A Cop Out Ending?

A Cop out Ending

It could be argued both ways that William Shakespeare did and did not use a cop out ending  in his play A Merchant of Venice. Many may thing that Shakespeare did go the way of a cop out ending because of his conclusion of the bond. Shakespeare in act 4.1 stripped Shylock of his bond, pride, and religion leaving him with nothing and letting Antonio go free. In the final act he also has Antonio’s merchant ships return restoring him of his wealth. This could be seen as a cop out because instead of taking another stand on religious prejudice and having Shylock, the Jew, get his bond fairly he let the audience have what they wanted, which was the Christians emerging on top. On the other hand Shakespeare ending  could be very true to his character. He always restored the natural order of things at the end of his plays, and the natural order of Christians dominating Jews was restored at the end of The Merchant of Venice. He also wraps up all the different story lines he has going in the book, with Portia forgiving Bassanio for giving away the ring, Antonio’s ships returning, and Lorenzo and Jessica becoming Shylocks heir.

I personally like the ending for all plots are brought fully to close, even though I truly sympathize for Shylock and wish he has been able to keep his religion and sense of self. 

MOV Cop Out Ending

The ending to Shakespeare's A Merchant of Venice could percieved as either a satisfactory conclusion or a "cop out". On one hand, it should be taken into consideration that at the time it would not have been politically "acceptable", even in literature, for a Jew like Shylock to be victorious in his bond being fullfilled, especially if it meant a wealthy and respected Christian merchant would lose his life.
While this social standard does justify Shakespeare's decision to spare Antonio and leave Shylock with next to nothing to his name, I feel that Shakespeare ultimately deprived the audience of a satisfying ending. It is a commonly attributed technique of Shakespeare's to restore the natural order of things within his novels, and I feel that because Shylock was so mistreated and abused by these wealthy and prejudice Christians and yet was still denied his bond, the natural order in a sense was never restored.
Shakespeare took a risk by merely including a Jew in his novel, so why not carry out his effort to change society and the world? Why not allow the minority and the oppressed to rise up and overcome their oppressor for once? It is because of this unfullfilled attempt to change society that I feel the ending to Shakespeare's A Merchant of Venice was a "cop out".

Cop-out Ending to The Merchant of Venice

I felt as though the ending to The Merchant of Venice was not completely a cop-out.  I thought that it answered questions about Portia and Nerissa and how they dealt with the fact that their husbands gave away their rings.  I thought that this was necessary to show Portia and Nerissa’s true emotions because there were many unanswered questions after the court scene such as if they would forgive their husbands or not.  I am glad that Shakespeare included act five in the play because the answer of whether or not the wives would forgive their husbands was different from my idea of what would happen.

Although it showed how all the characters reacted after the court scene, it could be considered a cop-out ending.  Shakespeare did not include Shylock at all in the last act which caused many unanswered questions to how he reacted after the court scene and how he dealt with all his loss.  Throughout the play, there are examples where Shakespeare could be persuading the audience to give up their prejudice against Jews, but in the last act no one shows any mercy or compassion to Shylock.  By not appearing in the last act, Shylock is depicted as less than a Christian which could give a counterexample to this fact.  I personally thought that the ending to The Merchant of Venice was not entirely a cop-out, but it could have included Shylock’s character to provide answers to questions about his reaction and for Shakespeare to further his point on whether he is against prejudice to Jews or not.

The Cop Out Ending:

I can not explain how angry this ending makes me. The law only seems to take in true affect when it is in the benefit of the Christians. For example, when Gratiano says "Therefore thou must be hanged at the state's charge" 4.1.381. So before when the situation was playing into the hands of Shylock the law is unjust and corrupted, but when it plays to the hand of the Christians and Antonio it becomes noble and righteous again. Shakespeare portrays Antonio in a situation that is basically him against the world so of course one hopes for the underdog, or the character harboring our sympathy to win, but it gets to a point where his only choice is the cop out. Shylock puts himself on the line for what he thinks is right, and is by the stating of the covenant, but is ripped apart by the masses. The play gets to a point where Shylock is not even fighting for the covenant or the money, but for himself and his own pride not only as a Jewish person, but a person just as the mass of Christians. He is holding on because in a his time of disparity when everything has been taken from him, but his pride he fights to have a morsel of control and pride in his life. It is highlighted that the mob hath no empathy, yet is trying to force it upon others in an uppity manor. When Portia then makes Shylock beg for forgiveness when she turns the tables on him, stripping him of the dignity he still possesed. The cop out ending heightened the idea of if you can only save anything save yourself. It is this makes a statement about how if minorities can come together and fight as one they fight alone at risk to the persecution of the majority. In a way saying you can not send one man up against an army, so Shylock could be symbolizing a movement for equality and unity.

But overall loved the book! :)

TMOV Ending

I did not particularly enjoy the ending of TMOV. I enjoyed the book, however I thought the ending was full of conflicting ideas. In Act IV, Scene 1, the Duke states that everyone expects a "gentle" answer, meaning that people expect Shylock to act like a Christian, who would give mercy to Antonio. As the trial continues, none of the Christians are willing to be merciful to Shylock. They call him out on his beliefs and use his words against him. Although they treat him to an alternate penalty, that is what they consider just and right. Mercy would be to let him take the money and leave. I think the ending is either to show hypocrisy, or just plain contradiction.

I also did not enjoy Act V. Though the two wives show mercy, they have just proven that their husbands would give away the symbol of their love, a part of the bond. Although both women are the ones that they give the rings to, I still think it is strange. If the women were serious about their binding through the ring, they should have kept to it. Both the husbands and the wives show little respect to what was supposed to be an "all powerful" love contract.

Shakespeare's Cop Out Ending

Despite The Merchant of Venice being a play that was way ahead of its time, the play closes in a way that leaves little to be desired. After Act IV closes I expected to see some sort of general interaction with Shylock, but I was saddened to learn that his appearances ended in the conclusion of the court scene in Act IV. I think Shakespeare copped out by doing this because it was too radical; he knew if he had made a definite choice about Shylock's fate his audience might not take it well. The Merchant of Venice has many satirical undertones that not all of his readers may have initially have seen, but with the addition of a just or merciful ending for Shylock, the readers would have picked up on the social commentaries and become enraged about the book. Although the ending is not at all ideal, Shakespeare wraps the play up in a way that would please his initial audience. I believe that Shakespeare was not concerned with the way he would end his play; his message was strong enough that no conclusion was the best decision. He wanted to make his readers think about the play and its connections to the world and, through an ending that does not satisfy the readers, he succeeds in his goal.

Cop out ending?

The conclusion of Shakespeare's play, The Merchant of Venice, can be viewed as a cop out.  In my opinion, the ending was a cop out because Shylock, the truthful character that is ridiculed and has all his posessions taken from him loses in his situation.  The greedy, stupid, and wasteful Christians end up gaining wealth in the end.  Usually Shakespeare doesn't shy away from killing off major characters, but the evasion of Antonio's death was almost awkward.  I think it seems awkward to me because in many stories the mistreated (Shylock) get their revenge and the hateful characters (Antonio) get what was coming to them.


However, this was not the case.  I think that the way the story ended may have not seemed like such a cop out in Shakespeare's time because I don't think people would have ever expected the Jew to triumph over the Christians. Shakespeare clearly shows the hypocracy of the Christians, so having them utterly defeated may be too extensive. So for this time period the ending may not have been a cop out.

TMOV Cop Out Ending

The ending of a play serves the purpose to conclude the overall message the author wishes to convey as well as tie up each string designated to the plot or characters. I believe that Shakespeare did create a cop out ending of his play The Merchant of Venice for the following reasons:

1. After the court scene, we no longer learn anything of Shylock. We are not sure of his actions, emotions, or physical state following his sentencing. He seems to simply slide out of focus and no explanation is provided. Lorenzo and Jessica receive a message regarding their place in his will but nothing else is mentioned. There is no sense of closure of to Shylock. This lack of information shows that he simply lives within the pages and provides no realistic continuation of his life for us to interpret. This can also be seen in Antonio where we find his wealth returned but do not see any self change created by the events he endured.

2. The subplot of the wedding rings is left unfinished. Bassanio and Gratiano finally learn of their wives deception after being chastised and do nothing about it. They lack the humanizing characteristics of anger or other various emotions after the moral battle Portia and Nerissa led them into. This was very upsetting to me and I felt that justice, a large influence throughout the play, had not been achieved.

3. Finally, I felt that this ending was incredibly rushed. I was surprised to see that the final act only consisted of 1 scene. Shakespeare crowded each plot and their corresponding characters together in attempt to conclude and tie all of the plots together. This however did not allow for natural development or a flowing plot line but rather an abrupt cop out ending.

Cop Out Ending Maddie Kness

After Act 4, felt horrible that Shylock's life was spiraling quickly in a downward direction. He had lost his daughter, his religion, his honor, and most of his fortune. I think Shakespeare's interesting choice not to include Shylock in the novel anymore gave for a questionable ending regarding his life. No one knows whether he was eventually happy, whether he stayed unhappy. Also, when going back to Jessica and Lorenzo in Belmont, Act 5 just began to pick up pace. In one moment Portia and Nerissa where upset at Gratiano and Bassanio, then the woman were asking for forgiveness, and then everyone was happy and talking about their new found future. The ending was very abrupt and I did not agree with it nor did I like it. It was I think almost in a way embarrassing for Shakespeare to end this great play. He also ruined it with all the couplets and rhymes he added in at the end as well. He just shoved a happy ending into one Act and I feel like it would have almost been better if he had just ended the play with the court scene.

Cop Out Ending

One side of the argument about the ending in The Merchant of Venice is that Shakespeare made it a cop-out ending. The cop-out could be proved because of the fact that Shylock was excluded from the final act which created questions about what happened to him and how he acted after the court scene. The ending could be shown as not including details about how the rest of the characters lived after the court scene also.
The other side is that the ending created by Shakespeare was not a cop-out. This could be proven by the three main plots in the play. The bond, elopement, and casket plots were all concluded and had detailed events that happened in order to resolve the conflict that was involved in each plot.  The events that concluded each lot were the court scene, the marriage of Bassanio and Portia, and the successful elopement of Jessica and Lorenzo.
I thought that Shakespeare did create a cop-out ending because it did not continue to explain important aspects of the play. In Act Five I wanted to learn more about the situation surrounding Shylock and his punishments. I felt sorry for him because he had so many problems occurring at one time due to his daughter leaving him and the result of the court scene and I wanted to see how he would deal with them. Shakespeare did not mention Shylock in the fifth act which made the ending for Shylock's story seem abrupt. I also understand that the plots were resolved but I think Shakespeare needed to add more detail to what happened after these events took place and how each of the characters dealt with their new lives. Even though I thought the ending was not perfect, I enjoyed reading this play.

TMOV Cop Out Ending?

The Merchant of Venice's ending could be considered a "cop out" ending or a strategic ending. The cop out ending being that Shakespeare just did not know where to take the play, so he ended it. The strategic ending being that Shakespeare did not want to write anymore because he had started to ramble and the play needed to end. I feel that the ending of this play was a mix the "cop out" ending and the strategic ending. The play ended abruptly and almost randomly because Portia and Nerissa appeared madder than they were and they just accepted the men's excuses. But could also be considered strategic because the play was coming to a close and needed an ending. I think that Shakespeare needed to either expand on the ring scene or end after the court scene. 

Catherine

Cop out ending?

There are two sides to be argued for this topic.  One side would say that yes, Shakespeare did cop out on this ending of The Merchant of Venice.  This could be argued because there is no resolution to a greater, overlying conflict.  Many of Shakespeare's works restore balance or natural order by the end of the plot, but there is no initial disturbance of order in The Merchant of Venice.  Also, Shakespeare failed to touch on the details of the stories of the other characters in the play.  This play's lack of a greater conflict therefore makes it much different from his previous works, which is why I believe that it is not meant to be compared to his other works.

The other argument that states that this was NOT a cop out ending is one that I would be partial to.  After the court scene, there was not much more to be said.  While Shakespeare did not touch on the details of the stories of the other characters in the play, there stories were already resolved.  Shakespeare therefore did not need to elaborate further; he only needed to do as much as would conclude the story of Bassanio, Portia, Gratiano, and Nerissa.

In my case, the depth of resolution at the end was therefore not something that concerned me greatly.  And frankly, this play was one that I truly enjoyed reading, so I am content with whichever interpretation of the ending is used.

Simi

Shakespeare's Cop Out Ending ML

ML Sparrow on The Ending of A Merchant of Venice:

After finishing Act IV, I was exhausted from the tense scenes and cruel ending for Shylock. I was hoping for Shakespeare to show Shylock growing and making peace with his punishments or show character's compunction for the mistreatment of Shylock. Shakespeare did no such thing. Act V of A Merchant of Venice consisted of an entirely new plot line brought in at the very end of Act IV having to do with the rings given to Bassanio and Gratiano by their wives. The Bond plot closed in Act IV with Shylock's punishments, the elopement plot was solved the same way, and the Casket plot was solved after Bassanio chose the correct casket. Where could Shakespeare have gone? He could have concluded the book amicably by having someone show compassion for Shylock, or show a sense of amity between Shylock and a Christian. By creating a seemingly random ending Shakespeare left the book uneasily ended; the books ends with a sense of unrest. I wanted a nice conclusion for Shylock because I felt bad about how he was treated and after finishing the book my frustration was heightened because there was no resolve. I think Shakespeare wanted the audience to feel so off balance by the ending that it would require them to think about the treatments of Jews more intensely. Shylock ends the book as a victim and loses everything, not giving the audience a strong reason to resent him. Shakespeare did so in hopes of making change in society. 

How do Plots interact?

How do Plots interact?

Casket:

• Morocco + Aragon go to Portia  + choose the wrong caskets
• Bassino comes, arrives with Gratiano
• Portia loves Bassanio + he chooses the lead casket
• Gratiano is going to marry Nerissa
• Lorenzo brings letter from Antonio + Bassino asks Portia for the money + he leaves to save Antonio
• Portia + Nerissa follow then dressed as a man + leaves estate with Lorenzo + Jessica

Bond:

• 3,000 ducats fire
• 3 months or pound of flesh for Bassino’s voyage courting Portia
• Antonio’s boat lost at sea
• Shipwrecked English channel
• Shylock is angry at Jessica for losing money, goes through with threat of taking pound of flesh
• Luckily, Shylock will wait for Bassino

Elopement:

• Everyone knows of plot to elope in night except Shylock
• S+S taunt Shylock by saying Jessica is not his flesh and blood
• Jessica and Lorenzo get to Portia’s castle
• Shylock’s frustration with rebelling daughter losing all his money, tormenting from S+S and Antonio’s ship lost at sea overwhelms Shylock into aggressively demanding Antonio’s pay debt. (Even though pound of flesh won’t do anything for him)

October 19, 2012

Thesis Notes: 
1. Should be one sentence, can use ";" though.
2. Thesis should have all controlling ideas there
3. Topic sentences should be connected to all parts of thesis


2.2 (180-190)
Gratiano Begs to go with Bassanio
..foolish?
knows each other so kinda weird
"Bible in pocket"


Mini Skits: 
(Mattie and Shannon) Jessica does not feel bad about taking fathers (shylock) money, shows they must have very strained relationship. Says to Lancelot "My house is hell and thou, a merry devil" (2.3). calls house hell-like, servant the only jolly thing. Ironic that Shylock speaks of his money being safe, not really worried about her safety, maybe her safety is implied though. Shylock trusts her (obviously should not have).

(ML and Mere) Jessica is above dressed as a boy (embarrassing to her) and is handing down her bag to Lorenzo. Brother like love through out all the friends. Puns: "here catch this casket, it is worth the pains" casket could be what you burry the dead in and also her bag. "Descend for you must be my torch bearer" shes light (fit), brings lights, and also expose her woman-ness, her shames are light "not to bad". lorenzo likes her because wise, fair, and true. whille bassanio loved Portia for money, looks, and virtue.

English Notes 10/12/12

10/12 Class Notes

• Prose:  Book writing, NO rhythm, NO rhyming, looks like paragraphs (like a textbook), happens during a break down of order, in the lower class, and change in pace/tone (comic switching to dramatic)

-Ex. Lancelet’s monologue

-Ex. Nerissa’s and Portia’s conversation in act 1 (Nerissa is lower class)

• Blank Verse:  Unrhymed iambic pentameter

• Couplet:  Rhymed writing
  
• Heroic Couplet:  Rhymed iambic pentameter
  
• Pun:  Same or similar sounding word being used/understood in 2 or more ways, for dramatic OR comic purposes
  
• Malapropism:  Mrs. Malaprop, similar words used in wrong context (stupid), for comic purposes
  

Portia - 

-being forced to marry an upper class man (wealthy), her dad’s dead, the suitor has to choose the correct casket (box) of gold, silver, and lead

-her father BOUND Portia to the promise that if the man didn’t choose write than he would never marry again (he will give his word)

-she does not want to get attached to them so she picks out flaws in them, she is trying not to get hurt

Morocco - 

-doesn’t want to be judged on outside only inside, he says many people have liked him

-compares himself to the BEST mythological characters

English Notes 10-11-12

                                                     English Notes 10-11-12

Review of Jewish Life in Venice

·      Lived in Ghettos until 1797-gates removed then

o   Forced to stay in the gates during Easter

o   Only allowed out during the day to be usurers, forced back in at night.

·      Had to wear red hats, other differentiating clothing

·      Usurers- practiced usury, charge exorbitant interest

·      No sexual relations with non Jews- social rule put forth by Christians.

·      Economic------political-----social

·      Only allowed to be usurers, only interaction with non Jews

·      Not allowed to hold public office

·      Venice was the most lenient of all the European countries

o   Venetians were politically independent, loose sexual morals, wealthy.

1.3

·      Ways we know about the character

o   Their words (monologue)

o   Their actions

o   Their dialoguing

o   Others’ words about them

·      Shylock

o   Hates Antonio because he is a Christian, lends money without interest, and because Antonio hates him and makes fun of him

o   Shakespeare characterizes him as a victim on lines 116-120

o   He becomes sarcastic when talking to Antonio about loans

o   “merry bond”- no interest, offered in friendship.  “1lb of flesh”

§  Can be seen as sarcastic, conniving, or it can be seen as a joke “if you don’t bring it back, I’ll just kill you”

§  He just wants to be friends with Antonio

·      Antonio and Bassanio- 3000 ducats over 3 months

·      Jacob and the Sheep-

o   Shylock interpretation- he was a business man

o   Antonio’s interpretation- he was a dishonest cheat

o    

·      Antonio

o   Says Shylock is a liar

o   Describes Shylock as an “evil soul, devil, rotten”

o   Antonio is extremely mean to Shylock

o   “I did and I would do it again”- Antonio towards Shylock after his soliloquy.

o   Why is Antonio putting himself that far out there for Bassanio? He cares for the world too much

o   Thinks the bond (1lb of flesh) could possibly work

o   Takes the deal because his ships will be back an entire month before the money is due.

·      Bassanio

o   Doesn’t want him to take the bond, not really though

·      2 bond plots- one with Antonio and Shylock, the other with Portia and the chests

·      Shakespeare is trying to change the world by enlightening his audience, leaving both sides of Antonio’s character open to interpretation.

Oct 4 TMOV Act I, II

Act I and Act II

Characters:

Antonio: merchant of Venice

Salarino and Solanio, and Gratiano all friends of Antonio

Bassanio closer friend of Antonio, asks to borrow money to court Portia.

Antonio is the merchant of Venice, “In sooth I know not why I am sad.”

• Friends guess: waves are not helping business, in love?
• Decide that he is sad just because he is not happy.

Quotes:

Gratiano: “You have too much respect upon the world.” Says that Antonio pays too much attention, involved in other people's problems

Antonio: “I hold the world but as the world, Gratiano, A stage where every man must play a part, and min a sad one.”

Gratiano: “Why should a man whose blood is warm within sit like his grandsire cut in alabaster?”

Why be sad when you are alive, unlike your grandfather.

Gratiano: “But fish not with this melancholy bait For this foodl gudgeon, this opinion.”

Do not bring your melancholy down on me, I am happy.

Bassanio:

• admits short comings, over does it, kisses up to Antonio
• poor, in debt, lost all his money from irresponsibility, prodigal
• Asks for more money
• sweet talker, way with words
• Describes Portia as 1. Rich 2. Fair 3. VirtuousShakespeare toolbox:

→ Enjambed lines: read through until punctuation

→ Enjambment: spilling over of lines without punctuation

→ Monologues: long speeches made by one person, other people on stage.

→ Soliloquy: Speech given by one alone person. Most often a monologue.

→ Aside: just to audience, requires others to be on stage. Often creates dramatic irony.

→ Parenthetical Phrases: gaps between subject and verb/ through-thought.

Be peevish? I tell thee what, Antonio

(I love thee, and 'tis my love that speaks):

There are a sort of men who visages...

Religious Strife between Muslims and Christians in Europe

This article is about the conflict between Muslim and Christians. 138 prominent Muslim scholars wrote two letters to Pope Benedict XVI and other Christian leaders to urge the religions leaders “to come together with us on the common essentials of our two religions. The first letter was a plea/request to make peace between the two religions; the second letter was about wanting the same freedoms Muslims enjoy in the west in the east (Europe).  We learn that it is not just American’s that are fearful of Muslims, and that actually Muslims have more freedom in the United States (the west) than in Europe. I chose this article because I wanted to learn something different than the religions that are in conflict with American people. This article also seemed interesting. The type of change that I think is needed is for the Pope to accept the letter and act on his ideas to grant Muslims the same freedoms as Muslims in the west have.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/oct/12/religion.catholicism

Butt, Riazat, and John Hooper. "Conflict between Religions Threatens Future of the World, Muslim Leaders Tell Pope." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 11 Oct. 2007. Web. 03 Oct. 2012. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/oct/12/religion.catholicism>.