Development Site - Changes here will not affect the live (production) site.

Jacob, Laban, and “The Merchant of Venice”

Nov. 20 2015

This week’s Torah reading tells the story of Jacob’s sojourn with his uncle Laban, whose flocks he tends and whose two daughters he marries. Laban tricks Jacob, first by substituting one daughter for the other and then by trying to deprive him of his wages—which are to be paid in sheep. Jacob responds with some trickery of his own, getting his due by a feat of biblical genetic engineering. In The Merchant of Venice, the character of Shylock cites Jacob’s example in this passage as justification for usury. Herbert Basser argues that Shakespeare here is engaging in a subtle analysis of the biblical text:

Shylock . . . recognizes that, . . . since a patriarch would never steal, Jacob is taking “interest” for the years of unpaid work. He calls it “indirect” interest as it came from natural increase and not added coin. Shylock also . . . notes that Jacob’s mother, Rebecca, was shrewd in helping him usurp Esau’s birthright. For Shylock this constitutes wisdom. It would seem that Shakespeare means to paint Shylock—and probably Jews in general—as the type of people who muddy the lines between smart business and deceitful practices, as Jacob does. . . .

Antonio . . . denounces Shylock’s biblical interpretation. . . . Shylock, Antonio believes, uses Scripture to justify his malicious practices, since Jacob could not possibly have been involved in usury. Jews, he tells Bassanio, are devils and devils misuse Scripture, looking outwardly pious but harboring nefarious schemes. The charge of Jewish hypocrisy was and is often encountered in Christian teachings. Shakespeare himself allows their positions to speak for themselves. . . .

The very debate Shylock and Antonio are having virtually reflects the dissonance [within] the story of how Jacob became wealthy. . . . [A]s a careful reader of Scripture, Shakespeare picked up on the tension inherent in the account, and chose to express this tension, this inner biblical dialogue, in the form of a debate between the Jewish moneylender, Shylock, and the Christian merchant, Antonio.

Read more at theTorah.com

More about: Anti-Semitism, Arts & Culture, Genesis, Hebrew Bible, Jacob, Literature, William Shakespeare

The Summary: 10/7/20

Two extraordinary events demonstrate something important about Israel’s most fervent adversaries. One was a speech given at something called The People’s Forum (funded generously by Goldman Sachs), which stated, “When the state of Israel is finally destroyed and erased from history, that will be the single most important blow we can give to destroying capitalism and imperialism.”

The suggestion that this tiny state is the linchpin of a global, centuries-old phenomenon like capitalism goes well beyond anything resembling rational criticism. Even if Israel were guilty of genocide, apartheid, and oppression—which of course it is not—it would not follow that its destruction would help end capitalism or imperialism.

The other was an anti-Israel protest that took place in front of New York City’s Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, deemed “complicit” in Israel’s evils. At organizers’ urging, participants shouted their slogans at kids in the cancer ward, who were watching from the windows. Given Hamas’s indifference toward the lives of Gazan children, such callousness toward non-Palestinian children from Hamas’s Western allies shouldn’t be surprising. The protest—like the abovementioned speech—deliberately conveyed the message that Israel is the ultimate evil and its destruction the ultimate good, cancer patients be damned.

The fact that Israel’s adversaries are almost comically perverse does not mean that they can be dismissed. If its allies fail to understand the obsessive and irrational hatred that it faces, they cannot effectively help it defend itself.

Read more at Mosaic