The below paper written in 2007 is submitted as proof that I did, at one point, write more than snarky social media posts.

 In Shakespeare’s two comedies, The Merchant of Venice and Twelfth Night, there are  many similarities including improbable romances, cross-dressing women, and bumbling  fools. However, the most interesting element that these two plays share is not comic at  all – rather, the use of two characters who are distinctive in that they seem not to fit into  the comedic setting at all. In Twelfth Night, this character is Malvolio, the steward that serves the lady Olivia; in The Merchant of Venice, this character is Shylock, a Jewish  moneylender. Both Malvolio and Shylock bear remarkable similarities in that, although  gilded with a thin veneer of comedy, they are in reality tragic figures who have been  ostracized from the societies in which they live, and therefore understandably express  resentment and frustration.  

 In his paper, “The Problem of Malvolio,” Edward Cahill writes, “Malvolio alerts us to  the necessity of comedy and to the profound implications of its failure” (62). In other  words, Malvolio is an example of what can happen when one takes life a little too seriously; indeed, he is the only “serious” character in Twelfth Night, surrounded by  people who are all determined to revel as much as they can in the bewitchment and  excitement that love can bring. Standing in contrast to these high-spirited characters,  Malvolio is, as the steward of Olivia’s household, a symbol of the order that is so  gleefully being thrown into shambles within the play. 

 Malvolio’s opposition to the disorder of the play is made known almost as soon as he  is brought on stage when discussing Feste, the fool, “I protest I take these wise men that  crow so at these set kinds of Fools no better than the Fools’ zanies” (1.5.86-88), to which  Olivia’s response is to tell Malvolio essentially that he is full of himself. This exchange is significant, as it immediately establishes that Malvolio is not happy with the kind of  disruption and high spirits that Feste (and the play’s title) represents, as well as revealing  that he is not warmly thought of by other characters in the play. This dynamic is  indicative of the interactions that Malvolio has throughout the rest of the play – he is  resentful and disapproving of the chaos that is being allowed to sweep through Olivia’s  household, and does what he can to contain it by way of advising his mistress and trying  to assert his authority over the other characters like Sir Toby and Sir Andrew by curbing  their drunken carousing.  

If he were simply a spoil-sport,

Malvolio would be a fairly flat character

 If he were simply a simple spoil-sport, Malvolio would be a fairly flat character;  however, one is given insight into the complexities of his personalities through the joke  that Maria and Sir Toby decide to play on him, in making him believe that he has a  chance to marry Olivia. If he were really such a strait-laced Puritan who cared about law  and order, Malvolio would immediately recognize the impossibility of a steward – a  higher-ranking servant, but a servant nonetheless – marrying a titled woman. But his  eagerness to believe that Maria’s forged letter is really a declaration of Olivia’s love  indicates that he is not as opposed to the forces of infatuation and love as he would like  the other characters to believe. “To be Count Malvolio” (2.5.34) is what he muses to  himself, and fantasizes about the privileges he would be able to enjoy as lord of the  estate, with real authority that he would be able to use to keep order over the disorderly members of the household. In his daydreams, Malvolio is revealed not only to be just as  susceptible to the forces of chaos as the other characters, but he is also made to seem surprisingly sympathetic; he is, after all, a man whose very job is to keep order – a  requirement which, when he tries to fulfill it, earns him only mockery and scorn. That he  is so eager to indulge in an unrealistic fantasy of marrying Olivia does not necessarily  make him naïve or hypocritical – it is an indication of just how frustrated he is with his  current situation as the enforcer of order in a continually disorderly house.   Malvolio becomes even more sympathetic when the practical joke gets out of hand;  thinking that he must act in certain ways before Olivia to convince her of his love, he  dresses in yellow stockings, continually smiles – a dramatic change from his typical dour  appearance – and makes references to the letter he believes that she has written, of which  she has no knowledge. Olivia concludes that Malvolio must be mad, and allows him to  be locked into a dark room, where Maria and Sir Andrew try to convince him that he has  lost his mind. This treatment, as well as the realization that he was the victim of such a  cruel prank in front of an unrepentant household, is essentially public humiliation – a  punishment given to a man guilty only of for falling for a practical joke.   In her paper, “Twelfth Night’s ‘Notorious Abuse’ of Malvolio…” Allison P. Hobgood  states: “…many of Shakespeare’s characters experience shame, but none so thoroughly as  Malvolio” (3). This is undeniably true, as he is put through an arduous night in which he  is made to defend his sanity – and therefore, his very sense of self – over and over to  people who continually tell him that he is out of his mind, and then he is laughed at once  again, when the joke is revealed. From the point of view of the other characters,  Malvolio is getting his come-uppance for being too Puritanical and strait-laced; however, from Malvolio’s perspective, it is a punishment that he receives essentially because he  was only trying to do his job. Although certain other of Twelfth Night’s characters  provoke sympathy, Malvolio is the real victim of the play, as he has lost the battle before  it has even begun; he will always be at odds with the rest of Illyrian society, simply  because his job forces him to oppose the chaos of the play, and his attempts to join in  with the fun and frivolity are met with laughter and punishment.  

 In The Merchant of Venice, it is not merely his profession that separates Shylock from the society in which he lives, but also his culture. As a Jewish moneylender, Shylock  occupies a curious position in the Roman Catholic Venetian society – he is despised  because he is not a Christian, but his ethnicity allows him to practice a vocation that is forbidden to Christian merchants. Therefore, while hated and distrusted, Shylock is also  a necessity to those around him, continually resulting in situations where he must interact  with those who despise him in order to financially survive. As Heather Hirschfeld  comments in her paper, “We All Expect a Gentle Answer, Jew”, Shylock “…is made to  answer to characters who simultaneously invite and impede [him]” (70). Thus, one can  imagine the immense amount of strain that Shylock must deal with on a daily basis,  understanding that his livelihood depends on his interaction with people who scorn and  even spit on him. 

 Despite the religious differences, one can imagine that earlier in his life, Shylock did  not think badly of the Christians he did business with; this is indicated with when he  agrees to loan Antonio money, saying, “I would be friends with you and have your  love…” (1.3.149). Antonio, on the other hand, despises Shylock and assures him even  while negotiating the loan that although Shylock is doing him a favor by overlooking the lack of collateral, he will continue to treat him as badly as ever. With this statement in  mind, it is easier to understand Shylock’s stipulation that Antonio give him a pound of his  own flesh if he is unable to repay the three thousand ducats – Shylock is reacting to a  substantial blow to his pride, made even more painful because his efforts to act amicably  are met with derision and scorn.  

He is not a hateful and unforgiving person by nature.

The exchange between Antonio and Shylock is significant, as it highlights a struggle  that Shylock has been fighting for a long time, one that he is destined to ultimately lose.  Throughout his life, he has been shunned by the Christian community, yet forced to  interact with them – thereby ensuring that he be reminded daily of the contempt that the  merchants feel for him. As Shylock’s gesture toward Antonio indicates, he is not a  hateful and unforgiving person by nature; on the contrary, he is a man who is willing to  forget religious differences and come to an understanding with the merchants with whom he does business. However, it is clear that his feelings have never been reciprocated, a  fact that he is all too aware of when he reminds Antonio of the wrongs that the merchant  has inflicted upon him in the past. Shylock’s later obsession with Antonio’s repayment  of his debt, continually voiced with the words, “I will have my bond,” thus take on a  deeper import, as one realizes that it is not simply the money or the flesh that Shylock  means – it is vindication for years of abuse.  

 As if Shylock’s anger and frustration toward the Venetian merchants is not enough,  a blow is given to him that hits extremely close to home when he is betrayed by his own  daughter, Jessica. She not only elopes to marry a Christian man – ironically, a friend of  Antonio’s – but steals money from her father’s household and takes the ring that  Shylock’s wife had given to him and immediately trades it for a monkey. Upon learning this, Shylock displays a considerable amount of misery and vulnerability in saying, “I  would not have given it for a wilderness of monkeys” (3.1.121-122). One can imagine  that for a man who has struggled in vain to fit into a society that repeatedly rejected him, a betrayal by one of his kin is the final blow. Although not written into any scenes,  Shylock’s anger and grief must be overwhelming as he contemplates that his daughter  has chosen the society that refuses to accept him over her own flesh and blood. This grief  almost certainly plays into his transformation into the blood-hungry tyrant who demands  Antonio’s life – again, Shylock is not by nature a bloody or hateful man, but years of  abuse by the Venetian society, finally compounded with his own daughter’s embrace of  this society and religion over his own bring to a halt his conciliatory efforts toward  Antonio and presumably any other Christian merchants. His grief and anger feed into his  desire to somehow be reconciled for all that he has endured in his lifetime, and thus he  insistently calls for his bond.  

 In his paper, “The Merchant of Venice: A Modern Perspective” Alexander Leggatt  describes the escalation of the events surrounding Shylock as “…a terrible demonstration  of the ways we teach each other to hate so that prejudice moves in a vicious circle” (216).  Indeed, one sees this incarnation of prejudice in Shylock’s relentless insistence for  revenge on Antonio; it is clear that he seeks not only to fulfill the requirements of the  bond, but also to extract vengeance on the merchant who has come to symbolize years of  abuse, discrimination, and – most recently – betrayal that he is otherwise powerless to  stop. Tragically, the final outcome with Shylock serves only to heighten his feelings of  discrimination and resentment, when, as his suit against Antonio is denied, he is forced to  convert to Christianity and thereby forbidden to continue in his profession of moneylending. As an added insult, half of his wealth is given to Jessica and her new husband, facilitating the comfort of the child who has abandoned him. At the close of  The Merchant of Venice, Shylock is truly left with nothing – he has no friends, no  employment, and no religion. It is no wonder that he excuses himself from the crowd by  saying, “I am not well” (4.1.13); this is easily the greatest understatement of the entire  play, spoken by a man who has just had his entire life taken from him by a society that  refuses to see him in any light except that of a villain.

While on the surface it seems that Malvolio and Shylock are the villains of these two plays, a  closer look reveals that they are actually the victims.  

 The characters of Malvolio and Shylock are not dissimilar – both are misunderstood  by their surrounding societies and therefore are understandably resentful. Malvolio’s  resentment is seen in his continual scorn of Feste, Sir Andrew, and other characters who  embody the chaos and wildness that it is his job to curtail; Shylock, on the other hand,  expresses his resentment in his sinister insistence that he be given “his” bond – Antonio’s  flesh. Both characters experience frustration at the continual lack of understanding and  empathy with which they are treated; after all, it is hypocritical for Maria and Sir Toby to  take such delight in punishing Malvolio for indulging in the same madcap romantic spirit  with which they gorge themselves, and the Venetian society treats Shylock no better,  failing to understand his anger at the life-long discrimination that he has endured. While on the surface it seems that Malvolio and Shylock are the villains of these two plays, a  closer look reveals that they are actually the victims.  

 The two comedies Twelfth Night and The Merchant of Venice are well-known as  comedies, but their “problem” characters of Malvolio and Shylock hint at the darker side  that is present in each play. Both of these characters are outsiders, shunned by their  societies and unable to reconcile at the close of events. The resentment that is expressed by Malvolio and Shylock is understandable given the treatment that each endures by his  society, neither of which ever demonstrates any empathy for the two dark figures that are  so mercilessly persecuted. In jarring contrast to the comedic escapades that take place  with other characters in these plays, Shylock and Malvolio are victims who are never able  to express their own perspective or gain any understanding from their peers, and their  frustration and resentment is unfortunately only seen as indication of their villainous nature.  

• 2007

Works Cited 

Cahill, Edward. “The Problem of Malvolio.” College Literature 23 (June 1996): 62-82.  

Hirschfeld, Heather. “’We All Expect a Gentle Answer, Jew’: The Merchant of Venice   and the Psychotheology of Conversion.” English Literary History 73 (Spring 2006):   61-81.  

Hobgood, Allison P. “Twelfth Night’s ‘Notorious Abuse’ of Malvolio: Shame,   Humorality, and Early Modern Spectatorship.” Shakespeare Bulletin 24 (Fall 2006):   1-22.  

Leggatt, Alexander. “The Merchant of Venice: A Modern Perspective.” Included in The   Merchant of Venice: 211-20. New York: Washington Square Press, 1992.  

Works Consulted  

Belsey, Catherine. “Twelfth Night: A Modern Perspective.” Included in Twelfth Night:   197-207. New York: Washington Square Press, 1993.  

Sherman, Anita Gilman. “Disowning Knowledge of Jessica, or Shylock’s Skepticism.”   Studies in English Literature 1500-1900 44 (Spring 2004): 277-95.