There are many cases where if one didn't laugh, one would cry; that is, the difference between the ridiculous and the deplorable is often narrow. Indeed, the irony behind what is tragic and what is comic is naturally linked to its relationship with pathos, so much so that comedy rejects empathy and pity, while tragedy requires it. From Chekhov's The Cherry Orchard to Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse Five, to the early burlesque and often dark works of Plautus, tragicomic elements have been used in short stories, plays and literature over time to provide ironic commentary on the spirit of the age and the state of being human. However, no one surpasses Shakespeare in providing insight into the human condition and its affinity between the tragic and the comic. This is why, after an analysis of The Merchant of Venice and its handling of fanaticism towards Jews and homosexuals, of the hypocrisy of the merciful judgment of Christians and, in particular, of the empathetic wickedness and fate of the antagonist of he play, Shylock, it becomes clear that Shakespeare deliberately blurs the lines between tragedy and comedy and between what is moral and immoral to provide humor, or at least irony, to describe the human condition. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay From the beginning with Antonio's opening line, "'Truly, I don't know why I'm so sad," the reader is introduced to the show with an air of speculative sadness. When Solanio and Salerio insist that Antonio's sadness could be generated by the risky nature of his business ventures at sea, Antonio responds by explaining how his holding is solid, regardless of the future of his current business prospects; however, when asked if the merchant's misery could be linked to love, Antonio retorts with "'Fie, fie!" The hasty response would seem to suggest that Antonio is sure he cannot be in love, but soon after, when he and Bassanio are left alone, the two share an exchange that would seem contrary to that statement. Although their exchange is not an open confession of homosexuality, it is undeniable that Bassanio, who says: “'To you, Antonio, I owe more. , in money and in love"," and Antonio, who promises ""my purse, my person, my extreme means are all open to your opportunities"," are in love with each other. At the very least, Antonio's undying affection and “'Devotion to Bassanio suggests the intensity of same-sex male bonds''. If Antonio is in such a loving relationship, then why is he sad Could it be that Bassanio is trying to woo Portia, the rich heiress of Belmont, and that? marriage could put an end to Antonio and his relationship, but Bassanio explains that they both expected this to happen given the messy condition of his estate, or in his own words: "It is not unknown to you, Antonio, / How much I have mining wealth deactivated.'' If it were intended, why would Antonio declare at the beginning of the play that he does not know the reasons for his sadness? One possible answer is that Antonio is conflicted by his homosexual desires for Bassanio Antonio, a merchant with Venetian sensibilities of the time, including homophobia and anti-Semitism, may be in conflict between his homosexual desire for Bassanio and his revulsion towards the very idea of ​​homosexuality. The implicit irony provided by a “'homosexual homophobic”' could certainly be seen in a humorous light, but it is almost impossible to erase the elements of tragedy, considering how easy it is to empathize with the lovelorn merchantgenuinely confused. the bigotry in the play extends far beyond sexual orientation and eventually becomes overt prejudice and racism, or more specifically, anti-Semitism. The irony behind the Christian/Jewish opposition throughout the play is obviously the Christian message of compassion towards others in conflict with the overt anti-Semitism prevalent in the Christian characters. Even more ironic, bigotry against Jews is not so much religious as racial intolerance. Although the Christians in the play are in no way to be perceived as religiously tolerant, the persecution of Shylock, as well as his daughter, is more of a xenophobic contempt for "the peculiarities of the bloodline, and increasingly, of the nation." '. This is made evident in the exchange between Jessica and Lancelot, when Lancelot explains that Jessica by birth is inevitably "'damned,"' except for a "'bastard hope,'" explaining that Jessica "'might partly hope that your father will took." no, you are not the Jew's daughter. In other words, Jessica's persecution is not necessarily due to the fact that she shares her father's religion, but to his blood, which in turn produces a tragicomic irony, so much so that the Christian characters have no qualms about persecuting Jews, also in the name of Christianity. , a religion that preaches exactly the opposite. It would be unfair to say that only Lancelot expresses an anti-Semitic attitude; in truth, almost all the Christian characters express some form of Jewish racism at some point in the play. Graziano, one of the “most explicit anti-Semites in the opera” embodies many of the character's prejudices, to the point of making radical and long hate speeches against Jews. Gratian, in one of these rants, comically hints at questioning his faith, an ironic idea considering that his anti-Semitism does not coexist with his Christian beliefs, when he tells Shylock: "'Oh, be damned, you inexorable dog, / And for your life let Justice be charged! / You almost make me waver in my faith”' Whether Shakespeare is consciously providing irony as a commentary on the injustice of Christian racism or is simply cultivating “'the soul of English culture”' and the “'long history of Jewish culture' suffering,”' is questionable. In any case, it is impossible to remove the tragic quality of the Jew's situation, even when illustrated in such an exaggerated and perhaps humorous manner. Christian foul play continues for throughout the play, particularly with Shylock's trial, Portia begs Shylock to show mercy to Antonio, stating "'then the Jew must be merciful,'" but when Shylock wonders why he must do so, she recants. with "'The quality of mercy is not tested.' , implies that mercy in the law “is not possible for anyone, but only in and through Christ.” His “capitalization” of Christian principles to gain an advantage over the Jew Shylock in the trial could be interpreted as “psychospiritual usury,” especially considering the hypocritical conclusion of the trial, where mercy is not fully exercised with Shylock's sentence If the Christian character's intention was mercy, then why publicly humiliate Shylock by forcing him to convert to Christianity, obviously going against his own beliefs. and family tradition? The use of Christian ideologies in the trial is not only ironic but also hypocritical, since those of the ideology do not even support their own preaching, to the point that Antonio's words at the beginning of the work, that even "'the devil can quote Scripture for his own purposes"' could be used against them. Whether it is subliminal or intentional, there is no doubt throughout theprocess that Christian characters show “'hypocrisy in projecting their own worst traits onto the figure of the Jew as a scapegoat”'. Since Shakespeare writes the play with the intention that the Christian characters identify with the audience, the subtle irony behind the Christian hypocrisy is ambiguous; however, if one places emphasis on “'the importance and centrality of irony'', it becomes clear that the work describes “'how Christians succeed in the world by not practicing their ideals of love and mercy." Justice at the hands of Christians is completely arbitrary, and not to the mercy of Christ (the only just mercy according to Portia earlier), but solely to Antony's tastes when Portia conveys the sentence to him by asking, "'What mercy can you render? " him, Antonio? ' but becomes "a sort of parody of celestial harmony and love". The irony behind the court scene, and certainly the potentially deliberate pathos rendered by Shylock's mistreatment, is quickly swept away as Shakespeare immediately shifts focus from Shylock to the lovers and their rings at the end of the first scene of Act IV, reinforcing the elements of romantic comedy throughout the work. But even if the irony is deliberately put aside to continue the comedic narrative, there is no denying its presence throughout the entire process and the hypocrisy and complacency of the Christian characters that allowed it to thrive. Perhaps the most complicated element in the critical interpretation of The Merchant of Venice is the ambiguity surrounding the character of Shylock. One inclination is to present Shylock as "'a potentially good man, distorted by malignant social and religious prejudices", an approach which can only mean that Shakespeare intended the play to be "'deeply ironic'' and about "hypocritical Christians ,'' but in "the other direction," Shylock could have simply been like any villain in a "typical romantic comedy, in which only by historical accident a Jew occupies the position otherwise held by (say) a killjoy." If the latter, if Shylock were simply a generic villain, then why are there so many complications and instances of pity towards his character throughout the play? It might be possible that Shylock deliberately has the characteristics of both, a sympathetic character and a typical villain. For how else could Shylock be "portrayed not as a hateful character, but as someone who arouses our sympathies" and "a comic, even farcical figure , greedy to the point of ridiculousness, whose every joke and every mannerism is intentional? to evoke belly laughs,'' if it weren't an ideal platform for him to provide irony throughout the play? It only seems possible that Shylock was created to embody contradictory characteristics. Because otherwise the most touching and sentimental lines of the play would be spoken by the man who, when Salerio asks him, “you will not take his flesh.” What is it for?", he coldly replies with "'Also for baiting fish. If it fuels nothing else, it will fuel my revenge." With these words something is revealed "much more than the mere desire for revenge" and an "element of wild desperation" created by the frustration of years of persecution, emerges in character of Shylock, so that as we see "there is a desperate sense of the futility of revenge, since the pound of flesh cannot heal the real pain", we realize that Shylock has gone mad to death point of profound agony, and through this knowledge they are forced to sympathize with him. If not for those words, then certainly for the rest of Shylock's speech, particularly his question: "'If you take us, we won't bleed / If you tickle us.' , let's not laugh?”' and certainly the.