The curse of Shakespearean’s Shylock on freedom and liberty from Morocco to Brunei!
Iqbal Latif, Paris, 31 March 2005
With a bloodthirsty Jew at its centre, “The Merchant of Venice” is Shakespeare’s most divisive play. Anyone who thinks this 400-year-old Shakespearean character is forgotten and superseded is mistaken. No one has hijacked this mass characterization of Jews through a personality to ignite hatred amongst people more than despotic totalitarians within the Islamic world, Though many in the Islamic world may not even be familiar with the character, but the way the message of hatred of Jews has been sold to the Islamic street is that every injustice is referred to be originated or consummated by the Jews. Perhaps there is very little conclusive evidence of Shakespeare's anti-Semitism, apart from ‘The Merchant of Venice.' Anti-Semitic slurs do not emerge to be significant in Shakespeare's terminology or his philosophy, with the exception of The Merchant of Venice. In the play, Shylock is rarely referred to by name, but instead is referred to as "Jew."
George Soros has been called a lot of names. Socialist billionaire. Soft-money Marxist. Leftwing loony. Even self-hating Jewish anti-Semite. The billionaire philanthropist, who depleted millions to oust President George W. Bush, has heard it all. Soros, now famed as Bush-basher was despicably characterised recently as a Hungarian-born descendant of Shylock. If you wish to destroy someone, call him a Shylock kind of Jew, and that seals his fate. Some form of anti-Semitism has been engrained in parts of our minds, may be we all are taught the Shakespearean character too well so that subconsciously we think of Jews as the cause of all evil, despite the fact that this mass characterization is most unjust and misplaced. Soros has been called many a name but nothing hurts more than this accusation, the name connotes so much. Greed. Blood-thirst. Viciousness. Hatred.
Shakespeare wrote “The Merchant of Venice” in 1596, based on the plot of a 16th-century Italian novel, “Il Pecorone” (“The Dunce”). It came on the heels of Christopher Marlowe’s, “The Jew of Malta,” which was written and first performed in England sometime around 1590. Marlowe’s main character, Barabas, a Jewish merchant, is unrequitedly evil, and the play was wildly popular.
The “Jew of Malta” attempted to create a memorable character, however, it influenced the prevailing anti-Jewish feelings in Shakespeare at the time. Marlowe, Shakespeare's contemporary, authored The Jew of Malta, a bloody farce in which the villain is a Jew who, ridiculously bloodthirsty and fanatical, is dedicated to killing Christians and wreaking havoc. In the story of “Merchant,” Bassanio, a young Venetian gentleman, needs money to win his beloved Portia’s hand. His good friend Antonio, a Venetian merchant, goes to the Jewish moneylender Shylock for a loan. Antonio, who publicly denounced Shylock and other Jews in the past for loaning money at exorbitant rates. But Shylock offers Antonio this loan at no interest. Instead, if Antonio does not repay him in time, he will cut off a pound of his flesh. Meanwhile, Shylock’s daughter, Jessica, elopes with Bassanio’s friend Lorenzo taking a significant chunk of her father’s wealth with her. Enraged by her betrayal, Shylock focuses all his energy on revenge. When Antonio defaults on the loan, Shylock demands his pound of flesh. Although the play and Shylock’s character are full of contradictions and ambiguities, Shakespeare clearly presents Shylock as a “bad Jew,” not as a “representative Jew,” in the same way he presents Richard III as a bad king, and not a representative one.
Shylock is explicitly demonized through the rhetoric of the play. On the political scene within the Middle East, this demonization is followed with letter and spirit. Israelis are like Shylock and stripped of their names. Israelis within the present global political drama like Shylock are only referred to as "the Jew" but often with derogatory adjectives, such as "dog Jew"; Shylock was reduced to something other than human - sometimes Shylock is not even described as "the Jew" but an animal, for example Gratiano curses Shylock with "O, be thou damned, inexecrable dog!" whose "currish spirit govern'd a wolf"; and finally, Shylock is equated with “the devil.” What a shame that radical politicians and extremists have instinctively taken this image of Shylock and applied it to a populace who has gifted mankind with more Nobel Laureates as a percentage of population than any other race.
Jew-bashing is not a modern phenomenon, it has been built within the psyche of western intellectual philosophy and, undoubtedly, Shakespeare inadvertently played quite a role in that. It can be argued whether Shakespeare even knew a Jew, or hated one, or if he ever even met one. Jews had been expelled from England in 1290, more than 250 years before Shakespeare’s birth. Only a few remained in London in his time, practicing their religion in secrecy.
Islamic societies today are gripped with frenzy; the root of all evils is considered to be Jews and, very conveniently, despots of these societies have an 'enemy to sell.' The freedom of people has become subservient to calls of Jew hatred. Characterization of Shylock is unswervingly prejudiced by the historical feelings towards Jews in the west, "the images of Jews as blood-thirsty murderers of Jesus who grab innocent Christian children for slaughter in bizarre Passover rituals” seems to provide a potent back-drop for the demonic appellations that are heaped upon Shylock in The Merchant of Venice.
Radical Islamists have seemingly taken the revulsion for Jews more than anyone else; the Jew of ‘The Merchant of Venice’ is a depiction that is traded, it is most marketable. Creating an enemy that, through some ideological misinterpretation of events, has a reason for hatred too helps perpetuate tyrannical regimes. The accusations of betrayal of Jews in the early times of the prophet help flourish this frenzy. It is most helpful for perpetuation of an autocratic society and the most convenient way to curtail the freedom of hundreds of millions by shifting the responsibility of denial of their self-determination on the doorsteps of schematic Jews who betrayed the prophet and nullified the treaty with him and now persist to plan the enslavement of the entire ummah. This is a perfect backdrop and story to sell and it sells very well. Perhaps, the betrayal is a matter of conjecture. But to emphasize too much on betrayal and omit the main structure of the treaty is most inequitable.
The Prophet held a treaty with Jews when he came to Madinah. The treaty, created in 622 CE, mentioned that, “…the Jews shall contribute (to the cost of war) with the Believers so long as they are at war with a common enemy. The Jews of Banu Najjar, Banu al-Harith, Banu Sa'idah, Banu Jusham, Banu al-Aws, Banu Tha'labah, Jafnah, and Banu al-Shutaybah enjoy the same rights and privileges as the Jews of Banu Aws.” The treaty clearly outlays that co-existence with Jews is possible and future can be referred to the day of judgement peacefully. “The Jews shall maintain their own religion and the Muslims theirs. Loyalty is a protection against treachery. The close friends of Jews are as themselves. None of them shall go out on a military expedition except with the permission of Prophet Muhammad, but he shall not be prevented from taking revenge for a wound.”
The word "Jews" appears in 19 verses in Pickthall’s translation of the Qur’an. The Qur’an makes clear that those Jews who follow the covenant shall fear no grief on the Day of Judgement, and that the Covenant is genuine. [al-Baqarah 2:113.3] “And the Jews say the Christians follow nothing (true), and the Christians say the Jews follow nothing (true); yet both are readers of the Scripture. Even thus speak those who know not. Allah will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection concerning that wherein they differ.” [2:256] “There is no compulsion in religion, for the right way is clearly from the wrong way. Whoever therefore rejects the forces of evil and believes in God, he has taken hold of a support most unfailing, which shall never give way, for God is All Hearing and Knowing.”
Rarely are these quotations invoked in Islamic world to conciliate the ongoing tensions. Why can’t these golden principles enshrined in the scriptures govern future relationships between Jews and Muslims? Why only the violations of treaties for which Jews were adequately punished by the Prophet be visited? Why should Jews continue to carry the cross forever? A crime cannot be perpetually punished even if it is unilaterally decided that a betrayal was committed. This mass characterization of any Israeli and respectful members of Jewry is the worst of injustices and the extreme form of effort of race decontamination. No one dare speak, should anyone take the courage he become a target of universal ridicule, derision and accumulated ostracization, but some good man should stand up to be counted and say, “Enough is enough! Let’s find the enemy within!”
It is ironically our leaders who display the character of Shylock amply; it is they who made us least worthy amongst comity of nations; it is they who shackled the nation with a long harness, the way dogs are kept.
The popular myth prevalent in the Islamic world is that the root of all commotion within Middle East lies in the injustices committed by the Jews on Palestinians, or on Islamic body politic as a whole, that is being served new blows by new Jewish “crusaders,” Bush’s slip-of-the-tongue fully utilized for its political benefits. Actually, it is like a game of hide and seek, through a ‘collective wisdom’ evolved by the entire leadership over centuries, of denying basic rights to their own populace. No effort is spared to hide the real issues which relate to the freedom of masses. Popular jihad-infested slogans and issues of perpetual jihad fee-sabeel-ullah, in which Jews and pagans, or westerners, are shown as the cause of all misery, are successful in diverting the masses’ attention to secure the continuation of despotism.
The freedom and election in lands that time had forgotten has broken that myth finally. In the hometown of Mullah Omar, Karzai secured 92 percent of popular vote cast; Kandahar the guy capital of the Talibanised Afghanistan threw its ‘holy sons’ soon after the success of Afghan invasion with a electoral poll denunciation that must have shocked even the stiffest of radicals.
Egyptian President, Hosni Mubarak, for the first time in the country's history announced that the next presidential elections would be open to candidates from several different parties. Mubarak's 23 years of soft authoritarian rule shall hopefully be replaced by a more inclusive conclave of Presidential candidates amongst which Egyptians would select. This is flowering of democracy, a shock therapy treatment that has destroyed many a myth, one being that all tribulations emanate from Jews and all Jews are depicted like Shylock. Mass denial of freedom had been perpetuated by projecting an everlasting struggle against unseen enemy plots who want to enslave the nation of Islam. The nations have become an eager slave as far as their rulers wage a jihad against the Jew. Under tutelage of ‘Jihad against the Jew’ ballot boxes belong to a thing of past! What a bright modus operandi to implement a totalitarian society.
Paradoxically Islamic radical opposition who want these rulers removed has helped their tormentors by fanning the hatred by highlighting the Jews as the root cause of all evils instead of free elections. Convoluted logic has helped ruling cliché and the opposition to read the same script of hatred but for conflicting ends, the ones who call for ballot box are denied one as enemies of Islam need to dealt first and that can be done through stability and strength of a dictator, hence the ballot box is relegated to last priority, the rights are trampled without impunity and rulers and oppositions harping the same message continue pounding the cause of freedom. The political philosophy of Saddam’s and Assad’s or Gaddafi’s is a page from this vicious circle.
No one can ever condone the mass abuse of human rights under Sharon, but to make Sharon a phantom for refutation of liberty and denunciation of freewill is reckless. Hatred of others should not be self-consummating and this is what ails Islamic nations at large. It is our maturity and free will that will help eradicate injustice perpetuated against the nation of Islam; a nation under a despot will not free its people from the crippling blows of injustice. Permanent peace can only be forged between free people; pre-programmed populace will only dance to the tunes of self destruction.
Islamic world is now equipped to tackle the new frontiers of change. They now realize that their own lack of freedom primarily stems from slogans of abhorrence, the reason they cannot talk as equals and have arrested human discovery and development trajectory is because of their enslavement, the biggest impediment is denial of freewill. Only free nation’s can make and have peace.
Political connoisseurs warned that the invasion of Iraq would coax an authoritative backlash against occupation in that nation. Backlash it was but in filling the ballot boxes! Like a bolt from the blue, they were taken aback when 8 million Iraqis turned out to vote in the recent elections, putting the notion to rest that the rebellion of insurgent Baathists’ disgruntled elements represented enthusiasm of popular insurrection. The free election in places where electoral ballot was alien idea deserves the credit for the recent surge of democratic flowering in the Middle East. This blossoming has came as a ‘shock therapy’ to the pundits who sell hatred; they overemphasized that at the heart of the "root cause" lies a monolithic pan-Arab public opinion driven by an obsessive concern with the Palestinians and their supposed Israeli and American oppressors. Of course twin causes of first Sharon’s inhuman treatment of civilians by excessive force and second Shylock-characterized version of Israel at large played an important part in enhancing this image. However, post Iraq and Afghan free elections, the typecast has been broken. The reaction of the Arab streets to freedom is mind-boggling. These "bolts from the blue" within the Middle East have a common thread that runs through these events; in all these cases there is a longing for freedom. Freedom is as cherished an entity for a Muslim as it is for a westerner. The myth that a nation deserves its leaders is dead; a nation that historically has been squandered and bulldozed by its leadership now sees green offshoots of freewill within their grasp. The genie of freedom and free elections has been released and it cannot be containerized again; no more can demands of free elections be camouflaged under emblem of greater conspiracy theories, astronomical adversaries and schematic Shylocks!
These experts, after Afghanistan’s, Iraqi and Palestinian elections, have been stunned by the recent self-sufficient progress in Lebanon, the angry expressions of swarming Lebanese crowds protesting Syria's occupation, rather than Israel's, was much beyond their prejudiced conclusions. Palestinian cause has become the biggest hijacked issue by the authoritarians of the Arab world who refuse to grant basic rights of electing their leadership in free elections. The results of these flowerings in the Middle East have resulted and shall result in a new characterization that Shylock was a “bad Jew,” and not a “representative Jew.” The real concerns for everyone are freedom and access to ballot box for every inhabitant from Morocco to Brunei.
|
