library General Reader’s Shakespeare, which this edition replaces, we include explanatory notes designed to help make Shakespeare’s language clearer to a modern reader, and we hyperlink notes to the lines that they explain. We also follow the earlier edition in including illustrations—of objects, of clothing, of mythological figures—from books and manuscripts in the Folger Library collection. We provide fresh accounts of the life of Shakespeare, of the publishing of his plays, and of the theaters in which his plays were performed, as well as an introduction to the text itself. We also include a section called Reading Shakespeare’s Language, in which we try to help readers learn to break the code of Elizabethan poetic language.

For each section of each volume, we are indebted to a host of generous experts and fellow scholars. The Reading Shakespeare’s Language sections, for example, could not have been written had not Arthur King, of Brigham Young University, and Randal Robinson, author of Unlocking Shakespeare’s Language, led the way in untangling Shakespearean language puzzles and shared their insights and methodologies generously with us. Shakespeare’s Life profited by the careful reading given it by S. Schoenbaum, Shakespeare’s Theater was read and strengthened by Andrew Gurr, John Astington, and William Ingram; and The Publication of Shakespeare’s Plays is indebted to the comments of Peter W. M. Blayney. We, as editors, take sole responsibility for any errors in our editions.

We are grateful to the authors of the Modern Perspectives; to Leeds Barroll and David Bevington for their generous encouragement; to the Huntington and Newberry Libraries for fellowship support; to King’s University College for the grants it has provided to Paul Werstine; to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, which has provided him with Research Time Stipends; to R. J. Shroyer of the University of Western Ontario for essential computer support; and to the Folger Institute’s Center for Shakespeare Studies for its sponsorship of a workshop on Shakespeare’s Texts for Students and Teachers (funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities and led by Richard Knowles of the University of Wisconsin), a workshop from which we learned an enormous amount about what is wanted by college and high-school teachers of Shakespeare today.

In preparing this preface for the publication of The Merchant of Venice in 1992, we wrote: Our biggest debt is to the Folger Shakespeare Library: to Werner Gundersheimer, Director of the Library, who has made possible our edition; to Jean Miller, the Library’s Art Curator, who combed the Library holdings for illustrations, and to Julie Ainsworth, Head of the Photography Department, who carefully photographed them; to Peggy O’Brien, Director of Education, who gave us expert advice about the needs being expressed by Shakespeare teachers and students (and to Martha Christian and other master teachers who used our texts in manuscript in their classrooms); to the staff of the Academic Programs Division, especially Paul Menzer (who drafted Further Reading material), Mary Tonkinson, Lena Cowen Orlin, Molly Haws, and Jessica Hymowitz; and, finally, to the staff of the Library Reading Room, whose patience and support have been invaluable.

As we revise the play for publication in 2010, we add to the above our gratitude to Gail Kern Paster, Director of the Library since 2002, whose interest and support are unfailing (and whose scholarly expertise is an invaluable resource); to Stephen Llano, our production editor at Simon & Schuster, whose expertise, attention to detail, and wisdom are essential to this project; to Deborah Curren-Aquino, who provides extensive editorial and production support; to Alice Falk for her expert copyediting; to Mary Bloodworth and Michael Poston for their unfailing computer support; and to the staff of the Library’s Research Division, especially Christina Certo (whose help is crucial), David Schalkwyk (Director of Research), Mimi Godfrey, Jennifer Rahm, Kathleen Lynch, Carol Brobeck, Owen Williams, Sarah Werner, and Adrienne Schevchuk. Finally, we once again express our thanks to Jean Miller, who continues to unearth wonderful images, and to the ever-supportive staff of the Library Reading Room.

Barbara A. Mowat and Paul Werstine

2010

Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice

The Merchant of Venice, like most of Shakespeare’s comedies, is about love and marriage. But the path to marriage in this play is unusually hazardous. The characters compare it to the epic voyage undertaken by Jason and the Argonauts to win the Golden Fleece. In this play, Portia, the fabulously wealthy heiress of Belmont, is herself the Golden Fleece, according to her would-be husband, Bassanio. To win her hand in marriage, he must put his future at risk in an attempt to choose correctly among three caskets or chests made of gold, silver, and lead. If he chooses rightly, he wins, in marriage, the beautiful, intelligent, and supremely resourceful Portia and her great wealth. If he chooses wrongly, he must forever abandon Portia and may never propose marriage to any other woman. He would therefore die without legal heirs.

And the test of the caskets, prescribed in the will of Portia’s dead father, is not the only obstacle to Bassanio and Portia’s happiness. There also stands against them a magnificent villain, the moneylender Shylock. In creating this character, Shakespeare seems to have shared in a widespread and, from our point of view, despicable prejudice against Jews. In Shakespeare’s England there may have been no more than about two hundred Jews; however, Jews loomed large in the imagination because of myths still circulating from the Middle Ages about, for example, their ritual murder of Christians. Shylock would have been regarded as a villain simply because he was a Jew. Yet Shakespeare was led by his art of language to put onstage a character who gave such powerful expression to the alienation he felt because of the hatred around him that, in many productions of the play and in the opinions of many famous actors, Shylock emerges the hero of The Merchant of Venice. In fashioning in Shylock a character whose function is to frustrate the satisfaction that we are invited to desire for the play’s lovers, Shakespeare has, for many people, brought forth a character who rivals the lovers in the power he exerts over us.

Over the centuries Portia too has deeply engaged audiences. In her role as the daughter bound by her father’s will, one who sees herself as helpless in the face of the casket test and whose anxieties and joys we are encouraged to share, Portia is, for readers and playgoers alike, one of Shakespeare’s most appealing heroines. But it is in her role as Balthazar the young lawyer that Portia is most remembered. The speech in which she urges Shylock to show the kind of mercy that droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven, that is enthronèd in the hearts of kings and is an attribute to God Himself, is one of Shakespeare’s most famous and most loved passages. For readers and audiences today, the pleasure that should accompany her saving of Antonio is clouded by what seems to us her cruel treatment of Shylock—but the role of Portia remains one that every Shakespearean actress yearns to play.

After you have read the play, we invite you to turn to the back of this book and read "The Merchant of Venice: A Modern Perspective" by Professor Alexander Leggatt of the University of Toronto.

Reading Shakespeare’s Language: The Merchant of Venice

For many people today, reading Shakespeare’s language can be a problem—but it is a problem that can be solved. Those who have studied Latin (or even French or German or Spanish) and those who are used to reading poetry will have little difficulty understanding the language of poetic drama. Others, however, need to develop the skills of untangling unusual sentence structures and of recognizing and understanding poetic compressions, omissions, and wordplay. And even those skilled in reading unusual sentence structures may have occasional trouble with Shakespeare’s words. More than four hundred years of static—caused by changes in language and in life—intervene between his speaking and our hearing. Most of his vocabulary is still in use, but a few of his words are no longer used, and many of his words now have meanings quite different from those they had in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. In the theater, most of these difficulties are solved for us by actors who study the language and articulate it for us so that the essential meaning is heard—or, when combined with stage action, is at least felt. When we are reading on our own, we must do what each actor does: go over the lines (often with a dictionary close at hand) until the puzzles are solved and the lines yield up their poetry and the characters speak in words and phrases that are, suddenly, rewarding and wonderfully memorable.

Shakespeare’s Words

As you begin to read the opening scenes of a Shakespeare play, you may notice occasional unfamiliar words. Some are unfamiliar simply because we no longer use them. In the opening scenes of The Merchant of Venice, for example, we find the words sooth (i.e., truth), piring (i.e., peering), an (i.e., if), and doit (i.e., jot). Words of this kind are explained in notes to the text and will become familiar the more of Shakespeare’s plays you read.

In The Merchant of Venice, as in all of Shakespeare’s writing, more problematic are the words that are still in use but that now have different meanings. In the opening scenes of The Merchant of Venice, for example, we find the word still where we would use always, the word straight where we would say at once or immediately, the word disabled where we would use depleted or reduced, and the word ripe where we would say urgent. Again, such words will be explained in the notes to this text, but they, too, will become familiar as you continue to read Shakespeare’s language.

Some words are strange not because of the static introduced by changes in language over the past centuries but because these are words that Shakespeare is using to build a dramatic world that has its own space, time, and history. The Merchant of Venice is an interesting example of the way Shakespeare uses words to build dramatic worlds, for in this play he quickly builds two such worlds—the mercantile world of Venice and the romantic world of Portia’s estate of Belmont. In the first and third scenes of the play, he builds—through references to argosies,

Reviews for The Merchant of Venice

[rahkan-1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I think Shylock is one of Shakespeare's most powerful characters, even though the plot of this play is unusually cracked-out, even for the Bard.

[crowyhead · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Fascinating in terms of its portrayal of Shylock and what we can glean from it about attitudes at the time. I also love Portia, one of Shakespeare's more witty and intelligent heroines.

[tiffanyak_1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

This seems to essentially be Shakespeare's response to The Jew of Malta, so if you've read that, this will seem very familiar to you. However, the language used is far more memorable, the lead character more sympathetic, and the story shaped to fit a different genre. This means that it ends on a far less tragic note, and also that it secures its place in history as one of Shakespeare's masterpieces. Essentially, it is a story of failed revenge, love, and injustice. As to the edition itself, I found it to be greatly helpful in understanding the action in the play. It has a layout which places each page of the play opposite a page of notes, definitions, explanations, and other things needed to understand that page more thoroughly. While I didn't always need it, I was certainly glad to have it whenever I ran into a turn of language that was unfamiliar, and I definitely appreciated the scene-by-scene summaries. Really, if you want to or need to read Shakespeare, an edition such as this is really the way to go, especially until you get more accustomed to it.

[milti_1 · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

It has been read and over-read for school till it has lost all its dramatic value for me. But the true fact of the matter is that Shylock is an everlasting character who will never erase himself from common memory.

[bookomaniac-1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

1596-7, zeer populair en controversieel; zeer nauwe structuur, Shylock is eerste rijpe figuurVeel proza, moeilijk leesbaar, vrij saai tot de figuur van Shylock ten tonele verschijnt (problematiek van het joodzijn, en van de woeker).Bekend: III,1 (p215): “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?”Toch dubbelzinnig: zit vooral in met zijn verloren geld en juwelen, boven zijn dochter Jessica.Finale vanaf IV, thema van recht en rechtvaardigheid.

[brianinbuffalo · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Probably my favorite Shakespeare play. I loved it even as an assigned reading mission in high school. I've since read it again and have it seen performed on several stages. Shylock remains one of the most memorable literary characters in the "theater" of my mind.

[katieloucks · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

It was ok.

[coach_of_alva · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

In which a charming and entertaining romantic comedy is intertwined with a very grim portrait of a wronged outcast who has lost the ability to forgive.

[ncgraham_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

This was the play that always prompted the biggest reaction from me when, as a pint-sized, wannabe Shakespearean, I used to thumb through Charles and Mary Lamb’s Tales from Shakespeare. “What, he wants a pound of Antonio’s flesh?” I would think.—“Yuck!” Aside from the shock value, I couldn’t see why the play was considered one of Shakespeare’s best; Shylock seemed a rather drab villain, and I thought Portia an ugly name for a woman. But having read my old favorite Much Ado About Nothing this past Valentine’s Day (a very sappy thing to do, I know), I was determined to survey some of the Bard’s other plays. Two different friends whose tastes I trust named it as their favorite comedy and (in one case) favorite play, and this led me to pick it up, having never seen it performed on stage or screen.Baaaaaaaaaaad idea.I love Shakespeare, and I do think there are benefits to be derived from reading his plays and not only from seeing them performed, but doing the former without having first done the latter can make for difficult reading. I read the first act of Merchant in a single evening, but when I finished I realized that I had struggled through it, something that had not happened with Much Ado. However, I was determined not to give up, so I came up with and enacted a new, hard-hitting strategy. The Charles and Mary Lamb volume came back out—the paperback from all those years before—and when I resumed the play I began to mouth the words as I read them, getting a feel for the sound and rhythm. By these means I was able to get through it, and even greatly enjoy it.The merchant of the title is one Antonio, a prosperous but perhaps overgenerous businessman who lives amid the hustle and bustle of Venetian life. A young spendthrift friend, named Bassanio, asks for a loan of money so that he may go and woo the “richly left” Portia of Belmont (I.1.161*) in style. All of Antonio’s fortune is at sea, but he goes to the Jewish moneylender Shylock and asks him to take his bond—a loan of three thousand ducats for three months. For his usury the Jew demands no money, but simply a pound of Antonio’s flesh. He and Bassanio take this merely as a jest, thinking anyway that Antonio’s ships will have arrived before then, and Bassanio sets of for Belmont, while Shylock’s hate for Antonio is growing in his heart, and his plans for the merchant’s undoing becoming more and more a reality. Thus Shakespeare begins his interweaving of two basic plot lines—a “love” plot featuring Portia and Bassanio, and a “hate” plot featuring Shylock and Antonio. To give away much more would be to spoil it for those truly new to the play.Of course, it is a comedy, and so the reader expects a happy ending for at least some of the characters, and as far as that goes the play fits the genre. Otherwise it not what one typically thinks of as a comedy; very little of it is laugh-out-loud funny, and most of the humor found within these pages comes in the guise of wit or irony.But in its dramatic qualities the play is top drawer. Shylock truly is one of literature’s most fascinating characters. Like many Shakespearean baddies, he is self-admittedly a villain (III.1.66), but he commands our sympathy nevertheless. And I do not think this is simply because of our modern sensibilities, despite reports that the fall of a Jew might be a source of humor for an Elizabethan audience. He has been poorly treated by his fellow men, and learnt his villainy from this treatment, and so we must pity him, even as we feel horror at his response. The most likable character by far is Portia. “You will love Portia,” one of my youth directors predicted when she heard that I was reading this play, “because she is AWESOME!” And, indeed, she is—a fierce, independent woman who is nevertheless in love with Bassanio and will do anything to save the life of his friend. Her speech on mercy in the trial scene (IV.1) is truly the stuff of legend. The other characters are fairly dull, and Shylock’s daughter Jessica needs a good slap or two, but together Shylock and Portia sweep all before them, representing not only hate and love, but legalism and mercy. It is they who made me love this play, and it is they that will cause me to remember it and come back to it.* All line references come from The Complete Pelican Shakespeare.

[kenzielynn75 · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

The Merchant of Venice is a short story with a very basic plot, and one of little interest to me. Bassanio comes up with some crazy plan to pay Antonio back the money that he owes. However his plan backfires and Antonio is left to pay for Bassanio's mistakes. I found the story predictable and hard to get into. It isn't hard to follow, but you'll miss what little humor it has if you aren't well read in Shakespearean liturature. I definately would not include this with any of Shakespeare's more renowned plays.

[meandmybooks-1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Waffling between four and five stars for this. Four and a half, we'll say. The speeches, the characters, the ideas... so much that was beautiful and thought-provoking. I'm afraid that what I'm having a hard time loving is any of the characters. They are too... real. Their flaws are too visible and ugly, and their modest virtues fail to compensate. The character who inspires the most compassion, Shylock, is also the one who is most ruthlessly cruel, and Portia, the character who is presented as most clear-thinking, pure, and righteous, is also merciless, petty, and vindictive. The juxtaposition of comic and tragic elements, as when Shylock cries in anguish, “Out upon her! Thou torturest me,Tubal. Itwas my turquoise. I had it of Leah when I was a bachelor.I would not have given it for a wilderness of monkeys.”along with the mixture of cruelty and kindness in several characters, makes this, in a way, an exceptionally “realistic” comedy. It ends with weddings, but also with the fall of a larger-than-life character who is too sympathetic to be a proper villain. I read the Oxford World's Classics edition of this, which has fine notes, generous margins, readable font, and excellent introductory material. Which I only skimmed because, as always, I started with Marjorie Garber's wonderful chapter on the play in Shakespeare After All. All her analyses are good, but this one seemed to me particularly so. I know I wouldn't have enjoyed the play nearly so much without her insights, anyway. Also, I highly recommend the Arkangel recorded performance of this – it's just fantastic! I'm not a fan of Shakespeare's clowns, as a general rule, but David Tennant's “Lancelot” is irresistible, and the other actors are also marvelous.

[hahnasay · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Its Shakespeare! What more do you want me to say. He's wonderful!

[seabear_1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Those hypocritical bastards! Once a comedy, now a tragedy for those of us who aren't anti-Semitic. Although given the global financial crisis, perhaps a comedy once more if you replace "the Jew" with "the banker".

[alishabailey · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

[The Merchant of Venice] is a story of love, honor, pride, and loyalty all wrapped up in one. You will experience everthing from a Jew's daughter betraying him by marrying a Christian, Bassanio putting a pound of his friend's flesh on the line to go court a woman, Bassanio finding and marrying the love of his life, Shylock almost getting a pound of flesh from Antonio, Portia and Nerrisa portraying men to save Antonio, and trick their men into giving up their rings. There is action in every page each and every character will grab your attention and hold it. I would recommend this book to anyone who can understand Shakespearean language, or who is willing to try. As for myself, I have a hard time figuring out what is going on. Honestly, I didn't understand this story until I watched the movie, and that film pulled everything together for me. I don't think this is one of Shakespeare's best plays therefore I give it 2 stars.

[paradox98_1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

One of my favorite plays. I love the Shylock "hate not a Jew eyes" speech. I feel, being Mormon, I can relate to that.

[david.alfred.sarkies · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

To call this play unique would be a misnomer since Shakespeare was hardly original with the subject matter of his plays. I believe that the only play that came entirely from Shakespeare's imagination would have been The Tempest. Most of his other plays he had either borrowed from historical events or earlier works, usually both. There is even some suggestion that a number of plays (particularly Hamlet) were based on older plays, and Shakespeare basically compiled and rewrote them into the form that we have today. The reason that I suggest that The Merchant of Venice is unique is because it does not seem to follow the pattern that most of Shakespeare's other plays follow. But first a synopsis.The play is based around two plots, the first plot being a romance and the second being a claim for a debt to be paid. The main characters of this play are Antonio (a merchant), Shylok (a Jewish money lender), Portia (a beautiful princess), Jessica (Portia's friend and Shylock's daughter), Bassiano (a suitor to Portia and a friend of Antonio), and Lorenzo (the suitor to Jessica and a friend of Bassiano and Antonio). Portia has quite a lot of suitors, so to pick the right one she has three chests, one of gold, one of silver, and one of lead. Inside one of the chests (the lead one) is a image of her, and the suitors must chose the correct chest to win her hand in marriage. Pretty much all of the suitors pick the wrong chest, going for the gold and the silver, however when Bassiano comes (and Portia is in love with Bassiano, but everybody must play the game), he picks the correct chest, and they go off and get married. However, this is halfway through the play (and is odd because in most Shakespearian comedies, the marriage comes at the end).Getting an audience with Portia is not cheap though, so to do that Bassiano approaches his friend Antonio, but all of Antonio's money is tied up in investments, so to help out his friend, he attempts to borrow money from Shylock. The catch is (and there are always lots of catches in Shakespearian comedies) is that Shylock hates Antonio because, to put it simply, Antonio is an anti-semetic pig. So, seeing Antonio's desperation, he agrees to lend him the money with a pound of his flesh (in the region of the heart) as surety. Unfortunately for Antonio, disaster strikes and he pretty much loses all of his investments which leaves him with no money and a Jew banging on his door demanding payment.This is all resolved at court, and while it appears that all is lost, and Shylock refuses to show mercy, since he now has his enemy over a barrel, a doctor's apprentice and his servant enters (who turn out to be Portia and Jessica in disguise), who, through clever legal argument, point out that while the bond is solid and Antonio must give up his pound of flesh, the bond does not give any right to take any blood, and further, no Jew may spill a drop of Christian blood, on pain of death. So, the tables are turned, Antonio escapes his debt, and Shylock is punished.It would seem that the play should end here, however it doesn't: there is at least two more scenes afterward. In payment for their services Portia (in disguise) convinces Bassiano to give up a ring that he had promised Portia never to let go, and Jessica does the same with Lorenzo. When they return, they are then confronted by their respective ladies as to the location of the ring. This is Shakespearian comedy at its best, especially how both Lorenzo and Bassiano sweat over how, in such a short time, they have betrayed the trust of their loved ones.I am hesitant to say this, particularly since with a looking at a 16th Century play, that it appears to be about racism, and I will quote one of Shylock's lines below, but I find it difficult to conclude that it really is racist. Indeed, Shakespeare does make some comment on how despite their beliefs both Jews and Christians are still human, yet Shylock is still considered the antagonist, and it is his refusal to show mercy, even if he were to be paid 10 times what is owed, that causes us to lose all sympathy for him. Granted, the play does appear to be anti-semetic, but we must remember that this was what was happening at the time. I do not believe Shakespeare is deliberately targeting Jews here, and especially since it was illegal for Christians to lend money to Christians and charge interest, the only way people could obtain loans were through the Jews. In fact, the Jews were the bankers of the Middle Ages (though this medieval attitude must have changed early on in the Renaissance where the Medicis, a Christian family, were considered to be the founders of modern banking).What about women's liberation? Lets us consider this aspect of the play: Portia is a very strong willed and dominant character; she keeps her suitors at bay with a test that they may pass; she has demonstrated that she has superb rhetorical ability; she is incredibly knowledgeable; and incredibly mischievous; her trick with the ring pretty much has Bassiano wrapped around her finger - in a flurry of kind words, she binds him to a promise, and within a day, forces him to break that promise; She then forces Bassiano into submission through the use of guilt over how he not only broke a vow that he had made to her, but that a day had not even passed before he broke that vow. While it is true that women of the middle ages were not all beaten into submission, the actions and the ability of Portia is staggering. She is able to interact within the world of men just as well, or even better, than most dignified men could. I find Portia to be an amazing character, and considering the date of this play, to be somewhat ahead of her time, though we should remember that this was also written during the reign of Queen Elizabeth, a classic example of a woman doing a man's job, and doing it rather well at that. Maybe, just maybe, Portia represents Elizabeth in demonstrating that a woman can do just as well as any man in the world of men.To bait fish withal: if it will feed nothing else,it will feed my revenge. He hath disgraced me, andhindered me half a million; laughed at my losses,mocked at my gains, scorned my nation, thwarted mybargains, cooled my friends, heated mineenemies; and what's his reason? I am a Jew. Hathnot a Jew eyes? hath not a Jew hands, organs,dimensions, senses, affections, passions? fed withthe same food, hurt with the same weapons, subjectto the same diseases, healed by the same means,warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, asa Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed?if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you poisonus, do we not die? and if you wrong us, shall we notrevenge? If we are like you in the rest, we willresemble you in that. If a Jew wrong a Christian,what is his humility? Revenge. If a Christianwrong a Jew, what should his sufferance be byChristian example? Why, revenge. The villany youteach me, I will execute, and it shall go hard but Iwill better the instruction.

[cbl_tn · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

When the merchant Antonio is approached by his friend, Bassanio, for a loan, he doesn't have money in hand to loan. He's expecting a large profit upon the arrival of ships from various centers of trade, so he borrows the money from Jewish lender Shylock. If Antonio can't repay the loan by the due date, instead of interest, Shylock will take a pound of flesh from Antonio. Meanwhile, Bassanio is off to court Portia. Bassanio is lucky in love, but Antonio is very unlucky in business. All of his ships are lost, and Shylock is demanding his pound of flesh. Bassanio is distraught at having put his friend Antonio in this position. Fortunately, Portia has a plan...This is more like two different plays instead of a unified drama. Portia and her suitors begin as a separate story line, finally connected to the main plot through Bassanio's arrival. I think Polonius delivered his famous monologue to the wrong character in the wrong play. Antonio, Bassanio, and Shylock could all have benefited from his advice to “neither a borrower or a lender be”!

[aliceanna-1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Holds up quite well upon re-reading. Although I'm now too old to play Portia, I still love her. Shylock gets a bad rap, but that's zeitgeist for you. At least Shakespeare tries to give background for him and he's not just pure evil (for no reason).

[silverwing2332 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

This is a classic, and a great piece. I often think about the book, its very memorable and quotable. Even if you hate Shakespeare, at least you'll be able to recognize any allusions to it in other books. The plot is really good, and the characters are amazingly well made. The writing is impeccable and it is surprisingly easy to understand (for Shakespeare that is).

[narshkite · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I am apparently the only person on the planet who does not believe that Merchant of Venice is anti-Semitic. Shylock is a man living in a world where law and custom consider him as less than human and he is filled with anger. His cruelty is his tiny way of lashing out. He wants revenge, and he prizes that above money. Is his intended (though thwarted) violence horrifying and shocking? Sure it is. It is the twisted malignant violence that grows in the heart of a man caged and stunted, of a man forced to be inhuman. When you prick him, he doth bleed. And the true evildoers in this tale are not Jews. Shylock is the victim. (Jessica is a whole separate story.) This is the story of a man stripped of manhood, a man whose essence is ground to dust under the boot heels of people who call themselves Christians. That Shakespeare, he knows a tragedy when he sees one.

[roxyite4life · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

The Merchant of Venice is fraught with risk and sacrifice. Antonio risks his life so his dearest friend, Bassanio, may risk his chances with other suitors to woo the beautiful Portia. Portia risks being caught disguised as a man in order to save Antonio's life. Shylock's daughter, Jessica, sacrifices her religion and her relationship with her father so she may marry the christian, Lorenzo. Since Shylock is jewish, he disowns Jessica who has converted to christianity in order to marry Lorenzo. And, in the end, Shylock sacrifices his religion, loses acceptance of the jewish community, and loses all of his money in order to save his life. With such action going on, you would think the play is hard to follow, but it is probably one of the most understandable plays of Shakespeare. However, I had hoped it would have have proved more suspenseful. With that said, I would recommend this book to anyone wishing to start reading Shakespeare as this book would do well to ease you into Shakespeare's language and style of writing. It would also make a nice read for those interested in race relations during the Elizabethan era.

[brianstone_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

The Merchant of Venice is about a man named Antonio who is sad at the beginning of the play for no reason, "In sooth, I know not why I am sad; It wearies me; you say it wearies you; But how I caught it, found it, or came by it, What stuff 'tis made of, whereof it is born, I am to learn; And such a want-wit sadness makes of me, That I have much ado to know myself." (Act I Scene I). Antonio goes through the novel trying to fix his sadness. Then he finds out that he is sad because he misses his youth. He misses being young so he makes friends with a young man named Bassanio. Bassanio helps Antonio feel young and so does the rest of his friends. Then Bassanio sees Portia and falls in love. Bassanio goes to Antonio for money but all of Antonio's money is at see so they borrow from Shylock, the Jew.This story is full of dramatic scenes like Shylock wanting his bond, "When it is paid according to thee tenor. It dothbappear you are a worthy judge; You know the law, your exposition Hath been most sound; I charge you by the law, Whereof you are a well-deserving pillar, Proceed to judgment: by my soul I swear There is no power in the tongue of man to alter me: I stay here on my bond." (Act IV Scene I), or like Bassanio giving his ring that was given to him by his wife to the doctor who helped the trial, who was actually Portia, his wife.I personally didn't enjoy the book because I couldn't comprehend what Shakespeare was writing. I gave this book three and a half stars out of five stars. I recommend this book for high school honors classes only since Shakespeare has a hard language to understand.

[borrows0n0wants · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I read this a few years ago for an Intro to Shakespeare class. It was my favorite play we covered with the exception of The Tempest. My memory is a little fuzzy, but I do recall enjoying it and laughing out loud at several parts. Shakespeare's word play is wonderful. I also feel that whether you try to read this from an anti-Semitist point of view or choose to view Shylock as a sympathetic character, you will still find a lot of enjoyment in this. It is also interesting to think about law interpretation and the loop holes in the law and how they still exist today.Side note: I watched the 2004 version of this with Al Pacino and felt that it stayed very true to the heart of the play. 

[duck2ducks · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Wonderful; one of Shakespeare's best. Shylock and the Merchant are fascinatingly complex characters - they each have motives and reasons that makes it hard to dismiss either one as simply a villain. Light, dark, comic, tragic, wonder, ribaldry - this one has it all.

[homeschoolmimzi · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I first read this play back in 9th grade. At the time I remember being struck w/certain parts of it though I missed a lot of references, and many somewhat bawdy double entendres went over my head. Re-reading it as an adult was a great idea, as I was able to appreciate the story more. And I found too, after awhile, that understanding Shakespeare's English became easier as I continued reading.

One of my favorite passages was Portia's speech in Act IV Scene I, where she speaks to Shylock,


The quality of mercy is not strained.
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath. It is twice blest:
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.
Tis mightiest in the mightiest; it becomes
The throned monarch better than his crown.
His scepter shows the force of temporal power,
The attribute to awe and majesty,
Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings.
But mercy is above this sceptered sway;
It is enthroned in the hearts of kings;
It is an attribute of God himself;
And earthly power doth then show like God's
When mercy seasons justice.

I had to memorize this for my 9th grade Lit class and was surprised to see how much of it I still remember after all these years.
I'm having my 9th grader read this play now for her Lit class. I hope I can help her to appreciate this more than I did at her age ☺

[bestinbrooklyn · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Yes, it is a great play, with a truly original plot, but what about the social statement? Is the theme of the book anti-semitic? Shylock's actions and demeanors could be seen as evidence of Shakespeare's possible dislike for jews. On the other hand, is the play more a lesson on how revenge, even if prompted by justified feelings of persecution and harassment, is not morally right? Maybe it is about the latter, but the play's language depicts the jewish stereotypes that have been used by anti-semites throughout history. Perhaps it is about both, and the language reserved for Shylock, his dead wife and Rebecca are intended only as a reflection of the period's socially inevitable disposition toward jews. Once again, Shakespeare leaves us with unanswered questions.

[meditationesmartini · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

CHRIS-TIANS! CHRIS-TIANS! GOTTA GIVE IT UP FOR CHRIS-TIANS! EVERYTHING GOES GREAT FOR CHRIS-TIANS! There are, as we know, many unresolvable interpretative ourobori in this play--the anti-Semitism thing, the relationship of Antonio and Bassanio, the very vexed question of the Venetian oath, that false thing, and what yet makes Bassanio and Portia infinitely cold and clean and Shylock a quintessence of grime--I mean to say, better to rule one's house in the Ghetto than serve in Belmont, right? As Jessica will learn, to her sorrow? The fact that the passionate malice of the Italians is so much more terrifying, here, than the grim legalmindedness of the Jew? These are all interesting things, and this great play is chock-full of more cool thoughts like them--about capitalism, about youth sucking age dry like the New Testament does the Old, about the Prince of Morocco as a secret counterpoint to Shylock--the Semite prince, cartoonishly accipitrine, flourishing a scimitar-world of infinite princehood--versus the Semite moneylender, ever debased below his pecuniary value, from the people who had their princes taken away long ago. And you can get diverted and watch a smartass Hermione Granger type (In the context of Christian and post-Christian hatred, I use the word "progress" with infinite trepidation, but surely the fact that our generation's reincarnation of the bright spark who always has something up her sleeve is a Mudblood fighting Voldemort and his crew of wizard Nazis, and not an abjurer and defender and reinscriber of racial boundaries around the home, possibly that's a small good thing?) break a bitter old man and clear the road for wedding-ring hijinx--and you know that for the happy crew at the middle, somehow the bill for the uneasy edge that their ringplay has in that extraordinary final scene falls at Shylock's door too. You can do all that but when you stop just watching the sweet show and try to resolve something, close any one of the doors that Shakespeare so suggestively leaves open, you find yourself tying yourself in knots, and getting into some really dark places. Why? Because it doesn't matter how we arrange our interpretations; there is no version of this play where Shylock's not fucked from the beginning, because he's the villain and the groundlings want him to get a kick, and there's no version where he's not the villain--there never will be--why? Because he's the Jew. And suddenly it hits you--it hits generic Gentile me--why the representation of people like you as good and kind that the mainstream culture has always taken for granted is the most essential thing in the world. Because otherwise, on some level, from the earliest age, you're afraid that you're bad. And the rest of it proceeds inexorably outward from that fundamental trauma. Why does Antonio loathe Shylock? He's easy to loathe, because he's never had a role open to him that wasn't loathsome. Why does Shylock loathe Antonio? Because he's just as loathsome, only--roles again--nobody will ever see it, because he's inherited the snowy mantle of lion in winter. It's like how racism isn't wrong because those people we hate didn't have a choice about being hateful; that's not why; it's wrong because we didn't give them a choice. We made them hateful with our stories--and to the degree that they're hateful, it's no wonder, but for the dizzying degree that we've just revealed ourselves as hateful, there's no bond, no pound of flesh. We're just bastards.I saw Merchant the other night, and the dude who played Shylock didn't do this scene this way, but it came to me in the middle with an awful shiver and became, for me, this play's fearsome core: the speech? "Hath not a Jew hands?" Imagine Shylock, not defiant, not roaring, not cold as ice, not looking for pity, but gnawing his fingers, hitting himself in the head, throwing himself against the walls, saying "Is not a Jew bad--bad--BAD--just like a Christian? And will he not revenge, as a way of stopping himself from going home in the mirror and driving a toothpick into his face?" His defiance becomes his heroism, the refusal to make that traumatic break with himself. Antonio's not that strong, and I bet he goes to his guest room at Belmont and hears the young cavorting and looks at the lines on his face and does something horrible to himself. Every time Shylock walks out of that courtroom and we leave him for the winners, it's unforgivable, because behind the scenes somewhere there's the mutilated self, the violated body. Our great art shows us that body--but our greatest art makes us complicit in not wanting to see it, but being aware it's there. This is no happy ending, nor even a clean tragedian sleep of death. This is a bunch of damaged and undermined people walking away to sow the crimes of the future.

[mstrust · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Beautiful and wealthy Portia is looking for a husband, and Bassanio wants to try for her hand but he is too poor to present himself as a viable suitor. He turns to his best friend Antonio, who has several ships expected with cargo that will bring him more wealth. The two friends go to Shylock the moneylender for a loan, but Shylock uses their need to set up his revenge. Antonio has always taunted and demeaned the Jewish moneylender, so rather than contracting for property if Antonio defaults on the loan, Shylock demands a pound of the debtor's flesh.The speeches by Shylock are the most famous of this play and though he is overall portrayed as a cruel man who is openly hated by the others, including his own daughter, he is also given the opportunity to point out that his religion makes him no less human than a Christian. I would think modern audiences would see him as a more empathetic character than Antonio, whose cruelty is addressed with an admission that he has called Shylock a dog and spat on him in the past and is likely to do it in the future. The courtroom scene near the end is tense as Shylock demands payment.

[liveshipvivacia · Rating: 1 out of 5 stars]

If I could have given it less than one star, I would have. Perhaps I'm naive and perhaps I missed the point, but the blatant antisemitism in this piece made me want to fling the book bodily across the room. I understand that the characters within the play may typify certain elements, but as a whole, this was the most antisemitic, racist play I have ever read. Is there redeeming quality in looking at it through the lenses of what Shakespeare intended versus how his audience perceived it? I don't know, but the excerpts of Mein Kampf I read were less enraging than this.

[joshberg · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I read Merchant exactly 25 years ago and recently had the opportunity to read it again. I mostly enjoyed the play and was all set to give a solid four-star rating, when that foolish final scene left a bad taste in my mouth. After the profound pathos of Shylock's defeat, the silly-at-best conventions of Shakespearean comedy make for a particularly discordant ending.