|
|
|
| Current Issue |
|
|
| Resources |
|
|
|
Shakespeare's Jew of Venice
| Article
# : |
17899 |
|
|
Section : |
CURRENTS IN MODERN THOUGHT
|
| Issue
Date : |
3 / 1990 |
6,663 Words |
| Author
: |
Sam Schoenbaun
Sam Schoenbaum is Distinguished Professor of Renaissance
Studies at the University of Maryland and director of the
university's Center for Renaissance and Baroque of America, he
is currently vice president of the international Shakespeare
Association. Schoenbaum's numerous publication include
Shakespeare's Lives, William Shakespeare: A Documentary Life,
and William Shakespeare: Records and Images. |
A common error identifies Shylock as the merchant of Venice in Shakespeare's play of the same name. But Shylock is not a merchant at all, only the usurious antagonist of the actual merchant of Venice. But the error is commonplace, so forcibly has Shylock impressed himself on multitudes of readers and spectators. He has a magnetism that the true merchant lacks.
This perception was apparently evident early on. To this the existence of an alternative title - by and large uncharacteristic of Shakespeare's plays - testifies. For the comedy was recorded in the Stationers' Register - used before the advent of modern copyright legislation by early printers to safeguard literary properties from purloining - in July 1598, only a couple of years after composition as "a book of the Merchant of Venice, or otherwise called the Jew of Venice."
The past summer saw a notable revival of the Merchant of Venice, which has frequently held the stage since Shakespeare wrote it. There was a time, not so long ago, when the London theatrical community slumbered away the summer month. The old favorites were still performed for tourist multitudes, but it wasn't time for new shows. Now the season appears to be year round, with first nights, as well as revivals of established favorites, taking place all the time.
But the most coveted attraction in the West End last summer was the almost four-century-old Merchant of Venice. It was the only entertainment advertised daily in the London press as sold out for the entire June to September run. I understand that queuing - a favorite British pastime - in hopes of cancellations began at noon each day and lasted until performances commenced at seven thirty. I am not so naïve as to imagine that the chief draw was the eminence of the playwright or the director, Sir Peter Hall, eminent as both may be. What people were lining up for was a chance to see superstar Dustin Hoffman as Shylock. I myself was sufficiently involved in the production to have contributed a program note for it. So I couldn’t resist booking a transatlantic flight to see the play - as Sir Peter's guest -at the Phoenix Theatre on Charing Cross Road. I had never traveled so far before for an evenings' entertainment.
It was worth it. The Hall revival did not bypass the possibilities for spectacle afforded by the casket or the court of justice scenes - far from it - but this was on the whole an austere and low-keyed production: Less can be - and was - more. The night I attended, the audience watched spellbound as Hoffman - the celebrity performer,
...
Read Full Article
Look for this article in Ask.com
|
|
