The Trial of the Caskets, while not an actual legal affair, has many similarities to a court trial. It is designed to prove something. A judgment is rendered at the end of the trial and, if appropriate, punishment is given. Also, the terms of the trial were set by the will of a person in the past, much as laws are the will of the legislatures that enacted them, sometimes long dead. Morocco and Aragon choose unwisely, fail the trial, and must not only leave immediately, but never marry. Bassanio, on the other hands, chooses successfully and wins Portia.
However, are these outcomes just? Do Morocco or Aragon deserve their punishment? Look at their reasoning: does it merit the outcome? What about Bassanio? Does he deserve Portia? What about the possibility that Portia is giving him hints? What does the Trial of the Caskets tell us about legal trials?
How Philosophical Reflection Can Bring Light (and Turn Down the Heat) on Political Discourse
Friday, January 13, 2017
Justice Is Blind?
Justice is often portrayed as a blindfolded woman holding the scales of justice. The usual interpretation of blindness in that case is that judges need to look past their personal feelings and prejudices and uniformly apply the law. The Merchant of Venice is also concerned about blindness. Lancelet Gobbo, for instance, plays a trick on his "sandblind" father who cannot recognize his own son. Jessica, when she meets her lover Lorenzo after escaping her father's house, declares that: "But love is blind, and lovers cannot see / The pretty follies that themselves commit," (2.6.37-8). Some characters, like Morocco and Aragon, make poor judgments based on the appearances of things. While other characters, like Antonio, warn about confusing appearance and reality. He claims that Shylock, for instance, "Is like a villain with a smiling cheek, / A goodly apple rotten at the heart." (1.3.109-10)
What is this play telling us about the human ability to discriminate and discern? Our ability to go beyond appearances to the heart of things? What does it tell us about the law's ability to render fair and just decisions?
What is this play telling us about the human ability to discriminate and discern? Our ability to go beyond appearances to the heart of things? What does it tell us about the law's ability to render fair and just decisions?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)