The Jew of Malta and Merchant of Venice

260 Words2 Pages
Elizabethan England produced two great plays involving Jewish protagonists, and for most of the past hundred years or so it has been generally believed that one of these plays is essentially defensible although highly problematic while the other is simply and crudely anti-Semitic. The Merchant of Venice remains controversial and with good reason, but it is generally defended and is and can be performed in the English-speaking world without much protest. The Jew of Malta, Marlowe's earlier masterpiece, on the other hand is, in fact, not controversial: it is generally regarded as crudely anti-Semitic and therefore cannot be staged. William Shakespeare’s, The Merchant of Venice, contains many examples that insult Jews because they were the minority in London in his time. Although many parts of the play could be interpreted as offensive in modern times, Elizabethan audiences found them comical. The majority of London’s population at the time was anti-Semitic because there were very few Jews living there. Shakespeare’s, The Merchant of Venice, supports anti-Semitism actions and thought. Although people from all kinds of nationalities and religious backgrounds did business in Venice, Shakespeare's setting is full of religious strife, especially between Christians and Jews. This culminates in a big legal showdown over whether or not Shylock should be able to collect his pound of flesh from Antonio. Although 16th century Venice was more tolerant of foreigners than Elizabethan England, Jews in Venice were confined to ghettos at the time Shakespeare wrote, ‘The Merchant of Venice’. (Shakespeare, however, doesn't ever acknowledge this in the
Open Document