The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.0643 Tuesday, 11 July 2006
[1] From: Edmund Taft <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Monday, 10 Jul 2006 10:54:58 -0400
Subj: The Big Question
[2] From: Joseph Egert <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Monday, 10 Jul 2006 20:48:01 +0000
Subj: RE: SHK 17.0634 The Big Question
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Edmund Taft <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Monday, 10 Jul 2006 10:54:58 -0400
Subject: The Big Question
David Bishop concludes his latest post thusly:
>"After all, how could I see the truth of the play when I stubbornly
fail to understand
>that Shakespeare is presenting Antonio, Bassanio, Jessica and Portia
as despicable hypocrites, >thieves, cheats, etc., and Shylock as their
admirable victim? I guess we all have our blind spots."
Maybe somebody argued this position, but not me. What I find so
admirable about the play is the way that Shakespeare refuses to let his
characters off the hook. Shylock is wrong to thirst for revenge (though
we can see why he is so motivated), and the Christians are wrong to
cloak as mercy Shylock's punishment, which is clearly meant to break him
(and it does). Bassanio is a spendthrift playboy, Jessica's double;
Antonio cannot see or understand clearly (either himself or others), and
Portia, like a lot of rich people, is used to getting her own way (and
will cheat if she has to insure that she gets what she wants), etc., etc.
In short, there's great balance in this play, from start to finish. And
one neglected area that needs more study is Shakespeare's emphasis on
styles of thinking. In this play, the two rival styles are literal
(Shylock) and figurative/metaphorical (Portia's father). I guess there's
a third too: fuzzy thinking (Antonio).
Ed Taft
[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Joseph Egert <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Monday, 10 Jul 2006 20:48:01 +0000
Subject: 17.0634 The Big Question
Comment: RE: SHK 17.0634 The Big Question
David Bishop again notes "Shylock's mean materialism." But how did the
worldly villain appear on Shakespeare's stage?
Here's Florio's 1611 Italian dictionary definition of "SILO": "he that
hath a nose crooked upward, a flat or chamoy-nosed fellow [reverse
stereotype?]. Also he that hath a scouling looke, lowring visage or
hanging eye-browes. It hath also been used for the whole world or
universe."
Regards,
Joe Egert
_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>
DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the
editor assumes no responsibility for them.