Read Aloud the Text Content

This audio was created by Woord's Text to Speech service by content creators from all around the world.

Text Content or SSML code:

The discriminatory influence of religion is represented by dramatising the pressure individuals face in maintaining their cultural identity (QUESTION). In alignment with 16th-century binaries of Christian purity and stereotypical Jewish criminality, Shakespeare culminates the paradoxical interdependence of inclusion and exclusion to expose the hypocrisies perpetuated by dominant groups and solidify how societal ideologies disaffirm shared humanity. Shylock is constructed as a vengeful Jew with a “currish spirit”, labelled via derogatory epithets as a “dog jew” and a “devil” to affirm his identification as an archetypal“villain.” Shylock’s first line is symbolically layered with mercantile discourse, “three thousand ducats, well,” mirroring elements of rapaciousness to reaffirm Tudor stereotyping of Jewish fiscalism. As a caricature of Jewish wickedness, Shylock is juxtaposed with Antonio’s “good” and “honest” Christendom, as “the kindest man, the best conditioned and unwearied spirit.” This disparity consolidates Renaissance-England religious binaries which reflect a search for dependability in orthodox paradigms. Moreover, the Christians’ hypocritical motivation of moral righteousness is developed when Antonio says, “the Hebrew will turn Christian, he grows kind”, where the pun on “kind” invokes mockery through stereotypes and binaries of Hebrew and Christian, cruelty and kindness, further limiting authentic freedom. In both entertaining and educating Elizabethan audiences, Shakespeare provides an argument for common humanity. By unveiling the problematic duality of Antonio’s antagonistic character, as he “spit upon (Shylock’s) Jewish gaberdine,” Shakespeare confirms Antonio’s malice, contrary to his preceding depiction. In unmasking Antonio’s campaign of anti-Semetic abuse, Shakespeare critiques the performativity and inconsistencies in Christian displays of virtue and the anomalous motivations of religious dogma. In his rhetoric, Shylock destabilises anti-semetic stereotypes by adopting the role of the ‘storyteller’ to interrogate his audience's complacent cruelty. By appealing to a shared humanity, Shylock catechizes, “Hath not a Jew eyes?... if you prick us, do we not bleed?” This questioning challenges dominant paradigms by exposing how stereotyping limits the diversity of the human experience. A modern audience is prompted to recognise how anti-semetism continues to impact individuals today, regardless that all human beings share a natural kinship and dignity.