By the end of the trial scene, do you think true justice and mercy was achieved? Reflect and write on the following questions:
1. Is there true justice? Why?
2. Is there true mercy, as expounded by Portia? Why?
3. Justice and Law can be manipulated by people in power. Comment on this with reference to the text and other real-life cases and examples.
Definition of Justice: the administering of deserved punishment or reward.
Definition of Mercy: compassionate or kindly forbearance shown toward an offender, an enemy, or other person in one's power
I think there was no true justice at the end of the trial scene. Although nothing at all on blood was written in the bond, and Portia's accusation of Shylock seemed logical and very valid, one must note that Antonio never thought of that as way to "launch a surprise counterattack" on Shylock. He simply accepted it because he was overconfident and believed that his ships would not sink. He had also been warned of the consequences by Shylock several times, and should have know better than to give Shylock a chance to take revenge on the insults he received from him. However, he accepted the bond without even a second thought. The fact that he never knew that the words on the bond could be used to "counterattack" Shylock as Portia did was proven by his speeches of despair in the beginning of the trial scene. Therefore, strictly speaking only from the views of the two (Shylock and Antonio) who signed the bond, the thought of blood being related to the bond never came across Antonio's mind, and Antonio can only blame himself for not being sharp enough and also, more importantly, being overconfident. One can consider all the events leading up to the trial scene as a Tic-Tac-Toe game, which both signers of the bond (Antonio and Shylock) are playing. By the time Antonio realised he was losing, it was too late, and it could be said that Shylock won the game fair and square (justice). However, a friend of Antonio, Portia suddenly comes in the picture and told Antonio another way to win the seeming lost game which Antonio himself never thought of. Antonio then won the game. If one were to compare the entire Tic-Tac-Toe game to the definition of justice, he/she would come to realise that true justice was definitely not achieved and if Antonio had lost, he deserved it. The only counterargument I can think of is that Antonio deserved to win as he was helpful and kind, and promised to help Bassanio and Bassanio was, coincidentally, the husband of Portia. But then again, it might be just because Antonio is proud.
I think that there is no true mercy at the end of the trial scene. The word "Mercy" means compassionate or kindly forbearance shown toward an offender, an enemy, or other person in one's power. The word "Compassion" means a feeling of deep sympathy and sorrow for another who is stricken by misfortune, accompanied by a strong desire to alleviate the suffering. Let us look at Antonio in his "merciful release" of Shylock. Was he truly being compassionate? Was he sympathetic? Was he sorrowful? Was he really trying to "alleviate the suffering" of Shylock from the bottom of his heart?
Yes. In the text, Portia manipulates justice cleverly and subtly. In George Orwell's Animal Farm, the totalitarian dictator Napoleon manipulates the Law for his own good, for example changing the law from "No animal should sleep on bed" to "No animal should sleep on bed with sheets" in order to satisfy his own desire to sleep on beds.
Hi Shao Dian,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that true justice wasn't achieved at the end of the trial scene! I personally feel that you have presented a strong argument to support your stand. It was really creative that you used a tic-tac-toe game as an analogy for the trial scene! It was also good that you used questions to set the readers thinking and to prove your point.
Hey Shao Dian, i think it is wonderful of you to use a tic tac toe game as an analogy which shows your point in an interesting yet profound way! I also agree with your points that there was no true justice nor mercy, and the last part about whether people in power can bend the law and i like your example about the animal farm, great job!
ReplyDeleteHey Shao Dian, this is the first time someone used an analogy to justify your point and good job with that! You just helped made me understand your point much more clearer. Indeed, the situation between Antonio and Shylock is like a Tic-Tac-Toe game, where both parties are willing to play at first without being forced to. So, in the end when Shylock wins, he wins it fairly, because of Antonio's incompetence. Now, on what ground is Shylock not supposed to get what he serves after his win? Impressive post!
ReplyDeleteJack Tan 2O307
Hey Shaodian, your post sure is persuasive, making use of many analogies and starting off with a thorough explanation of the topic through definitions of the dictionary.
ReplyDeleteRegarding your Tic-Tac-Toe analogy, I guess that Portia caem in and managed to find a loophole in the game rules that Shylock has set, and not finding a way for Antonio to win the game.
Overall, that is one superb post you have there, with concrete examples to support your argument.
Well it was good effort to use the tic tac toe analogy, but actually in this case a third player comes in (Portia) and plays a seed in Antonio's favor, when it was Shylock's turn, resulting in Antonino's victory. Well justice and mercy is very subjective in this situation as it depends on two very conflicting points of view, whereby none of which can be totally called correct. Portia definitely played around with Shylock's words, which was a clever way of getting what she wants, which is granted by the law, but not right in the eyes of justice (THIS IS MY OWN OPINION)
ReplyDelete