BOOK REVIEW: The Merchant of Venice by William Shakespeare

The Merchant of VeniceThe Merchant of Venice by William Shakespeare
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Amazon page

Get Speechify to make any book an Audiobook


This story hinges on the (now proverbial) pound of flesh. Bassanio is a poor gentleman in love with a rich lady, Portia. While Bassanio is upfront with Portia about his poverty — and she could care less — he can’t bring himself to propose to her without a few coins to his name. So, he goes to Antonio, the titular merchant of Venice and a close friend, and asks for a loan. Antonio is free and easy about making loans without requiring interest payments. Antonio says he’d gladly hand over the money to Bassanio, but all his money is tied up in his ships at sea. He, furthermore, tells Bassanio that if anyone will make him loan, the merchant can easily cover it. Antonio has tons of merchandise arriving in the next couple months from all around the world. The loan amount is small compared to what Antonio intends to earn from selling his goods.

The problem is that the only other game in town for loans is a Scrooge-esque lender named Shylock. Shylock is hard enough to deal with as it is, but he has it in for Antonio, in particular. Besides the fact that Antonio frequently offers interest-free loans — cutting into Shylock’s business — Antonio has also kept Shylock from collecting collateral by paying off other people’s loans before said loans went into default. (Maybe that’s why there were no other lenders in all of Venice?) To be fair, Shylock claims that his gripe with Antonio is that the latter is always leveling antisemitic slurs and other insults at the lender. At any rate, Shylock says he’ll make the loan of 3,000 Ducats, but, instead of ship or merchandise, he requires a pound of flesh as bond. Antonio, for reasons of friendship and the fact that he believes he will have a windfall by then, agrees to Shylock’s terms. If he doesn’t repay the 3,000 ducats in three months, Antonio will have a pound of flesh cut from his chest.

[Spoilers follow.] Bassanio takes the cash and goes traveling to make his proposal. First, he is required to play a “Let’s Make a Deal” game in order to earn the opportunity to wed Portia. The game involves three boxes (i.e. caskets): one of gold, one of silver, and one of lead. Inside one of them is a portrait of Portia, but the others are losers. All a prospective suitor has to go by is a brief inscription. By the time Bassanio arrives the reader has seen two Princes’s failed attempts at this courtship game. The inscriptions with the gold and silver boxes flatter Portia and the suitor, respectively. The inscription on the leaden box acknowledges that the marriage will not be all sunshine and roses, and that is the box Bassanio has the wisdom to choose. Unfortunately, shortly after he does so, he learns that a couple of Antonio’s ships wrecked at sea and the others haven’t been heard from, and – by now – the loan is in default.

Bassanio heads out to Venice with triple the Shylock’s money from his generous and wealthy new wife, planning to dispose of the situation. However, Shylock won’t budge on the terms of the bond. A drama plays out in the courtroom. Portia, anticipating the Shylock might not take the lucrative offer, has her butler take a letter to a legal expert and has said servant return with the lawyer’s reply posthaste. Portia and her handmaid disguise themselves as men – a lawyer and legal clerk, respectively – and catch up with the legal proceedings in Venice. After no one (i.e. the Duke, Bassanio, nor Portia-in-disguise as lawyer) is able to reason with the Shylock, Portia-as-lawyer tells him that he may proceed with cutting away the pound of flesh. However, the bond document says nothing about blood. So, if Shylock spills any of Antonio’s blood, he will be guilty of assault (at the least) and murder in the likely event that Antonio dies. Not to mention, going an ounce over a pound would be a breach of contract to be severely countered. This turns the tables, and Antonio and friends end up exploiting the situation to force the Shylock to convert religion as well as dictating the disposition of the lender’s estate (not to mention he’s still out his 3,000 ducats.)

[Spoiler end.] This play has a tense story line, particularly for a comedy, and is a gripping read. However, it’s also one of the most controversial Shakespearean works for its antisemitic and racist comments. On the other hand, there are reasons to believe that Shakespeare might have been engaging in satire. First, I mentioned that Shylock doesn’t cite loss of business as his quarrel with Antonio, but rather that the merchant has repeatedly insulted and slandered him. While we don’t see direct evidence of this behavior, the fact that Antonio rapes Shylock with his religion (by that I mean forcing a conversion using the threat of State force,) makes it ring true. Second, but continuing on this theme, there are a number of points during which the Shylock is sympathetic, most notably the famous “If you prick us, do we not bleed?…” monologue. Third, we learn that Shylock has a delightful daughter named Jessica, leading the reader to the conclusion that perhaps Shylock isn’t a jerk because he’s a Jew, but is a jerk who happens to be a Jew. Finally, the degree to which Antonio and his friends rake Shylock over the coals at the end of the court scene tarnishes Antonio’s virtue and makes Shylock sympathetic once again. The “turn the other cheek” approach of Christianity gives way to Old Testament vengefulness.

Like many of Shakespeare’s plays (notably “The Taming of the Shrew”,) accusations of sexism are also common, but if there were an award for BOSS of this play it would go to Portia, hands down. True, she has to pretend to be a man to get it all done, but those were those the times. The need for disguise also facilitates a prank that she and her handmaid play on their new husbands, regarding their wedding rings. While they are forced to comply with the dictates of the age, the women in this play certainly hold their own as strong characters. Still, I can’t say the degree to which Shakespeare was a satirist versus an anti-Semite / racist / sexist, but it’s a testament to the richness of his stories and the depth of his characters that his works can be interpreted so diversely.

It’s a masterpiece. Read it.

View all my reviews

26 thoughts on “BOOK REVIEW: The Merchant of Venice by William Shakespeare

  1. Thank you for visiting and liking my post today on writing a Haiku. I am delighted to see your blog – and I plan to read many of your reviews. This is a stellar FIND for me today – I took as many courses in Shakespeare as I could during my academic training – the classes always went to Stratford on Avon in Canada to see them in person. AWESOME plays. Awesome place to go.


  2. It’s very dangerous to apply twenty-first century values to medieval writing. Remember at the time Shakespeare was writing women did not even appear on stage. My personal opinion is after sitting through several classes on various plays, we are probably better served by seeing any performance. As literature, I think they fall flat. In spite of glimmers of deathless prose. “Men now safely tucked in bed will rue the day & wish they were here….”

    Liked by 2 people

  3. I agree that this play should be seen as satire of antisemitism; the sexism is however completely unconscious and routine for its time. The irony of seeing about playing a woman pretending to be a man should not be discounted. Thanks for drawing my attention to your very well written and thoughtful blog.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I saw a Royal Shakespeare Company version of this play set in modern day Las Vegas. A brilliant production that showed most of the charaters as feeling in control of their own destinies and yet it had a wonderfully ambiguous ending that still, over 10 years later, prompts me to think about what the play is saying.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Thank you for giving my blog a read! 😀 I just finished reading the review of Merchant of Venice by you. It is adequately well-explained. This reminded me of a skit I performed on one of a scene of this amazing play.!

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Try Hamlet next. It’s amazing. I saw Rosencrantz and Guildenstern off Broadway years ago and was blown away. But you have to at least read Hamlet first. I took an entire class on Hamlet in college and was amazed how much I had missed merely by reading it one time. There is so much in every line in that play.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. A very well written book review. It brings back memories of my university days when we studied Shakespeare. We adored those classes wherein our teacher used to read out the plays in a dramatic manner. I plan to read all your reviews. Thanks for connecting.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Nice review. I have often wondered whether the plot device around the pound of flesh (but no drop of blood) is an ironic reference to kosher meat. But I can’t remember ever reading any commentary on the Merchant of Venice which refers to this.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Great play choice, Portia’s is quick witted, her potency comes from her ability to make the law work for her – for a woman now it is often difficult, then virtually impossible, high five to that woman!

    Liked by 1 person

  10. I studied this play for O levels. Portia is boss (hahaha). I still remember her speech: “Take then thy bond, take thou thy pound of flesh, but in the cutting of it…” etc.. From the island of Barbados which was parisitised by Christians, I always related more to Shylock. Ill-treatment can make anyone a Shylock and morality clearly doesn’t require religion. It requires empathy.

    Liked by 2 people

  11. I taught Merchant many times to high school kids. Shakespeare saw too deeply into the human character to be a racist. He gives Shylock a voice that can’t be ignored: his “hath not a Jew” speech testifies to this.
    Thanks for this post!

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Your review made for entertaining reading but I try never to apply twenty-first century values to writing from a past century. This applies as much to the 19th and 20th, as to Shakespeare’s day. It’s enough to note the differences and then just read the play or book to engage with the ideas, something Shakespeare had in abundance. It was stimulating to read your take on the play.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.