THE THEATRE
The Merchant of Venice." At the New Theatre.—" Old Chelsea." At Princes Theatre.
THOSE humanitarian critics who have found in Shakespeare's Mer- chant of Venice an enlightened tract, particularly suitable for these times of anti-semitism abroad, have let their feelings overrule their judgement—as is commonly the way with critics whose immediate environment is overpowering. There can be no doubt that Shakespeare intended Shylock to be the villain of the piece, not the martyr. But just because he was a great creative artist, and a dramatist, he could not fail to present Shylock as a human being and not as the mere monster of superstition and prejudice. But he started with the portrait of a bad Jew, not a good Jew. The idiotic, base and wholesale persecution of Jews in our time has made it impossible while it lasts for decent men even to refer to bad Jews. Shakespeare, however, was free, and he shows us in Shylock an avaricious, vindictive Jew,' whom his own daughter dislikes, and whose only admirable qualities are his vitality and intellect. In both these respects, but in nothing else, Shakespeare shows him as far superior to all the other characters in the play who, indeed, are not a particularly attractive lot. In vitality Frederick Valk's Shylock is all that one could desire ; he has the voice and the driving force that overwhelm, but he does not win positive sympathy. What sympathy we feel is due to the extremely revengeful treatment he suffers. Here, again, Shakespeare is true to nature. Although he shows us an impartial Duke, setting the law above religious and social bias, and an advocate "(more Shakespearean than judicial), imaginative enough to have a poetic conception of mercy, he does not permit the Court to allow Shylock to escape. My criticism of Mr. Valk is not that he does not make Shylock more sympathetic ; if he did he would not be giving a portrait of the sort of Jew Shakespeare drew in this play. What I miss is a sense that Mr. Valk is capable, as an actor, of winning our sympathy. I did not see his Othello, which won great praise from critics, so I cannot be sure about this ; but I found no sign of this capacity (which, to be true to the part, he would have had to struggle against) in his Shylock. The only other performance that calls for notice is Miss Kay Bannerman's ingenious, butterfly- handed Portia. It was clever, minxish, but impossible. Let me also warn the talented Miss Bannerman that she has the physical grace for gesture, but not yet the significant art of it.
Take the virtuosity of Richard Tauber as a singer out of Old Chelsea and one would be left with very little but the music, which is melodious, and the setting, which is high and sunny, and the large cast, which is kept vigorously in action. But there is, also, that brilliant Irish actress, Marie O'Neill, sparkling like a diamond, with nothing whatever to do but make us wonder how she comes to be there without a real part in a real play.
JAMES REDFERN.
Previous page
