I really cannot bring myself to have much sympathy for Portia. To the extent that her monologue is convincing, one cannot positivelty deny that she is not either completely deluded about her own lack of impartiality and inconsistency, or that she does not really believe what she is saying and is making it all up as she is talking. Portia does not show any mercy (or justice) to Shylock herself -- even if it _was_ just to release Antonio from his contract (or from the part that of the obligation which would have killed Antonio). She rejected giving Shylock an equivalent in money, and she also rejected that Antonio simply return the original loan to Shylock. Portia and Antonio, then, went on to positively _punish_ Shylock. They shake him down and force Shylock to 1) give an inheritance to a daughter whom he had previously disinherited and 2) they force him to convert to Christianity -- if not, they will completely dispossess Shylock. It's overkill. Not to mention, that Portia cannot be assumed to be acting in good faith, as she has a vested interest in the outcome and she is at the very same lying by pretending to be a judge. So, if Portia were the rightful judge in the dispute between Shylock and Antonio (and she is not), she would still be biased.
Hey Juan, I love your enthusiasm for this play! So thanks for commenting. Of course I agree Portia has a vested interest in the outcome, but she does show Shylock mercy and actually offers him three times the money owed. She says to Shylock "Be merciful. Take thrice thy money. Bid me tear the bond." But Shylock doesn't take it. Obviously, Antisemitism is a whole other theme to be explored in this play and you could definitely argue that had Shylock not been treated so unfairly all his life by Christian's who discriminated against Jews, then Shylock might not have been so relentless and bitter in his pursuit of Antonio. Portia did what she felt was right. All through the monologue she might have known that the outcome wouldn't favour Shylock, yet she still tried to be fair and give him chance to withdraw. At first, she tried to gently convince Shylock to withdraw his bond. Then she tries to offer him three times the money. And only in the last moment when Shylock is about to cut out Antonio's flesh does she reveal a Venetian law "if thou dost shed one drop of Christian blood, thy lands and goods are by the laws of Venice confiscate unto the state of Venice." Also, it's Antonio who declares that Shylock converts to Christianity, not Portia. Hopefully, this is helpful. There's a great reddit thread on this if you're interested: www.reddit.com/r/shakespeare/comments/3tpysv/why_do_we_think_the_christians_forcibly_convert/
Another masterclass. Absolutely loved this one and the performance was exceptional. ❤️✨🙌🏻
Too too kind 🐒 🥰
THIS IS AMAZING! Thank you so much!
Haha you’re SO welcome Daniella! 😊 thanks for commenting 🙏🏻
Perfect keep going
Thanks ✌️
I really cannot bring myself to have much sympathy for Portia. To the extent that her monologue is convincing, one cannot positivelty deny that she is not either completely deluded about her own lack of impartiality and inconsistency, or that she does not really believe what she is saying and is making it all up as she is talking.
Portia does not show any mercy (or justice) to Shylock herself -- even if it _was_ just to release Antonio from his contract (or from the part that of the obligation which would have killed Antonio). She rejected giving Shylock an equivalent in money, and she also rejected that Antonio simply return the original loan to Shylock. Portia and Antonio, then, went on to positively _punish_ Shylock. They shake him down and force Shylock to 1) give an inheritance to a daughter whom he had previously disinherited and 2) they force him to convert to Christianity -- if not, they will completely dispossess Shylock. It's overkill.
Not to mention, that Portia cannot be assumed to be acting in good faith, as she has a vested interest in the outcome and she is at the very same lying by pretending to be a judge. So, if Portia were the rightful judge in the dispute between Shylock and Antonio (and she is not), she would still be biased.
Hey Juan, I love your enthusiasm for this play! So thanks for commenting. Of course I agree Portia has a vested interest in the outcome, but she does show Shylock mercy and actually offers him three times the money owed. She says to Shylock "Be merciful. Take thrice thy money. Bid me tear the bond." But Shylock doesn't take it. Obviously, Antisemitism is a whole other theme to be explored in this play and you could definitely argue that had Shylock not been treated so unfairly all his life by Christian's who discriminated against Jews, then Shylock might not have been so relentless and bitter in his pursuit of Antonio.
Portia did what she felt was right. All through the monologue she might have known that the outcome wouldn't favour Shylock, yet she still tried to be fair and give him chance to withdraw. At first, she tried to gently convince Shylock to withdraw his bond. Then she tries to offer him three times the money. And only in the last moment when Shylock is about to cut out Antonio's flesh does she reveal a Venetian law "if thou dost shed one drop of Christian blood, thy lands and goods are by the laws of Venice confiscate unto the state of Venice." Also, it's Antonio who declares that Shylock converts to Christianity, not Portia. Hopefully, this is helpful. There's a great reddit thread on this if you're interested: www.reddit.com/r/shakespeare/comments/3tpysv/why_do_we_think_the_christians_forcibly_convert/