Shakespeare’s work is considered classical as the stories can be consumed by any generation, in any decade or century and in any part of the world and still have relevance to the audience. His work embodies a multitude of universal themes allowing the reader to draw parallels to situations that may be occurring in their personal lives. The Merchant of Venice contains many contemporary themes that still ring true today. Reassuring in its themes of different forms of love, and the degrading actions of anti-Semitism are just a couple.

 

A strong theme that is woven throughout the words of the Merchant of Venice is “love”. The pages behold tales of many loving relationships and affinities which controversially do not all represent the traditional type of ‘love.’ The relationships obtained and developed between Bassanio and Portia (traditional love), Jessica and Lorenzo (inter-racial love) and Gratiano and Nerissa (spontaneous love) are all between a man and a woman, proving still relevant in today’s society. If a microscope were to be placed over these three relationships, parallels could be drawn to the ones of today. The conceptual belief that all 3 marriages have a slim chance of surviving the tests of time, is represented in the multitude of divorces that are occurring daily, in 2013, there were 47,638 divorces granted in Australia. 

 

                                      The main reason for divorce is surmised that marriages                                       are occurring without the couple getting to know the                                         ‘itty gritty’ stuff about each other, evolving too                                           quickly for the partners to realise that they may not                                       be meant for one another. This ‘problem’ is present in                                       two, possibly three of the relationships established                                         in the Merchant of Venice. 

                                      Bassanio and Portia get married before they had                                             chance to really get to know each other. (This                                               occurrence can't be faulted on either one as they were                                       adhering to the guidelines set by Portia’s father                                           before his untimely passing). However, their marriage                                       was in the beginning, fuelled by Bassanio’s desire for                                       Portia’s money.

                                      Gratiano and Nerissa got married after knowing each                                         other for only a few hours, challenging the nature of                                       love and marriage. The parallelism of the couples                                           dialogue “You saw” “I beheld” and “You loved” “I                                             loved” with Bassanio and Portia, and Gratiano’s big                                         announcement as he admits that Nerissa only agreed to                                       marry him if Bassanio won the casket contest,                                               concludes to the audience that their love may not be                                         very genuine.

 

Continuing with relationships that are present in The Merchant of Venice, a second avenue is explored in the proposed sexuality of Antonio. Antonio’s deep friendship and dependance on Bassanio, and his willingness to risk his life and drain his finances to help Bassanio court Portia has been interpreted as a supporting theory that Antonio is homosexual. Theories began to first circulate in the 1950’s but not without many conscientious objectors. During that time period, the language people used was much more expressive, leading audiences to take Antonio as homosexual.

 

Modern productions now use the theory that Antonio is suffering from his love for Bassanio to explain his melancholic behaviour, nothing however, has been substantiated as Shakespeare is not alive to confirm his thoughts during the writing of his play. Many Scholars still maintain the standing belief that all attempts to read between the lines of Shakespeare’s characters in terms of being gay or straight in accordance with the modern understanding of the relationship is culturally and historically flawed. This theme of love is becoming ever more important in today’s time as we as 21st Century people, move to be more accepting, understanding and open about gay marriage, even recently changing the laws in several countries to allow it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The third branch of love interwoven into this play is the type between a man and his money. The Merchant of Venice declares from the outset that it is money that makes the world go round. As Portia proves with cold, cruel clarity in the courtroom, there's more than one way to extract a pound of flesh. On one hand, the fact that Shylock constitutes human flesh into his business contract with Antonio, showcases how wrapped up we all are in the cash nexus - we cannot escape its grip and hope to live. On the other hand, Shylock is offered a sum far larger than the 3,000 ducats owed to allow Antonio to live. His blatant disregard of this offer leads the audience to assume that there are some things more important than money, in the case of Shylock, revenge. The challenge presented to the audience is to decide which one is worse.

 

But why is Shylock like this? It could be said that Antonio brought his fate unto himself for the years of racial discrimination he performed against Shylock. Although we cannot be sure that Shakespeare was an anti-semite, we can draw this conclusion through his ugly depiction of Shylock as a cold-hearted Jew, that hates Christians and wants to kill them. Shakespeare achieves  anti-semitic views in exhibiting Shylock as an inhuman scoundrel, whose diabolical cunning is bent on gratifying a satanic lust for Christian flesh. You noticed the way Shylock keeps saying "I'll have my bond" over and over again in Act 3, Scene 3, right? The guy would rather have a piece of Antonio (literally) than "thrice" the amount of money he's owed, which suggests that Shylock is a) bloodthirsty, b) vengeful, and c) inflexible.

 

Over the years, theatre and film productions have portrayed the Jewish money lender in various ways. “Shylock’s representations have varied from the devil incarnate to a sometimes comic villain jibbering absurdly about ducats (money) and daughters. He has also been sentimentalised as a wronged and suffering father, nobler by far than the people who triumph over him.”

 

However, although we can see that Shylock is a victim of bigotry, his actions often make it hard for the audience to sympathise with him. Rude and sharp in his interactions, abrupt with his daughter, mean to his servant and described as ‘hell’ on more than one occasion. 

"I am sorry thou wilt leave my father so," Jessica says to Lancelot. "Our house is hell, and thou, a merry devil, / Didst rob it of some taste of tediousness" (2.3.1-3)

Was it his own, of those around him actions that caused him to end up a broken man? The debate is not about whether or not Shylock is bad because he is a bad Jew or bad because he is simply a Jew. The play establishes quite clearly that he and his community are badly treated in Venice and subject to vicious discrimination, so it could be argued that he came by his rage honestly.

 

To place things into perspective, anti-Semitism is still a huge issue today in the 21st century. The Merchant of Venice has been banned from public school’s shelves in Toronto, Canada for its interpreted endorsement of anti-semitism. Parents and teachers worry that the stereotyped Jewish Shylock in the play will influence young, un-educated teenagers, who may not have much of a multi-cultural experience to treat all Jews they meet with the same contempt and derogatory treatment pictured within the play. For a Jewish person reading The Merchant of Venice, they may be able to draw parallels to confrontations they have experienced or witnessed in their own personal lives. 

 

Overall, The Merchant on Venice is as relevant today in the 21st Century as in

the year it was written 1596, thus the Elizabethan/Shakespearean time. When you

get past the old language and engage yourself into the ‘story’ and important

thees of the text, you can form your own opinion of the many facets of ‘love’

and the importance of living with consequences of loving relationships both

physical and emotional and the possibilities of those relationships turning

sour (therefore divorce) because of such issues of falling ‘in love’ too

quickly, or following parental/cultural expectations that do not represent

your own beliefs. How amazing that 419 years late, we can still relate to

the anti-semitism views with wars such as WW2 - the Holocaust having

occurred. It makes you ponder, just how far have we come in the last 419

years? This is a true example of classical literature!