Shylock
Guy Masterson @ Royalty Theatre
9:00pm, Fri 25 Feb 2011
I’ve often professed my love for Shakespeare on this blog… but I have to admit that The Merchant of Venice is not my cup of tea. Every time I’ve attempted to read it, or see some production of it, my attention gets deflected and moves on to something else. I like to think that Bill is talking to me from beyond the grave to let me know that it’s really not worth my time.
Which is nice of Bill, but doesn’t really help me understand the premise of Guy Masterson’s production of Shylock… because I have no grounding in the titular character. But I love seeing Guy’s work, so I slotted this into The Schedule regardless.
And, as it turns out, there was nothing really to worry about. Masterson plays Tubal, Shylock’s (best/only) friend, and from this perspective he is free to discuss all of Shylock’s defining quirks and mannerisms, whilst also justifying them all to some degree. And that’s all very interesting and entertaining…
…but there’s two twists in Shylock. The first is that writer Gareth Armstrong presents Tubal from a time-agnostic perspective, allowing him to speak about Shylock from various historical vantage points (including the little side-note that Hitler loved The Merchant of Venice). And that leads to the second twist… which is more of a central thread.
Shylock is less about The Merchant of Venice than it is about Judaism; the character of Shylock is simply used as a vehicle for the introduction and discussion of Jewish stereotypes. And that’s all very fine and good, but it’s very unsubtle – and that makes the latter half of the play feel a little awkward, veering into the role of lecture.
Don’t get me wrong – it’s still an entertaining show: Masterson, as usual, puts in a convincing performance on a very simple stage. It’s just that Shylock tweaked that part of my theatre-going brain that made me think that it wasn’t giving me enough credit, that it wasn’t allowing me to connect the dots for myself. In a way, it’s playing it safe with the delivery of the message, rather than letting the audience play its part. Or maybe that’s just my problem ;)