Christopher Columbus a hero or a villain.
Shylock becomes the true villain when he takes Antonio to court.
Even if critics can't agree on how to interpret Shylock, one thing is certain: the man is an outsider who is alienated from just about everyone—even his own daughter, who can't wait to run away. By the end of the dramatic courtroom scene, Shylock is a broken man—he's humiliated in court, stripped of much of his wealth, and forced to convert to Christianity. How are we supposed to read this? Are we meant to sympathize with Shylock? Are we supposed to think that his forced conversion is a good thing? What do you think?
Shylock is the villain of The Merchant of Venice.
What adds to their role at the edge of society is the way they subvert their roles because this focuses, in the case of Portia, the audience on her and, in shylocks case, the other characters on him....
Shylock victim or villain student essays summary of macbeth
This loan had to be paid back within three months time otherwise Shylock would get what he wanted, a pound of Antonio’s flesh, as a part of a clause of the contract.
Villain of or summary essays macbeth victim student Shylock
Yet as powerful as this speech is, elsewhere in the play Shylock tends to emphasize the differences between Jews and Christians. When Bassanio invites him to dinner, Shylock mutters "I will buy with you, sell with you, talk with you, walk with you, and so following, but I will not eat with you, drink with you, nor pray with you" (1.3.35-38).
Merchant of Venice: Is Shylock a Victim or Villian
Implicit in all of these manifestations of Shakespeare worship is a perception best summed up, perhaps, in 's rendering of the charismatic name: "Shapesphere." For in showing "the very age and body of the time his form and pressure" (as Hamlet would put it), Shakespeare proved himself to be both the "soul of the age" his works reflected and adorned and the consummate symbol of the artist whose poetic visions transcend their local habitation and become, in some mysterious way, contemporaneous with "all time" (to return once more to Jonson's eulogy). If Jan Kott, a twentieth-century existentialist from eastern Europe, can marvel that Shakespeare is "our contemporary," then, his testimony is but one more instance of the tendency of every age to claim Shakespeare as its own. Whatever else we say about Shakespeare, in other words, we are impelled to acknowledge the incontrovertible fact that, preeminent above all others, he has long stood and will no doubt long remain atop a pedestal (to recall a recent cartoon) as "a very very very very very very important writer."