The Experience of Injustice and the Sense of Revenge of Shylock and Prospero

Shakespeare’s Shylock of Merchant of Venice can arguably be one of his most prized characters with his complex nature involving religion and usury and the different ways to interpret his attitude throughout the play. Upon studying Shylock’s character, the question of intent makes considerable recurrence. Critics John Gross and D.M. Cohen have argued that he was a power-hungry “monster” that took a stab at a Christian as soon as he had a chance, while Rita H. Silverman and Kenneth Gross would relate his revenge as a result of his oppression and sadness.

The issue here is not necessarily what Shylock says or does throughout the play, but what his end-goal is beyond what the play reveals. Similarly, Prospero from The Tempest seeks revenge at the beginning of the play to gain his power back as ruler; however in the end, he forgives everyone for their wrongdoings against him, but the reliability of his forgiveness is unclear.

Beyond the endings of both plays, it seems as though Shylock from Merchant of Venice and Prospero from The Tempest have perhaps not given up on their revenge at all.

Beyond the happy endings of both plays, there is some sort of malicious intent behind Shylock’s and Prospero’s actions and motivations. Shylock and Prospero both experienced injustice and sought revenge to get equal; however, by the end of the play, Shylock internalized his revenge and escaped to another place whereas Prospero forgave those who wronged him and took his place back in power.

Get quality help now

KarrieWrites

Verified

Proficient in: Drama

5 (339)

“ KarrieWrites did such a phenomenal job on this assignment! He completed it prior to its deadline and was thorough and informative. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Before coming to the conclusion of this sense of revenge from Shylock, it is important to examine the beginning of the play, where the anger is first presented. As Shylock is untaken with the option of giving Bassanio a loan at Antonio’s cost, Shylock meets with Antonio face-to-face, saying, “How like a fawning publican he looks! / I hate him for he is a Christian,  But more for that in low simplicity He lends out money gratis and brings down The rate of usance here with us in Venice” (1.3. 38-42). It is with these first words that the evidence of a relationship between Shylock and Antonio existed prior to this confrontation.

Shylock also mentions to Salerio later on, “He hath disgraced me, and hindered me half a million, laughed at my losses, mocked at my gains, scorned my nation, thwarted my  bargains, cooled my friends, heated mine enemies” (3.2. 51-54). Clearly Bassanio and Antonio chose the wrong person to go to for such a loan, as Antonio must have upset Shylock quite a bit in the past. Shylock clearly states his reasoning behind his hatred towards Antonio and after Salerio questions why Shylock request such a bond, he responds, “if it will feed nothing else, it will feed my revenge” (3.2. 50-51). He continues to assert the importance of this bond throughout the play, and once Shylock is brought to trial, he is reluctant to give up.

Similar to Merchant of Venice, The Tempest ends with happiness, as if everything is meant to be well and back to normal. The play, however, began with Prospero creating the storm that shipwrecked his brother Antonio and other enemies who attempted to overthrow him as Duke of Milan. As if the successful overthrow did not make Prospero angry enough, he reminisces to Miranda, “they hoist us, To cry to th’ sea that roared to us, to sigh To th’ winds whose pity, sighing back again,  Did us but loving wrong” (1.2. 148-151). It was then that they landed on an island by “providence divine”, as Prospero describes it (1.2. 160). Miranda had been primarily kept in the dark about the situation until she noticed the shipwreck to which Prospero assured her, “be collected.  No more amazement. Tell your piteous heart. There’s no harm done” (1.2. 13-15).

Miranda had good reason with his reply to believe that he was somehow involved in the boat’s unfortunate setting and pushed him to tell her what was happening. He finally gives in, telling her, “by foul play, as thou say’st were we heaved thence,  But blessedly holp hither” (1.2. 61-62). Prospero and Miranda were likely meant to die, but miraculously reaching the island has given him plenty of time to work up more anger and resentment towards his brother. Though he was not paying the people of Milan the attention he needed to, he felt it was unfair of his brother to overthrow him and cast him and his daughter out into the sea with little pity. The next step of this feeling of injustice: revenge.

As Merchant moves forward, Shylock loses some of his speaking time, but whenever he does speak, it is in his own defense. John Gross analyzes Shylock as someone who is “invoking his humanity in order to justify an inhuman purpose” (67). This points to the idea that Shylock perhaps saw an opportunity with Antonio to seek vengeance on a Christian. Antonio did give Shylock reason to believe that he disliked him for being Jewish, but it is more likely that Shylock is lashing out on Antonio because he, as a Christian, has previously wronged Shylock. Shylock’s notions began by fighting for equality, but he was driven by the amount of power he had.

As Antonio goes to speak to Shylock and the Jailer, Shylock immediately says, “I’ll have my bond. Speak not against my bond.  I have sworn an oath that I will have my bond” (3.3. 5-6). This is what shows his obsession with power and rush to defense. Whenever the subject is brought up, he will not let the bond go. Antonio was attempting to reach out to Shylock, but Shylock was reluctant to listen and just started rambling about his bond. He put Antonio and the Christians in a difficult place with this bond and he did not want to ease up.

In the words of D.M. Cohen, “all [Shylock’s] words, even the most convincingly aggrieved among them, are the words of a cold, heartless killer and should therefore be regarded skeptically” (59). Though Shylock may have been driven by this idea of Jewish retaliation, he became enveloped in the control he held. Even as three times the amount of money is offered in return to Shylock, he still asserts, “An oath, an oath! I have an oath in heaven.  Shall I lay perjury upon my soul?  No, not for Venice” (4.1. 226-228). Shylock wants one thing and one thing only, Antonio’s life.

Cohen backs up the idea of a vengeful Shylock with his reference to Shylock’s sentimental self-pity he feels towards his daughter. He shows this particularly when he is faced with the fact that his daughter Jessica is gone with his money; he says, “why, thou loss upon loss! The thief gone with so much, and so much to find the thief, and no satisfaction, no revenge! Nor no ill luck  stirrung but what lights o’ my shoulders, no sighs but  o’ my breathing, no tears but o’ my shedding” (3.2. 87- 91). Shylock is so concerned with his own loss of his daughter and money, yet nowhere in this scene does he seem to show any sort of sorrow for his daughter; only himself. This is the hateful, “monster”- type of Shylock we know.

On the other end of the spectrum, Shylock can be seen a sorrowful, oppressed Jew. Rita H. Silverman critiques Shylock as “[The Jew who] resented the Christian’s freedom to act in accordance with his religious precept” (14). She explains that Shylock acts the way he does because he has been living an unfair life in control of others. She also resorts to the idea that Shylock, as a Jew, has encountered all sorts of tragedy with his discrimination. This is what she says leads him to be so bitter.

Silverman considers Shylock to have taken advantage of the situation he was given, not because he was a “monster”, but because he has been oppressed for so long. Kenneth Gross would agree, mentioning, “repetition [in his “Hath not a Jew?” speech] is a cipher of his melancholy, his sadness” (57). What Silverman and Gross fail to dwell on is the idea of revenge. While Shylock can be presented as depressed throughout the play, more evidence points to his anger, especially as Shylock demands physical flesh and blood of Antonio.

Upon speaking with Salerio about his deal, he says, “If a  Christian wrong a Jew, what should his sufferance be  by Christian example? Why, revenge. The villainy you teach me I will execute, and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction” (65-69). Shylock knows he is turning to revenge out of rage and even acknowledges it in these lines. By saying he will “go hard” except he will “better the instruction”, Shylock is turning the way he was wronged into something worse. He is fighting fire with fire. This points directly to the idea of him being more of an outraged soul rather than a depressed one. The excuse for Shylock’s actions is revenge, which happens to be the excuse for Prospero’s wrongdoings as well.

Stuck on an island alone with his daughter, Prospero has had plenty of time to reminisce on his days as ruler of Milan. This has allowed for him to build up a significant amount of anger towards his brother. He mentions to his daughter, “here  Have I, thy schoolmaster, made thee more profit  Than other princes can that have more time. For vainer hours and tutors not so careful” (1.2. 172-175). In their time on the island, Prospero has both educated himself with books left on their ship and also devised a plan to seek vengeance. In this plan came the tempest that his loyal slave Ariel rose to shipwreck his enemies.

After the men are separated on the island, Prospero continues to make his anger present, particularly in the scene where Miranda meets Ferdinand. As her and Ferdinand speak, Ferdinand mentions, “Yes, faith, and all his lords, the Duke of Milan And his brave son being twain” (1.2. 440-441). Prospero is clearly enraged over this statement as he makes an aside: “The Duke of Milan And his more braver daughter could control thee, If now ’twere fit to do’t. At the first sight They have changed eyes” (1.2. 442-445). Here is it easily seen that Prospero is also angry because the people of Milan have “changed eyes at the first sight”, meaning that they actually recognize the next person to claim the dukedom as their ruler.

As the shipwrecked men of The Tempest move deeper into the island, one of the groups encounters dancing islanders who invite them to a dinner. Moments before, two of the men (Antonio and Sebastian) were plotting to kill two others (Alonso and Gonzalo) because they were frustrated with them. Upon the dancers leaving, Gonzalo says, “these are people of the island,  Who,though they are of monstrous shape, yet note,  Their manners are more gentle, kind, than of  Our human generation you shall find  Many, nay, almost any” (3.3. 30-34).

It is this response that Prospero comments on in an aside, agreeing, “Honest lord,  Thou hast said well, for some of you there present Are worse than devils” (3.3. 34-35). By agreeing with Gonzalo and saying that some of the men in that group are “worse than devils”, Prospero’s anger is still evident. At this point of the play, he has no intention of giving up on his revenge plot. He wants them to continue to feel imprisoned on this island, just as he has been this entire time.

By the end of Merchant of Venice, it seems as though Shylock accepts his defeat a little too easily. In the beginning of the play, Shylock takes the opportunity to give a shady loan to Antonio. His anger with Antonio, be it for his religion or his previous attitude towards Shylock, is easily seen as he creates the terms for the bond. In this case, let us say that Shylock hates Antonio because he is Christian and has thus teased and taunted him prior to this sudden need for money. It comes to no surprise that Shylock is furious when his daughter runs away with a Christian man, taking her from him and their shared faith. Marc Shell points out, “Shylock depends on an interpretation of the Jewish law of retaliation.

For the loss of his daughter – his own flesh and blood – he will take the flesh and blood of Antonio” (76). Shylock is angry that a Christian “stole” his daughter and has a desire to exact revenge on the general Christian, who happens to be Antonio in this case. So here we have Shylock angry with a Christian for stealing his daughter, and also angry because a Christian has treated him unfairly for committing usury. This is enough of a drive to retain his anger, even in the ending of the play.

As Shylock appears in court, he stands his ground, at first reluctant to budge on his bond request. He then makes a statement saying, “I have a daughter;  Would any of the stock of Barabbas  Had been her husband rather than a Christian!” (4.1. 293-295). Here it is prominent that he is still angry about his daughter marrying a Christian. When Shylock’s bond is proven invalid by Portia in court, Shylock backs down quite easily; in fact, he tells them to send the deed after him, and he will sign it (4.1. 392-394). He is suddenly in a rush to leave, which is odd considering he has been so vengeful up to this point. His hastiness to leave the court is likely reminiscent of his movement towards another plot of revenge. If he did not let any of this go throughout the play, it is highly unlikely that he would give up this easily in the end.

As Portia, Gratiano, and the Duke tell him that he is to forfeit all of his wealth to the state, Shylock is shocked, replying, “You take my house when you do take the prop / That doth sustain my house. You take my life When you do take the means whereby I live” (4.1. 373-375). At this point, Shylock is angry that he is getting nothing out of the situation and is also left with nothing. His rush in the end is out of defense of himself; he is escaping to another place where he can continue to commit usury and regain the wealth he relies on. He even says that he is essentially losing his life by losing his wealth. His nextplot of revenge is not necessarily against Antonio and the Christians in this town, but in the next. By committing usury, he is still undermining the Christians and finding a way to live as a money-lending Jew.

As The Tempest nears its end, Prospero has successfully made prisoners out of his enemies, leading him to empathize since he was essentially a prisoner on the island for a while himself. He says to Ariel, “though with their high wrongs I am struck to th’ quick, Yet with my nobler reason’gainst my fury Do I take part. The rarer action is  In virtue than in vengeance” (5.1. 25-28). The point here is, although Prospero decides to let them go, he does so reluctantly, perhaps to be seen as a forgiving ruler in the eyes of his people back in Milan. Lois Potter brings up the idea of motive behind this particular set of lines, saying that there is a certain “smugness or still-unconquered fury” Prospero has towards his enemies (452). Potter also explores the idea that Prospero had this in his plans the entire time, and it was all a part of his revenge plot.

She says, “the cutting of the last lines of his last speech gave him an almost gloatingly triumphant exit”, leading to the conclusion that although his enemies are now “free”, he knows they will still be slaves to him as a ruler (452). Contrarily, Peggy Phelan notes the importance of Ariel in the plot. She says, “Ariel turns Prospero’s plot from a revenge tragedy to an allegory of compassion and forgiveness”, which does not take away from Prospero’s reluctance to forgive at the end, but instead provides a more sound conclusion (48). Prospero is allowed to be somewhat angry still, after all he has been through.

After Ariel “rebukes Prospero for having no pity on the shipwrecked Italians, Prospero reconsiders the direction of the play he is writing” (48-49). With Prospero and Ariel’s magic, Phelan argues that Prospero is, such as Shakespeare, writing the play, which is where this notion of direction and writing by Prospero come from. After Ariel makes Prospero feel guilty, Prospero focuses on the play as one “in which power is restored to the rightful heir. Motivated by more than altruism, Prospero’s compassion [also] allows Miranda and Ferdinand to marry and resume the rule of Milan” (49).

Shylock and Prospero from Shakespeare’s Merchant of Venice and The Tempest give the sense of anger and revenge from the very beginning of each play. Shylock feels as though he is discriminated against for being both Jewish and a Usurer, while Prospero was the rightful duke of Milan who was cast away by his brother. The answer to Shylock and Prospero’s problems was simple: seek vengeance. As the two characters form their own revenge plots, Shylock is left penniless and in search of a more revenge as a usurer, while Prospero ends up forgiving his enemies. Shylock stood his ground on the bond he required and took an easy defeat at the end; however he was in a sudden rush to leave court for some reason. This is highly non- coincidental because he is running away to commit usury against Christians somewhere else.

Similarly, Prospero shipwrecks his enemies as a means of revenge against them for abandoning him and his daughter. Only after Prospero goes through the motions of taming his current servants does he settle on the act of pardoning Antonio and his men for what they have done; also far from coincidental. Prospero knew that although he was “freeing” Antonio, he would still likely desire to return to Milan where he would have to live under the rule of Prospero as the duke again. In a way, this was enough punishment for Antonio and also made Prospero a kind, forgiving ruler.