Shakespeare introduces an complex scene here, in terms of the relationship between comedy and anti-semitism. The scene is comedic and the topics are treated lightly- Launcelet plays a trick on his father and whines about his work, his beard is compared to a horse’s tail- but at the same time, anti-semitism invades as he shames Shylock for being "very Jew." From the text, it is clear Launcelet blames Shylock’s cruelty as a boss on the fact that he is Jewish. We can see his anti-semitism mixed with his perverse attempt at comedy, when he remarks, "Give him a present. Give him a halter." The second line seems to be a punchline, as if he's expecting his father to laugh at Shylock's supposed death. This is one moment of many where the audience is forced to make a choice. If they laugh, they are complicit in the anti-semitism. If they don't, they're taking a stance that anti-semitism is not funny. This begs the question: is Shakespeare calling antisemitism a joke, or is he calling those with anti-semitic views a joke?
The use of money imagery further complicates this question. Shakespeare has established Shylock as the rich master, and Launcelot as the poor servant, who is "famished in his service," and whose ribs can tell "every finger I have." This reveals Shylock as greedy, a common anti-semitic stereotype, while Launcelot is the helpless victim. This could suggest that Shakespeare is leaning into the stereotypes that Jewish people have worked so hard to dispense, but he could also be emphasizing these stereotypes as extreme which would propose a satirical reading of the play.
Even Launcelet’s name leads to a complicated reading of anti-semitism and comedy. The name Launcelet seems to be a bastardization of Lancelot, a knight in King Arthur’s court who is hailed as a hero. Launcelet, however, is an anti-semitic clown who seems far from moral purity one would find in a hero. We are again confronted with a question of Shakespeare's intentions. Are we meant to associate Lancelot's pure moral alignment with Launcelot, which would justify his bigoted views as rightful? Or are we meant to view Launcelot as a satirization of Lancelot, the complete opposite, thus calling those with anti-semitic views as morally questionable?
To emphasize the relationship between anti-semitism and comedy, we will translate the spelling and spacing of the page as accurately as possible. Our page will highlight terms which relate to actors to animals in yellow, references to money in green, unflattering representations in red, and reversals of expectations in blue. In doing this, we believe that our digital edition poses questions about Shakespeare’s intentions for his anti-semitic characters in relation to comedy.
