WP: “His plays contain anti-Semitism, racism and sexism, sexual abuse and violence. Does it matter?”
The article, however, is all about Shakespeare and the Jews. So if the Bard is to be censored, it’s apparently primarily about whether or not he is good for the Jews.
It’s getting tiresome hearing Jews push for increased censorship of views they don’t like.
The article is written by a “Preti Taneja,” not a Jewish name. Here are some excerpts:
Shakespeare’s plays contain anti-Semitism, racism and sexism, sexual abuse and violence; they magnify the tenor of their age. But should they be censored when they might offend a particular community?
Actor Mark Rylance, former artistic director of the Globe theater, recently said that he has sometimes cut “some unfortunate anti-Semitic things” from Shakespeare’s plays:
If a character says it, it doesn’t mean the author means it but since the Holocaust . . . these statements have a lot more resonance now than they did at that time.
The Merchant of Venice is the most obvious example here. It’s the play that most thoroughly reveals the anti-Semitism of Shakespeare’s day. Rylance’s words perhaps act as a kind of warning to theater makers in our current climate of fear, heightened by the attack on a Kosher supermarket in Paris after the shootings at Charlie Hebdo magazine in January.
Yet for other contemporary writers and directors, Shakespeare’s anti-Semitism offers a chance to highlight social injustice. Director Rupert Goold’s recently revived “Merchant of Venice” for the Almeida Theatre in London was a bright, brash show that set the play in Las Vegas. It turned the spotlight on the hypocrisy of Christian fundamentalism in a digital age.
The anti-Semitism of Shakespeare’s words was emphasized in one shocking scene where, following Shylock’s forced conversion from Judaism to Christianity, Bassanio’s men spit on him and film his humiliation on their mobile phones. He struggles to his feet and runs through the audience, implicitly damning all silent observers with his pained cries. On stage, Bassanio’s men laugh; to them, anti-Semitism is no more than a moment’s entertainment. The implication is of course that soon their videos will find an airing on the Internet.
It was deeply disturbing: a reminder of how anti-Semitism is alive in the heartland of kitsch and capitalist America. Reviewers called the show “revelatory” and “provocative”; two comments that support productions that don’t shy away from problematic subject matter in difficult times.
But my brief canvas of the audience after the show revealed opinion was divided. Some agreed with the reviews; others felt Goold’s production was irresponsibly extreme, guilty of expressing the racism it purportedly critiqued.
How come we never hear about the need for censoring Jewish texts because they contain anti-Gentile references?
