Printable View
This question daunts me...
Is the Merchant of Venice a Comedy or a tragedy?
Could someone give me atleast two good reasons for either one with quotes perhaps to back it up?
I was asked to write this for an essay a while back and my mind went blank!
Thank you,
Harry
In the original folio publications, 'The Merchant of Venice' was classified as a comedy. What you have to consider is, technically, a comedy isn't a comedy because it's funny, but because the hero doesn't have a tragic fall in the end. Different terminology, that's all. So I guess what I'm asking is, are you analyzing it as a comedy/tragedy by Elizabethan standards, or by ours?
Rosalind has made a very good point.
I would also like to add that, MOV being a play, this also partly depends on the production. While I have personally only seen productions that are what I would from my 21st century perspective consider "tragedies", it certainly has comic elements to it and could probably be turned into something I would label a "comedy".
Yet, I am not sure how well a comic Merchant might go down with the audiences -- the play itself is, apparently, more or less officially banned in many US schools due to its alleged anti-semitism. And if you now went to turn it into a certain type of a comedy... I can see the headlines, already.
Ergh. I'm going to assume that the eye-rolling over school censorship is just assumed, and move on with the conversation.
I agree with Vili. I've never seen a comic production of 'Merchant' either, but I suppose it could be done--just emphasize the comic elements, the romance, the happy ending. On the other hand, I saw a production this summer than managed to make even those aspects negative. They somehow turned the couples' recconciliations into rows, and somehow had it make sense.
However, even if it's technically a comedy, I personally think that 'Merchant' is a very dark play, and that that's the way Shakespeare wanted it. It's disturbing, it has very few really sympathetic characters, and you feel so sorry for the 'villain' by the end that there's no enjoyment of his fall. I mean, you can cheer when Macbeth dies. You can't cheer when Shylock hobbles out of the courtroom.
I pretty much agree with what you wrote, Rosalind. And it is indeed true and a good point to make that the comic and romance elements can and have been portrayed in a negative light. I also tend to think of Merchant as a very dark play, and it is also one of my favourites for it.
Have you seen the recent film version of the play? The one with Al Pacino as Shylock, Jeremy Irons as Antonio, and Joseph Fiennes as Bassanio. If you have, what did you think of it?
The school censorship bit was something I read about at the Shaksper.net mailing list some time back. I don't remember who actually mentioned it and what the point was that he or she was making with it, but that's my source.
I did see the most recent film, and honestly, I had mixed feelings. The acting was great (well, with that cast, how would it not be great?) and the production was really well done, though I didn't like suitor's contest. It definately got the grimness of the play across. But I think in some ways it was a bit sensationalized, a bit overdone. Also, I guess cutting-and-pasting the script is inevitable in movie adaptations, but this time it really threw me. What did you think? Do you know of any other productions you would reccomend?
Oh, I should add--the movie definately handled suspense well! I saw it with my mother, who was unfamiliar with the play. She covered her eyes because she was convinced that Pacino was about to cut Irons right open!
I know 'Merchant' gets censored or avoided a lot, but I always find it aggravating.
I quite liked the film, to be honest. The production, camera and acting was excellent. Although I must agree that something was off with the suitors' contest. And at some points I felt the pacing was a bit slow -- maybe this had something to do with the almost complete copy-paste of the script that you mentioned. My girlfriend actually fell asleep halfway through! But she does not like Shakespeare to begin with, so that wasn't very surprising. :)
It's been a while since I saw the film, but I seem to remember that it did something with the song Portia sings before Bassanio makes the correct choice. Did it leave it out altogether, or emphasize it somehow? Or am I mixing it with something else here? As you may know, some argue that the song Portia sings directs Bassanio to choose the casket, and hence Portia is actually cheating.
That is, of course, hardly a major point. Just somehow it stuck with me. Although not clearly well enough to actually make me remember what happened...
I'm afraid I can't really recommend any taped versions of the play. The Laurence Olivier film is supposedly excellent, but I haven't seen it. The 1980 BBC production, meanwhile, is not very good, as far as I can remember. There actually aren't that many other film versions that I am aware of. It is probably one of the least filmed of his plays.
This play is a comedy for a couple of reasons. Shakespeare's comedies usually include things like puns or songs. There is usually a character to incite laughter (although it isn't exactly funny that Launcelot tells his blind father that he is dead, this is still considered comedy--ACT 2, SCENE 2). Mistaken identity or disguises are used (Portia in court). Plus there is always a happy ending (and most of the main characters in this play end up together and in love--of course in Shakespeare's day, there would have been no hope for the poor Shylock anyway).
FYI--According to Marjorie Garber's Shakespeare After All, until the mid eighteenth century the Shylock was played as a comedic figure (red wig and false nose-signs of Jewishness). Then he was played as a villian. It wasn't until the nineteenth century that he was portrayed as a sympathetic figure. Of course now, after the Holocaust, it's hard to imagine him in any other way.
No debate on the quality of the production or camera work on the movie. Despite my criticism, I did enjoy it a lot. It was only afterwards that I started thinking too hard, I guess. I'm afraid I don't really remember how they handled the song--I'm pretty sure it wasn't included. I haven't seen the film since it was in cinemas, though, so I'm pretty foggy on the details, too. I don't remember having any complaints about the pacing, but I imagine it would get a bit dull for someone less than enamoured of the Bard.
Wow, I had no idea Laurence Olivier did 'Merchant of Venice.' I'd love to see that--I like most of the productions he was in. Who does Olivier play, out of curiousity?
LadyMacbeth, I agree with your list of the features of comedy, but while they are usually comedic, with the exception of the happy ending I'd say they can just as easily appear in tragedies. Take 'King Lear,' for example. It has disguises, mistaken identities, puns, wordplay, and the Fool as the comedic character. If it stopped two scenes early (or even followed the original story, for that matter), it would technically be a comedy. But, like 'Merchant,' it's still a very dark play.
Shylock, apparently. It's a 1973 TV version, and the IMDb entry seems to be here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070386/ . He didn't actually direct it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosalind
Also I immediately thought of King Lear when reading LadyMacbeth's post. Curiously enough, Rosalind, cutting the play two scenes early was exactly what the Victorian editions did. And I think even in the 18th century, the play was only successful when given a happy ending.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosalind
In any case, it was interesting to read about the timing when Shylock turned from a comic to a tragic character, and later from a villain to a non-villain.
Ah, yes. The Victorians. They loathed 'King Lear' because of the lack of neatly moralistic poetic justice, the unhappy ending, the crudeness, and the Unity-less format. So what do they do? They get the whole thing re-written and call it a hit. Personally, I have never had any patience for the Neo-classicists.
That is very interesting about the interpretations of Shylock, LadyMacbeth. If I ever have free time again (which is a big 'if' at this point) I'm going to have to read that book.
:D the merchant of venice wasseen as a comedy back then not anymore because the humour back then has been lost!
It's also seen as a comedy because issues that were present at the time of the book being written are still relevent today such as Racism, Justice and Money!
It's seen as a tragedy because of sympathy brought up often in the play, sypathy for both sides for shylock as he loses his daughter (Jessica), his money and his court case, theres sympathy for Antonio in the court as he is willing to give up to Shylock which would cause sympathy towards him from the crowds because he is giving up to a Jew which wouldn't have been seen!!!
hope thats helped u!! xx
we have tragedy all along , there nothing funny in the play
But the ending of the play is bobble (happy ending) in some character
and sad ending in another people or characters (like shylock in the play)
so I think it's tragic_comedy play.
(flower)
Modern perceptions of the play means that directors normally focus on the persecution. It's like 'The Taming of The Shrew' where we feel more unsettled by supposedly comic elements.
The basic distinction betwen Shakespearean comedy and tragedy is that comedy ends with a marriage and tragedy with deaths. However some of the comedies have streaks of darkness and some of the tragedies have streaks of humour (Hamlet does).