While I was unsure before about whether or not Shylock is villain or victim in The Merchant of Venice, upon closer inspection, the BBC "Theatre in Video" production seemed to be leaning towards villain. Shylock's character is dressed in all black, and the actor chosen was shorter than any other. Whether intentional or not, the visual difference between Shylock and other men sets him apart from them, and the black clothing suggest evil or darkness. Maybe even a 'black heart'. In the climax of the play, the court scene, Shylock and Antonio are placed much more closely on stage than I would have pictured them. The producers seem to be saying, "look at this man, he can stand a foot away from a good man like Antonio and demand his life." Villain. The physical closeness of the characters, and Antonio's friends intense pleadings with Shylock, reveal a heartless and unforgiving man.

The themes of mercy and justice were also extremely emphasized in the film. Shylock refuses to have mercy on Antonio, saying he wants justice to be fulfilled. Portia(disguised as the lawyer Balthazar) tries to convice Shylock to take his money and leave. The actress helped me to better understand the theme in the way she softly, almost pleadingly, encouraged Shylock to show mercy. But when the tables were turned and Shylock was the one in need of mercy, the judge spared his life before Shylock could even ask. The judge said it was "the see the difference in our spirit." So once again Shylock is the villain, the one who showed no mercy and asked for justice. It was the judge, by Antonio's request, who portrayed the Christian concept of mercy when he could have dealt Shylock with justice.

So there you go, Shylock is the villain and he got what he deserved. Right?

Oh.. poor guy..

Some other things that I noticed about the production:

Antonio(right) saying goodbye to Bassanio(left) with
Portia(disguised as lawyer) listening in.

• It was set up like a stage production, but obviously for a movie viewing audience. The actors talked too softly for a play, moved around too much, and interacted with the camera.
• I like that all the [asides] that weren't to another character were directed at the camera. It formed a connection between me and the character, like they were confiding in me as a viewer.
• The setting was very minimalistic, but the costumes were extravagant. Called attention and focus to the actor.
• Camera angles usually focused on speaker, but sometimes captured powerful emotions in listeners
• Shylock's daughter, Jessica, didn't have a Hebrew accent. This is a foreshadow of her running away with a Christian and not identifying herself with the Jews.
• The women in the court scene were not very well disguised as men. It emphasized the gullibility and ignorance of the men for not recognizing them.

The actor who plays Shylock in the BBC adaptation (and apparently the radio voice).

So when I first started reading Merchant of Venice it was pretty black and white who was who. Shylock's the villain, and Antonio and Bassanio the good guys. Then as I got a little farther into it, my perception flipped. I actually felt bad for Shylock. His daughter ran away with a Christian and took all his money, Antonio humiliates him in public, and his servant runs away to work for Bassanio. Antonio starts to look like the guys who gets whatever he wants, and no one likes that. But then there was a court scene, and Shylock is demanding a pound of Antonio's flesh to repay a debt and refuses to have mercy, which kinda heads back towards the villain status, and Antonio is so sad, just wanting to see his best friend before he has to die. So then I thought, ah-ha!, Shylock is the bad guy, and this court scene proves it. But by the end of that same scene Bassanio's wife, disguised as a lawyer, has tricked Shylock out of demanding Antonio's death and Shylock pretty much loses everything. They take away all that he owns and give back half on the conditions that he turn from Jew to Christian and, when he dies, give everything to his daughter who has run away with a gentile. I feel so bad for him. I mean sure, he wanted to kill the protagonist, but "Nay, take my life and all" is the line of a pretty beaten down man.

So the moral of the story is I don't know who I'm supposed to be happy or sad for in this comedy of sorts. Sure, I know Shakespeare intended for his crowd to hate the Jew and be glad he got such a harsh punishment, but I just don't know that he deserved it. And the movie didn't help, he was such a cute little, old Jewish guy with his Jewish hat and thick Hebrew accent. And all the other guys seemed kind of pompous to me.. Perhaps the BBC production wanted to be more open about who's side to be on. Anyway.... If you're still reading this long rant, thank you. I guess the point is that I really loved this play, but loving something doesn't mean I completely understand it. So maybe next week my thoughts will be a little more coherent. Until then, Hakuna Mutata:)

Honestly, I am so excited to read this play. The plot summary was so confusing and twisted that I'm not even going to try and sum it up here, but this play had me laughing just reading the summary. What I got from it was a double wedding, debts payed in a pound of flesh, women dressed up as lawyers, and a Jew forced to convert to Christianity or give over half his property. I can't wait.

The only slightly disappointing thing about this comedy that I can see is it's romance. Like I talked about before, Shakespeare really only has two kinds of love. This one seems to fall right into the "love at first sight, meant to be together" category. Not once, but twice in this play do two people fall so easily in love it's like fiction. Oh wait....

I am, however, thrilled for the villain. His name is Shylock, and the Urban Dictionary definitions of his name are quite fantastic. Which is funny, because I didn't know Shakespeare was urban. But basically he is a ruthless, Jewish, money-lender. When the merchant Antonio takes out a loan for his friend, he promises Shylock a pound of his flesh if he does not pay the money back in full. When Antonio's ships are lost Shylock tries to cash in his debt. Can you think of any better villain than one who demands a pound of your flesh? I didn't think so.

As far as movie adaptations of the play, there have been at least 18 that I could find. (Well, that IMDb could find.) They all seem okay, but nothing really stuck out. There was a 2004 production that was looking pretty good, and it's the only one that's been really heavily advertised. I tried looking it up on the BYU library website to no avail, only to realize that it's rated R. Shucks... So I'll have to keep working on that. But I'm sure one of those other 17 movies are worth watching.

So what's my plan? Read the play straight through and be on the lookout for themes and motifs that interest me. Then watch a movie, noticing how the specific adaptation affects my views on the play. Hopefully this way I can completely focus on each media, rather than trying to read along to a movie and get distracted with edits and cuts.