Howard Jacobson on His Recreation of Shylock

Discussing his most recent novel, an adaptation of The Merchant of Venice set in modern Britain, Howard Jacobson comments on the character of Shylock and the question of Shakespeare’s anti-Semitism. (Interview by Liam Hoare.)

Shylock . . . remains part of English culture as both noun and adjective. . . . Shylock does not die in the play; he is very much still among us.

Although Shylock comes from the mind of someone who isn’t Jewish, he has entered the Jewish imagination. He’s entered the literature, not just about Jews, but also of Jews. He is one of the ways that we see ourselves. He won’t go away—he’s always there. . . .

[In The Merchant of Venice, Shylock comes across as] so much more sympathetic than the other characters. At once, immediately, he plays with them: he’s funny; he’s quick on his feet; he plays the Jew and then doesn’t play the Jew; he plays them at their own game; he’s saucy; he’s rude. . . .

Did Shakespeare hate Jews? Clearly he didn’t, because there was so much amusement and vitality and pity to Shylock, including the famous, “Hath not a Jew eyes?” That’s standard for Shakespeare—you humanize the foreign, you humanize the alien.

Read more at Moment

More about: Anti-Semitism, Arts & Culture, English literature, Howard Jacobson, William Shakespeare

 

What a Strategic Victory in Gaza Can and Can’t Achieve

On Tuesday, the Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant met in Washington with Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin. Gallant says that he told the former that only “a decisive victory will bring this war to an end.” Shay Shabtai tries to outline what exactly this would entail, arguing that the IDF can and must attain a “strategic” victory, as opposed to merely a tactical or operational one. Yet even after a such a victory Israelis can’t expect to start beating their rifles into plowshares:

Strategic victory is the removal of the enemy’s ability to pose a military threat in the operational arena for many years to come. . . . This means the Israeli military will continue to fight guerrilla and terrorist operatives in the Strip alongside extensive activity by a local civilian government with an effective police force and international and regional economic and civil backing. This should lead in the coming years to the stabilization of the Gaza Strip without Hamas control over it.

In such a scenario, it will be possible to ensure relative quiet for a decade or more. However, it will not be possible to ensure quiet beyond that, since the absence of a fundamental change in the situation on the ground is likely to lead to a long-term erosion of security quiet and the re-creation of challenges to Israel. This is what happened in the West Bank after a decade of relative quiet, and in relatively stable Iraq after the withdrawal of the United States at the end of 2011.

Read more at BESA Center

More about: Gaza War 2023, Hamas, IDF