Um.. no. I know it's funny, but it doesn'i make me laugh, if you know what I mean. This applies to most of the other 'funny' bits as well.You didn't find the mock cuckold scene that Portia and Nerissa played on their husbands funny?! (Act 5, Sc 1) - YesNo
You might not have been laughing at him because he is a Jew but his obsession with money is a typical Jewish stereotype, and Shakespeare's audience would be aware of this, hence why they found it amusing. Modern day audiences may not associate the stereotype with anti-semitism but Shakespeare is playing on racial stereotypes for laughs. I'm not saying that this makes him a bad playwright or makes the play bad- all comic writers play on one stereotype or another- but Shylock's race is inextricably linked to his greediness. - Kelby Lake
That's true, and I've no doubt Shakespeare started out to give his audience a very 'typical evil jew', but it didn't work out that way. In the end Shakespeare couldn't deny him his humanity. While he has a few characteristics of the stereotype, he also greatly transcends the stereotype.
However, after reading Marlowe's Jew of Malta today and comparing the two, I'm beginning to think there's no simple answer to the question. Barabas is much more villanous and much more of a stereotype than Shylock, but the rest of the folks in the play (christians, as well as muslims for good measure) are just as bad as he is. In Merchant of Venice on the other hand, the christians are portrayed as more noble, and this does give the play an anti semitic slant when compared to The Jew of Malta. They may bully the poor jew a bit, but they believe in mercy and forgiveness, as opposed to the revenge disguised as justice which the jew so stubbornly clings to. The nobleness is obviously undercut by the fact that mercy and forgiveness work very much in the christian's favour in this case, but I don't know if Shakespeare realised that.