What are you watching tonight?

[Worthy4England]

Watched the 2004 film production of the Merchant of Venice last night, having never seen or read the play before. Thought it was terrific, would love to see it on stage now.

As ever in Shakespeare, there are loads of phrases in there that he may well have coined and that we now use all the time - "bated breath", "love is blind", "all that glistens is not gold" and, of course, references to a "pound of flesh" and "my own flesh and blood" (and probably a few more besides that I haven't remembered).

Just to be really picky, you may find that it glisters...

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Watched the 2004 film production of the Merchant of Venice last night, having never seen or read the play before. Thought it was terrific, would love to see it on stage now.

As ever in Shakespeare, there are loads of phrases in there that he may well have coined and that we now use all the time - "bated breath", "love is blind", "all that glistens is not gold" and, of course, references to a "pound of flesh" and "my own flesh and blood" (and probably a few more besides that I haven't remembered).

Just to be really picky, you may find that it glisters...

Ah yes, I knew I hadn't heard "glitters".... I am much obliged, signor.

It's on iPlayer if anyone fancies it - Al Pacino as Shylock, lots of Venetian prostitutes with their tits out, etc.

[William the White]

Still shudderingly anti-Semitic in many ways, though...

But tonight... Garow's Law, BBC1, 9.00pm.

excellent start last week, hope they build on it..

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Still shudderingly anti-Semitic in many ways, though...

Well, yes, but that was Venice and most of Europe in the 16th C.

I can't think that Shakespeare himself could have written the "if you prick me, do I not still bleed" speech had he not been one of the enlightened ones.

[Wandering Willy]

Watched Bloody Sunday last night with Nesbitt. Interesting story of a very difficult time. Old one but enjoyed it.

[William the White]

Still shudderingly anti-Semitic in many ways, though...

Well, yes, but that was Venice and most of Europe in the 16th C.

I can't think that Shakespeare himself could have written the "if you prick me, do I not still bleed" speech had he not been one of the enlightened ones.

Couldn't agree more. It's doubtful that Shakespeare ever met a Jew, since they had been forcibly expelled from England in the late 13th century. And, almost certainly, there was greater tolerance in Venice (where incidentally the first 'ghetto' was formed) than existed in England. And the speech you quote and others indicate his prevailing humanity and daring when trying to come to grips with this unfamiliar subject. Also witnessed in Othello - inter-racial marriage - and his ability (around the fringes) to make fun of monarchy.

But Shylock loses his fortune, his daughter, is forced at the peril of his life to convert to Christianity, is subjected to persistent and extreme racist taunts and baiting about his Jewishness. And that makes it shudderingly anti-Semitic in these times, the early 21st century. Which is where both of us live, no?

But it seems to me that Shylock in demanding his bond is doing something you would approve of, demanding the fulfilment of a contract. And Portia gets out of it with a trick only a profoundly prejudiced court could accept. don't you agree?

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Still shudderingly anti-Semitic in many ways, though...

Well, yes, but that was Venice and most of Europe in the 16th C.

I can't think that Shakespeare himself could have written the "if you prick me, do I not still bleed" speech had he not been one of the enlightened ones.

Couldn't agree more. It's doubtful that Shakespeare ever met a Jew, since they had been forcibly expelled from England in the late 13th century. And, almost certainly, there was greater tolerance in Venice (where incidentally the first 'ghetto' was formed) than existed in England. And the speech you quote and others indicate his prevailing humanity and daring when trying to come to grips with this unfamiliar subject. Also witnessed in Othello - inter-racial marriage - and his ability (around the fringes) to make fun of monarchy.

But Shylock loses his fortune, his daughter, is forced at the peril of his life to convert to Christianity, is subjected to persistent and extreme racist taunts and baiting about his Jewishness. And that makes it shudderingly anti-Semitic in these times, the early 21st century. Which is where both of us live, no?

But it seems to me that Shylock in demanding his bond is doing something you would approve of, demanding the fulfilment of a contract. And Portia gets out of it with a trick only a profoundly prejudiced court could accept. don't you agree?

Sorry, I suppose I just wouldn't describe it as 'shuddering', because I don't find it shocking, given the setting. I realise now that you didn't mean it pejoratively, however...

And, yes, Othello is one of my favourites - Shakespeare was brilliant at painting the world of the outsider.

And no, I don't believe in complete freedom of contract, including offering a pound of one's own flesh (or, in a more readily imaginable situation, an organ) as consideration.

However, one of my favourite lines in the play is this one, from Antonio, which shows a tremendous understanding of what strong contract law can do for a society.

The duke cannot deny the course of law:
For the commodity that strangers have
With us in Venice, if it be denied,
Will much impeach the justice of his state;
Since that the trade and profit of the city
Consisteth of all nations. Therefore, go:
These griefs and losses have so bated me,
That I shall hardly spare a pound of flesh
To-morrow to my bloody creditor.

The commodity that strangers had in Venice was that contracts would be taken seriously, even to the detriment of Venetian citzens - this is why it was such an attractive place to do business and an important reason it was so wealthy. Antonio made the bad bargain in the first place, and he could see that it was in Venice's interest that Venetians were held to their bargains.

Brilliant stuff.

As for the 'trick' and 'prejudiced' court you speak of... I think there would have been significant 'prejudice', if one can call it that, against upholding this gruesome bond, even if the two parties had both been gentiles. And Portia's trick was really only an extremely literal interpretation of the document, which doesn't seem out of kilter with the very strict textual approach of older legal systems, including our own. Teleological readings of statutes and contracts are a fairly modern phenomenon.

[William the White]

The only two productions of the merchant I've enjoyed have both centred the anti-semitism of Venetian society, and given Shylock dignity as a human being - in peformance, production, without, of course altering shakespeare's lines. One was David Thacker's at the royal shakespeare company in 1995, with David Calder as Shylock, which set the action contemporaneously, computers flashing news, bonds being traded etc... In itself this asked you to examine the outrageousness of the racism, and therefore examine it, and how this outsider might feel, to understand, a little, the ferocity of his bond. Excellent.

The other was two years ago at the octagon, where Mark Babych directed David fielder in the role, again the text was, as it should be, Shakespeare's. This was set firmly in the 16th century, but the attitudes of the christian wolves were highlighted, and Babych took the risk of showing Susan growing with doubt at the thought of her marriage, feeling hurt for her father, feeling repelled by the racism of her fiancee's friends, and growing, at the end in despair at what she might marry into.

Any production that hides away from the vernacular racism of shakespere's play is hiding away from a historic truth that persists today, and soemtimes in its most historically repellanr form. auschwitz still has a handfull of survivors.

OK - lecture over - but if you are going to produce this play you have to decide how you deal with the anti-semitism.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

The only two productions of the merchant I've enjoyed have both centred the anti-semitism of Venetian society, and given Shylock dignity as a human being - in peformance, production, without, of course altering shakespeare's lines. One was David Thacker's at the royal shakespeare company in 1995, with David Calder as Shylock, which set the action contemporaneously, computers flashing news, bonds being traded etc... In itself this asked you to examine the outrageousness of the racism, and therefore examine it, and how this outsider might feel, to understand, a little, the ferocity of his bond. Excellent.

The other was two years ago at the octagon, where Mark Babych directed David fielder in the role, again the text was, as it should be, Shakespeare's. This was set firmly in the 16th century, but the attitudes of the christian wolves were highlighted, and Babych took the risk of showing Susan growing with doubt at the thought of her marriage, feeling hurt for her father, feeling repelled by the racism of her fiancee's friends, and growing, at the end in despair at what she might marry into.

Any production that hides away from the vernacular racism of shakespere's play is hiding away from a historic truth that persists today, and soemtimes in its most historically repellanr form. auschwitz still has a handfull of survivors.

OK - lecture over - but if you are going to produce this play you have to decide how you deal with the anti-semitism.

Ha, well I don't think I'm likely to produce this play anytime soon...

I'm actually not completely sure what point you're trying to make though. The anti-semitism is there in the script, and I'm not sure it can be shyed away from - it's absolutely central to the plot. Shylock is a tragic figure, but should we really feel much sympathy for him and his 'humanity' - he is hell bent on killing a man?!

[William the White]

Perhaps sympathy for a victim?

Understanding of the context?

Knowing why he might want to get his 'pound of flesh'?

Even at the lowest level a recognition that the worm may turn...

My guess is it's only post world war 2 that shylock has been portrayed as anything other than the avaricious 'Jew' of folklore...

interesting too, that it's the forbidden blood that undoes him - i wonder whether this was a conscious ref to the 'blood libel' - christian children kidnapped by jews so they could drink their blood... the blood is forbidden the jew...

anyway - enjoyed Garrow's Law once more

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Perhaps sympathy for a victim?

Understanding of the context?

Knowing why he might want to get his 'pound of flesh'?

Even at the lowest level a recognition that the worm may turn...

My guess is it's only post world war 2 that shylock has been portrayed as anything other than the avaricious 'Jew' of folklore...

interesting too, that it's the forbidden blood that undoes him - i wonder whether this was a conscious ref to the 'blood libel' - christian children kidnapped by jews so they could drink their blood... the blood is forbidden the jew...

anyway - enjoyed Garrow's Law once more

I stood in the gas chambers of Auschwitz a few months ago, and it's quite possible that there is no more chilling place on earth.

However, I think it's quite wrong to project our horror at what happened in Nazi Germany back onto the time Shakespeare was writing and to C16th Venice. I agree that understanding the context is everything, but I think you are distorting the context with something that is actually a bit anachronistic. What's the worst thing that happens to him in the play - he is spat at, called a dog... unpleasant, yes, and there's no doubt that we are made to feel sorry for him at times, but it's not the sort of thing that makes a lust for fatal revenge understandable or condonable.

Anyway, all we're really doing here, I suppose, is illustrating its brilliance. We're supposed to wrestle with it a bit and be pulled in both directions - just like in Othello, where we surely have to condemn the deeply flawed man and his dreadful crime, but at the same time we feel profoundly sorry him. The difference in the M of V is that Shylock is more obviously the architect of his own downfall (such that it is after the mercy of the Duke's court!) than Othello is.

[William the White]

tonight I'm watching Digging up the Dead on BBC4... About the wishes of relatives to discover the remains of franco's victims in the Spanish Civil War - and the particular case of Federico Garcia Lorca, executed in 1936 at the village of Viznar just outside Granada - Spain's greatest poet and playwright, whose work i admire hugely...

It's being sold this way by the BBC, but it may well include the desires of Franco supporters whose relatives were killed by republicans to give them a known resting place.

[Bruno]

tonight I'm watching Digging up the Dead on BBC4... About the wishes of relatives to discover the remains of franco's victims in the Spanish Civil War - and the particular case of Federico Garcia Lorca, executed in 1936 at the village of Viznar just outside Granada - Spain's greatest poet and playwright, whose work i admire hugely...

It's being sold this way by the BBC, but it may well include the desires of Franco supporters whose relatives were killed by republicans to give them a known resting place.

I bought a Real Madrid DVD from TJ Hughes for a quid once, and it was part-football and part-sociohistoric piece about the differences between Franco and Barcelona and Madrid, it was very interesting.

[William the White]

tonight I'm watching Digging up the Dead on BBC4... About the wishes of relatives to discover the remains of franco's victims in the Spanish Civil War - and the particular case of Federico Garcia Lorca, executed in 1936 at the village of Viznar just outside Granada - Spain's greatest poet and playwright, whose work i admire hugely...

It's being sold this way by the BBC, but it may well include the desires of Franco supporters whose relatives were killed by republicans to give them a known resting place.

I bought a Real Madrid DVD from TJ Hughes for a quid once, and it was part-football and part-sociohistoric piece about the differences between Franco and Barcelona and Madrid, it was very interesting.

Yep, Franco hated the Catalans (and the Basques) - banning their language, regional government etc. And Barcelona - the club - was an expression of catalan identity of huge significance... I'm not certain about the truth of this, but i'm told that Espanyol, Barcelona's 'other club' was supported by the cops, army, fascists etc

[Prufrock]

Is episode two of Garrow's Law supposed to have that bloke talking over it? It's doing my head in. If not, how do I turn it off?

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Is episode two of Garrow's Law supposed to have that bloke talking over it? It's doing my head in. If not, how do I turn it off?

No, don't know what you're talking about!

[Prufrock]

Is episode two of Garrow's Law supposed to have that bloke talking over it? It's doing my head in. If not, how do I turn it off?

No, don't know what you're talking about!

There's some bloke talking over describing everything that happens. Right from the opening credits. It's reall annoying and distracting. Perhaps there are two, and I cannot find the normal one. This is the link to the one I am watching, do you have another?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0 ... Episode_2/

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Is episode two of Garrow's Law supposed to have that bloke talking over it? It's doing my head in. If not, how do I turn it off?

No, don't know what you're talking about!

There's some bloke talking over describing everything that happens. Right from the opening credits. It's reall annoying and distracting. Perhaps there are two, and I cannot find the normal one. This is the link to the one I am watching, do you have another?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0 ... Episode_2/

That's awful isn't it? I suppose it's a special needs version or something, but I can't work out where the normal one is. I saw it on TV this week.

[TANGODANCER]

tonight I'm watching Digging up the Dead on BBC4... About the wishes of relatives to discover the remains of franco's victims in the Spanish Civil War - and the particular case of Federico Garcia Lorca, executed in 1936 at the village of Viznar just outside Granada - Spain's greatest poet and playwright, whose work i admire hugely...

It's being sold this way by the BBC, but it may well include the desires of Franco supporters whose relatives were killed by republicans to give them a known resting place.

Have this marked for 9-0. I too will be interested in the Lorca angle. Read a story once that there were far more political prisoners killed in the creating of El Valle de Los Caidos than were ever declared. I have a copy of Carr's SPAIN, 1808-1975 which is a great refrence source.

[William the White]

All praise to Michael Portillo - despite his right wing politics he displayed his comitment to democracy, was absolutely fair in his explictaion of the history and issues, and summarised it at the end in a very humane way...

I wonder what his dad would have made of him becoming a standard bearer of the tory right? still, he's obviously grown out of that now...