Oliver Twist And Merchant of Venice Comparison Essay

Name
Institution
Course
Date

Oliver Twist and Merchant of Venice Comparison Essay
Merchant of Venice and Oliver Twist explicitly illustrate how Shakespeare and Charles Dicked literary prejudice against the Jews. They bring out their image as very distinct from all the original inhabitants of England at the time. The moneylender stereotype of the Jews can be considered the invention of Dickens in his book because, at the date of writing the books, the Jews still lived in England and the stereotype served as a live model for his thoughts or the thing that existed. They are creations as in the case of Shakespeare who tried to create a feeling of the stereotypes long after the Jews left England. In Shakespeare time, maybe only Christianized Jews could be remaining and might not have been visible with the general Jews activities such as lending of money because the church demonized the activity. So, therefore, it is evident that Dickens’ book gives the feel of reality while presenting the prejudices of Jews people in England than the counterpart.
Everything constant, the two clearly demonstrates all the prejudice that the Jews people faced. They were the only moneylenders, an act that was considered unchristian by even their churches to mean that they faced criticism from even their people who had changed allegiance to Christianity and faced the realities of the Old Testament. The main contentious born was in their lending activities is that they did that for interests. The two books therefore primarily captured them as Shylocks which in Christianity then was serious contempt.

It sparked severe ideological hatred between the characters of the two religious divide (Morse, 785-86).
Shakespeare appears to have been influenced by his society to deem Jews as greedy lenders among others informed his creation of the Character “shylock.” He never had any tangible reality to support the decision rather than the above stated, contrary to Dicken’s with Oliver Twist. Shakespeare picks Barabbas from Elizabethan theater and makes him the ultimate figure of greed and all odds. Barabbas works hard to amass as much gold as possible to himself which a real representation of a greedy person or the ancient Jews in himself. He openly boasts of fornications and the murder of Monk amongst other odds of the sort which is a real creation of what the Jews were. The only problem is that the Barabbas acts staged managed to represent a story not a reality because as Shakespeare portrays him, he does what he does best with a lot of impunity, which a reader can feel lacks factual basis. Nevertheless, it apparently bolded the stereotypic image that everyone else had created of Jews. They were greedy as both books depict, ill-fated and motived.
Shakespeare’s book, thereby, conventionally indicate from the Elizabethan days to date that when one plays the two characters, Barabbas and Shylock, he/ she intends to show how notorious the Jews were in the English community and anywhere else. Dicken’s brings out the actual feel the evil parts of the Jews. The two great writers successfully achieved their motives diversely.
It appears that Shakespeare core purpose was to revive the Jewish stereotype through his writing as it came at a time that England was free of any Jewish problem. Shylock is a typical Jewish stereotype he embodies lust that is so absolute and pure (love for money) an attribute that is overwhelmingly controversial as it obliterates all other aspects of the character. Shake-Spear is vividly out to exemplify the character’s greed in crudest form, as Shylock is simplified and stripped of his attributes as a human being to the extent that relatively little is left of him as a human being. Shylock is not comparable to ordinary human being even while sleep as money bag -visions haunt him in his sleep. Shylock appears completely unable to have his energies invested in anything other than the accumulation of wealth. In one of an ideal scene in revealing Shylock’s actual love of money, (Act three Scene one) Shylock almost has no feelings for his daughter. Even when she opts to run away with his gold and jewelry, he is incredibly pained and moans the loss of these items not concerned with her daughters running away. He enquired from Tubal on the where about of his daughter. Tuban, however, indicates that he has no idea of her were about. “I would my daughter were dead at my foot, and the jewels in her ear!” (Shakespeare, 12). It is surprising that a further can have such inclinations towards her daughter. Shylocks lust for material wealth (gold) assumes the form of prejudice that is merciless. He ends up equating money to life. His cries “Oh my ducats my daughter” reveal the equation of a father to child love with the love money that is so impersonal.
Charles Dicken’s Oliver Twist equally has similar prejudice of inhumanness in Jewish characters. Dickens uses a couple of attributes that give Fagin Jewish characteristics that are synonymous with medieval literature. The characters red colored hair contributes towards bringing out the mysterious nature of the character that is a key Jewish attribute. He is ruthless, and he indulges in the kidnapping of innocent Jewish girls. In a couple of instances, Fagin makes plans of poisoning some his conspirators at various instances. Fagin can be described as satanic and subhuman. Dickens constantly refers to Fagin the Jew probably to cement prejudiced idea on readers (Shakespeare, 152-153).
Perhaps Dickens illustration of Fagin on page I86 gives a comprehensive coverage of the characters’ attributes. He describes him as stealthily gliding along and “creeping beneath the shelter of the walls and doorways; the hideous old man seemed like some loathsome reptile” (Dickens, 78). He adds that in crawling through the night, the character is the act. This text is comparable to Shake Spears description of Shylock. Both characters in similar ways in human and they are both of Jewish origin. Fagin was ubiquitous and evil and primordial. He is meant to cause a nightmare for children as well as adult readers. The fear that character inspires is a specter that is considerably more horrifying in comparison to Fagin himself. The character is arguably more than merely ethnic prejudice. Dickens richly draws him as an echoing terrifying villainy embodiment.
It is evident that both writers embrace the use of their Jewish characters to as prejudice. It is, however, understandable that the preference in the use of these evil characters as of Jewish origin is purely a result of historical, social perceptions. The characters are however instrumental in the production of literary characters that can be applicable in the analysis of our day to day social interactions.
Works Cited
Dickens, Charles. Oliver twist. OUP Oxford, 1999.
Morse, J. Mitchell. “Prejudice and literature.” College English 37.8 (1976): 780-807.
Shakespeare, William. The merchant of Venice. Vol. 7. Lippincott, 1916.