威尼斯商人

『威尼斯商人』中，阿尔帕西诺的那段台词，念得太地道了，是第3幕第一部分的：

To bait fish withal:
拿来钓鱼也好；
if it will feed nothing else,it will feed my revenge.
即使他的肉不中吃，至少也可以出出我这一口气。
He hath disgraced me, and hindered me half a million; laughed at my losses,
他曾经羞辱过我，夺去我几十万块钱的生意，讥笑着我的亏蚀，
mocked at my gains, scorned my nation,
挖苦着我的盈余，侮蔑我的民族，
thwarted my bargains, cooled my friends, heated mine enemies;
破坏我的买卖，离间我的朋友，煽动我的仇敌；
and what's his reason? I am a Jew.
他的理由是什么？只因为我是一个犹太人。
Hath not a Jew eyes? hath not a Jew hands, organs,
难道犹太人没有五官四肢、
dimensions, senses, affections, passions?
没有知觉、没有感情、没有血气吗？
fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons,
他不是吃着同样的食物，同样的武器可以伤害他，
subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means,
warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as a Christian is?
同样的医药可以疗治他，冬天同样会冷，夏天同样会热，就像一个基督徒一样吗？
If you prick us, do we not bleed?
你们要是用刀剑刺我们，我们不是也会出血的吗？
if you tickle us, do we not laugh?
你们要是搔我们的痒，我们不是也会笑起来的吗？
if you poison us, do we not die?
你们要是用毒药谋害我们，我们不是也会死的吗？
and if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?
那么要是你们欺侮了我们，我们难道不会复仇吗？
If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that.
要是在别的地方我们都跟你们一样，那么在这一点上也是彼此相同的。
If a Jew wrong a Christian,what is his humility? Revenge.
If a Christian wrong a Jew, what should his sufferance be by Christian example? Why, revenge.
要是一个犹太人欺侮了一个基督徒，那基督徒怎样表现他的谦逊？报仇。
The villany you teach me, I will execute,
你们已经把残虐的手段教给我，我一定会照着你们的教训实行，
and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction.
而且还要加倍奉敬哩。

The merchant of Venice tells us a story about friendship, love and religion. Among the three themes, it is the religion that inspired me the most.
First, let’s take a brief look at the three main characters in the play: Antonio, Bassanio, and Shylock.
Antonio, whom the merchant of Venice refers to, is decent and brave, loyal to his friends and severe to his enemies. As a Christian, he often discriminates the Jewish people, and insulting them in public is often the case.
Bassanio, in my opinion, is a good-for-nothing young man. He is obsessed with the beauty and the fortune of Portia, and he borrows money from Antonio to make his trip to woo the hand of Portia. From this we can see that Bassanio is sort of incapable because he can’t even pursue his love all by his own.
Shylock, the big villain in this play, is a Jewish merchant. He is described as a mean, greedy, and cold-blooded merchant who sees no other things but money in his eyes. Being a Jew, he lives a lowly life, suffering continuous insults and humiliations from Antonio and other Christians. That explains why he bears deep hatred against Antonio. But objectively speaking, he is a man of endurance and toughness.
  Then let’s see how the story goes round.
Bassanio borrows money from Antonio to pursue Portia. But Antonio has invested all his fortune to his ships and has no cash in hand at that moment. Out of love to Bassanio, Antonio takes the risk to borrow money from his enemy Shylock which demands to cut down one pound of flesh from Antonio if he can’t pay back the money in time.
From this treaty we can see what a deep Shylock’s hatred against Antonio, he regard it a good chance to revenge himself. As an old saying says, “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”. Antonio used to treat Shylock bad, He has insulted the Jew and spat on him, yet he comes with hypocritical politeness to borrow money of him. Now it is the turn of Shylock to treat him back, even more harshly than the way he was treated before.
 So I think his act of revenge is reasonable to some degree and we should have mercy on him. Being a Jew, he is cruelly abused here and there. The Jews are not allowed to possess private possessions, they are obliged to wear a red hat in public to make sure that they can be easily identified, and they live in the dirty and narrow slums guarded by the Christians, supposedly for their own safety. This is a whole race that is been treated unfairly. And Shylock, to some extent, is one of the representatives of his people who underwent so much injustice. He speaks for his own nation:
Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that. If a Jew wrong a Christian, what is his humility? Revenge. If a Christian wrong a Jew, what should his sufferance be by Christian example? Why, revenge. The villainy you teach me, I will execute, and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction.
This is the most inspiring part that exerts our sympathy for Shylock, his words of anger, of interrogation, touched me a lot. I started to think about the so-called heroes—Bassanio, Portia, and Antonio, they’re sort of hypocrites. How can they ask Shylock to have mercy when they are showing none on him? See what this gentleman has done to the poor Jew:
 He hath disgraced me, and hindered me half a million, laughed at my losses, mocked at my gains, scorned my nation, thwarted my bargains, cooled my friends, heated mine enemies;
And what’s his reason? I am a Jew.
Apparently, Antonio’s behaviors do not accord with his decent figure. It’s worth doubting his personality dealing with others except for his friends. In addition, his actions do arouse Shylock’s anger and detestation, it’s no wonder that he wants to revenge on him. When his mutinous daughter, his only family member, deserts him to marry a Christian taking with her many valuable possessions, including the first ring Shylock gave to his late wife. His servant defects to his enemy; he definitely hates Antonio to death.
From this part, we can see clearly Shakespeare’s neutral position in religion, or at least he did not always portray Shylock as entirely detestable, putting him in unfortunate situations where the audience cannot but have some sympathy for him.
The court is a place where justice should be done, while what I see from the trial in the end of the play is totally a mockery of justice. Portia disguises as a lawyer, and easily reverses the tide with a little trick of words. This is what law allows? In the name of justice?
 At the ending of the play, Shylock has lost everything, what matters the most is that he has lost his belief, and he is forced to be converted to a Christian. How can he burden all this changes? He is just an old lonely poor man, how can he be accepted by the Christians and how his Jewish fellowmen look at him? None of my assumption is good for Shylock. He is pathetic, not only for his personality, but also for the social structures at that time. Although I don’t know the religions very well, I do know that we are all born equal. Shylock deserves sympathy, but none of Antonio’s insults. His misfortune doesn’t owe to Antonio, but to that time.

观看这部电影是在中央六套周六晚上佳片有约栏目上，电影开始前的广告片就不断放着夏洛特压抑欲迸发的仇恨和愤怒大段说出他内心深处长久被压抑的声音。。。
“他曾经羞辱过我，
夺去我几十万块钱的生意，
讥笑着我的亏蚀，挖苦着我的盈余，
侮蔑我的民族，破坏我的买卖，
离间我的朋友，煽动我的仇敌；
他的理由是什么？只因为我是一个犹太人!
难道犹太人没有眼睛吗？
难道犹太人没有五官四肢、没有知觉、没有感情、没有血气吗？
他不是吃着同样的食物，同样的武器可以伤害他，
同样的医药可以疗治他，冬天同样会冷，夏天同样会热，
就像一个基督徒一样吗？
你们要是用刀剑刺我们，我们不是也会出血的吗？
你们要是搔我们的痒，我们不是也会笑起来的吗？
你们要是用毒药谋害我们，我们不是也会死的吗？
那么要是你们欺侮了我们，我们难道不会复仇吗？
要是在别的地方我们都跟你们一样，那么在这一点上也是彼此相同的。要是一个犹太人欺侮了一个基督徒，那基督徒怎样表现他的谦逊？报仇。”
要是一个基督徒欺侮了一个犹太人，那么照着基督徒的榜样，那犹太人应该怎样表现他的宽容？报仇。你们已经把残虐的手段教给我，我一定会照着你们的教训实行，而且还要加倍奉敬!''
    于是这样一个北京应该是秋老虎肆虐却笼罩着深秋寒意的周末的深夜，我裹在棉被的温暖中看沙翁的经典名剧《威尼斯商人》。。。
     有人曾经提出很多疑问，为什么沙翁的很多剧目，例如《王子复仇记》《奥赛罗》《罗米欧与朱丽叶》。。。经典演绎也好，另类后现代也好，几乎都被多次不断的搬上银幕，而只有这部《威尼斯商人》好像被尘封到了地下室，影视制作商好像已经忘却沙翁还曾经写过这样一部喜剧。。。其实当我看完了这部作品后才明白，稍微有一点宗教知识的人就可以体会到戏剧中浓厚的种族歧视色彩。。。曾经观看过舞台版的《威尼斯商人》，那里的夏洛特尖嘴猴腮，猥亵肮脏，典型的自私卑劣的奸商形象，于是当他再作出要割掉一个“高贵”“优雅”的基督徒商人的一磅肉的时候，所有的观众一定会义愤填膺，而当他最终“阴谋”没有得逞，却得到了强有力的惩罚时，所有观众也一样欢欣鼓舞，一个喜剧的结局，一个坏人理应得到惩罚的经典模式，是最原始的沙翁作品的展现，如果在欧洲文艺复兴时期沙翁这样去写戏剧，我想应该是迎合了当时人的“喜好”，然而在人权和平等已经成为世界共同主题的今天，尤其是经历了二战对犹太人残酷屠杀后，谁都不想再去碰触这样一个敏感的主题。。。于是沉寂。。。一个大段的沉寂。。。
而这部新版的《威尼斯商人》，过滤掉原著中的对夏洛特讽刺性的坏人喜剧特性，更多的表现着一个受到迫害的犹太人人性：他有自己忠贞的信仰，他有自己的爱，表现为对自己的女儿和已故妻子的爱，尤其是当他听说私奔的女儿用偷走的他妻子送他的戒指仅仅换了一只猴子的时候，他愤怒，悲伤，甚至眼里流出了泪，说：即使给他100只猴子他也不会换。。。他对基督教徒的蔑视和人身侮辱，他卑微、屈从和忍耐，然而，当他得到机会可以反抗的时候，他却义无反顾的进行着他的复仇，面对敌人，他说出内心压抑许久的大段表白，最终他手持钢刀，毫不怜悯自己的敌人时说：当你把我形容成一只犹太狗的时候，请不要忘记狗的牙齿。。。我不能不佩服阿尔·帕西诺(Al Pacino)出色的表演，把这样一个内心压抑，充满仇恨却不得不屈从的人物刻画地淋漓尽致。。。这部影片恰到好处的将犹太人受到的不公正的迫害表现的银幕上，虽然最后的安东尼奥面对即将的杀戮时也表现出了无奈和悲情，以及他对待朋友的慷慨和“两肋插刀”的“哥们意思”，也同样会让人产生出些许的同情，然而，由于电影之前大段的铺垫，感觉他得到这样的惩罚也是他自作孽的结果，于是背离了原著的主题，完全感受不到夏洛特最终报复失败，却得到了更可悲的结局的喜剧感，取以是观者内心深处隐隐的悲凉。。。
    我不知道上述大段夏洛特的爆发性的陈述是否是沙翁原著中的台词？如果沙翁曾经这样撰写过将要出自一个犹太人的口的大段台词，单就这一点我可以看出沙翁在写这样一部带有浓重种族歧视的剧目的时候内心中尤存的一点对犹太民族的同情和公正。。。

我一直在等，哪怕是一个眼神，好让我知道她在担心着远方的父亲。我在想，无论是哪一个民族，亲情血缘作为人与人之间最原始也最天然的关系依托，总是不可忽视的。终于证明了这一点的，是她抚摸着手上的绿松石戒指，忧心地望着水面，似乎在等待着某个时刻或者某个人。她是夏洛克的女儿，为了爱情背叛了自己民族的人。

她的父亲说：她怎么敢这样，那是我的绿松石，是她母亲利亚给我的，那时我还是个单身汉。

我一直在想，到底夏洛克是更关心失去了踪迹的女儿，还是女儿带走的金钱，但是当我听到他的“绿松石”时，我不再寻找任何线索来证明什么了。被指为贪婪冷酷的夏洛克，他心中埋藏着最真的感情，女儿的这种几乎可以被称为背叛的出走，让他看起来苍老了许多。他漫无目的地走在威尼斯的大街小巷中，踽踽独行，茕茕孑立，孤立无援。他的不安与失望膨胀了他的报复心。

“如果它不能喂其他东西，至少可以喂饱我的报复心。”

电影开场的那一口唾沫具有太强的喜剧效果，“安东尼奥！”回答夏洛克的是一口唾沫，人群里，一顶红色的帽子，一个苍老的老头儿，一阵安静。毫无疑问的，我所有的同情都投降了这个犹太人。夏洛克忍着，正如他所言：我们的民族正是以忍耐著称的。等到终于有一天他爆发了的时候：

他羞辱了我，嘲笑我的损失，讥讽我的收入，斥责我的民族，阻挠我的生意，疏远了我的朋友，激怒了我的敌人，他这又是为了什么，因为我是个犹太人。。

犹太人就没有眼睛吗？犹太人就没有双手吗？没有感觉、感情和热情吗？不吃同样的食物，不会被同样的武器刺伤，不会被同样的疾病打倒，不会被同样的方式治愈，不和基督徒一样，感受寒暑更迭。你刺我们，我们不会流血吗？...你毒我们，我们不会死吗？而如果你冒犯了我们，我们不会报复吗！如果我们其他方面都和你们一样，我们在这方面也会和你们一样。

如果一个犹太人冒犯了基督徒，他会收到怎样的羞辱，报复？

如果一个基督徒冒犯了犹太人，以基督徒的标准，他该受到怎样的惩罚，当然，报复。

你们教会我的罪恶，我都会施行，但会变本加厉，我会在你们的教导上更进一步。



在鲍西亚咄咄逼人下，他说：

“你拿走支撑我房子的支柱，就是拿走我的房子，

你拿走我生活的来源，就是拿走我的生命。”



他倒下了，连唯一剩下的信仰，都被剥夺。

他是这样子的一个弱者，他脱下了红帽，却哪儿都去不了了。

很少看到好坏都如此突出的莎剧。Al Pacino的表演绝对是五星级的，这表明至少导演在矫正历来对这部莎剧的老套理解方面努力不少，也相当成功。但反过来，剧的另一面，则完全变成了喜剧性的：Lorenzo、Gratiano这些人的浮华言行，一边与Shylock的沉痛，另一方面与Antonio的悲哀，形成了鲜明的对照，这增加了《威尼斯商人》的悲剧性。但问题是Portia代表的智慧和仁慈也很快从求亲的喜剧变成了一场闹剧，这显然不是导演的意图， Lynn Collins的糟糕表演即使不是唯一的原因，也是最重要的原因。我不知道为什么居然有人会称赞她。她的表演（以及她的奴仆）轻浮鄙俗，和整个剧里基督徒的糜烂生活完全是一个调子。看到最后，她的那些自作聪明、缺乏深度的肢体动作，令我只能相信，Bassanio将她比作Brutus的Portia是莎士比亚的反讽。这样做的结果是，与犹太的沉重生活一面相对的，所有基督徒们的生活完全是一种放荡无聊的现代生活。这些人满嘴自以为正确的道德高调，却对友谊、爱情、法律、慈悲和智慧都一无所知。当最后Pacino的Shylock被这帮小人压倒的时候，我们只能觉得这部戏并非莎士比亚以最深刻的方式结合悲剧和喜剧的复杂作品，而象Troilus and Cressida一样，属于莎士比亚最阴暗的悲剧。最后Jessica的痛悔来得太晚了，增加而不是减少了这种戏剧效果。不过导演对现代生活的低俗和轻薄的表现（为了达到这一目标，电影变成了R级），无论是否出于有意，还是很有想象力的，特别是面具的使用，造就了Bosch式的场景，使Shylock最后的割肉行为显得非常合理。如果导演的主要目的就是为了怕一部反－反犹电影，甚至如果你相信莎士比亚也是如此的话，那么你可以相信这属于最好的莎剧现代之列。

Jeremy Irons的表演中规中距，可惜在这部过于片面的戏中，他没有Pacino的发挥空间。因此，最后的法庭戏，并没有我期望的那种真正重量级的对抗。Joseph的表演有些进退维谷，似乎不知道究竟应该是象Antonio一样更严肃些，还是象他的那些狐朋狗友一样更轻浮些好，不过反正，他还是力图成功证明了，自己和Portia是般配的，无论这样做是多么难。