Acta Iuris Stetinensis

Previously: Zeszyty Naukowe. Roczniki Prawnicze


ISSN: 2083-4373     eISSN: 2545-3181    OAI    DOI: 10.18276/ais.2024.51-11
CC BY-SA   Open Access   DOAJ  ERIH PLUS

Issue archive / 5/2024 (51)
Usury, law and emotions in William Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice and Krystyn Ostrowski’s adaptation Lichwiarz (1861)

Authors: Katarzyna Jaworska-Biskup ORCID
University of Szczecin
Keywords: usury Shakespeare Krystyn Ostrowski adaptation law and literature
Whole issue publication date:2024-12
Page range:20 (189-208)
Cited-by (Crossref) ?:
Downloads ?: 57

Abstract

The paper discusses the representation of usury in William Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice and the Polish adaptation Lichwiarz by Krystyn Ostrowski. This research aims to show how Shakespeare presented usury in his play and how Ostrowski modified it in 1861. As it is demonstrated, usury is a legal term that has always generated many feelings and provoked debates. This is reflected in the literature, Shakespeare’s play being the most illustrative example. Krystyn Ostrowski developed the theme of usury and emotions in his adaptation, introducing many additions and alterations all to criticise the Jewish community vehemently.
Download file

Article file

Bibliography

1.Ambrosino B., Four Hundred Years Later, Scholars Still Debate Whether Shakespeare’s “Merchant of Venice” Is Anti-Semitic. Deconstructing what makes the Bard’s play so problematic, “Smithsonian Magazine”, 2016, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/why-scholars-still-debate-whether-or-not-shakespeares-merchant-veniceanti-semitic-180958867.
2.Arct M., Słownik ilustrowany języka polskiego, Warszawa 1916.
3.Aristotle, Politics, trans. B. Jowett, Kitchener 1999.
4.Bartels E.C., Malta, the Jew and the Fictions of Difference: Colonialist Discourse in Marlowe’s The Jew of Malta, “English Literary Renaissance”, Vol. 20, No. 1, 1990.
5.Bloom H., Shakespeare. The Invention of the Human, New York 1998.
6.Budrewicz, A., The One Gentleman from Poland. Polonius and 19th Century Polish Translation, in: K. Kujawińska Courtney, G. Zinkiewicz (eds.), Shakespeare: His Infinite Variety, Łódź 2017.
7.Budrewicz A., Shylock in Poland. A Study in Anti-Semitism and Literary Translation, in: M. Nicolaescu et al. (eds.), Perspectives on Shakespeare in Europe’s Borderlands, Bucureşti 2020.
8.Cetera-Włodarczyk A., Kosim A., Polskie przekłady Shakespeare’a w XIX wieku, Warszawa 2019.
9.Coolidge S., Law and Love in the Merchant of Venice, “Shakespeare Quarterly” 1976, N. 27(3).
10.Crompton L., Homosexuality and Civilization, Harvard 2003.
11.Crystal D., Crystal B., Shakespeare’s Words. A Glossary and Language Companion, London 2002.
12.Dante Alighieri, Divine Comedy. Inferno, trans. H. Wadsworth Longfellow, London 2008.
13.Davidson I., Shylock and Barabas: A Study in Character, “The Sewanee Review” No. 3, 1901.
14.Fajgenberg D., Lichwa, Szczęsne 2019.
15.Felsenstein F., Jews and Devils. Antisemitic Stereotypes of Late Medieval and Renaissance England, “Literature and Theology” 1990, Vol. 4, No. 1.
16.Halio Jay L., Introduction, in: William Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice, Cambridge 2008.
17.Hawkes D., The Culture of Usury in Renaissance England, New York 2010.
18.Jones N., Shakespeare’s England, in: D.S. Kastan (ed.), A Companion to Shakespeare, Oxford 2000.
19.Kowalski, T., Framing Polish-Jewish Relations through Shakespeare in Post-War and Contemporary Polish Theatre, “Multicultural Shakespeare. Translation, Appropriation and Performance”, Vol. 28 (43), 2023.
20.Mahon J.W., The Fortunes of The Merchant of Venice from 1596 to 2001, in: J.W. Mahon, E.M. Mahon (eds.), The Merchant of Venice. New Critical Essays, New York and London 2000.
21.Mahood M.M., Introduction, in: William Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice, Cambridge 1987.
22.Maloney R.R., Usury in Greek, Roman and Rabbinic Thought, “Traditio” 1971, No. 27.
23.Marlowe Ch., The Jew of Malta, eds. D. Bevington, E. Rasmussen, Oxford 1995.
24.The Oxford English Dictionary, J.A. Simpson, E.S.C. Weiner (eds.), Oxford 1989.
25.The Oxford Shakespeare. The Complete Works, S. Wells, G. Taylor (eds.), Oxford 2005.
26.Ostrowski K., Lichwiarz, Paryż 1868.
27.Piniński L., Shakespeare. Wrażenia i szkice z twórczości poety, Lwów 1924.
28.Ravenscroft S., Usury in the Inferno: Auditing Dante’s Debt to the Scholastcs, Comitatus, “A Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies” 2011, No. 42.
29.Rothstein E., Structure as Meaning in The Jew of Malta, “The Journal of English and Germanic Philology”, Vol. 65, No. 2, 1966.
30.Sales R., Christopher Marlowe, London 1991.
31.Shaheen N., Biblical References in Shakespeare’s Plays, London 1999.
32.Shakespeare W., The Merchant of Venice, J.L. Halio (ed.), Oxford 2008.
33.Shakespeare W., The Tragedy of Coriolanus, in: S. Wells, G. Taylor (eds.), The Oxford Shakespeare. The Complete Works, Oxford 2005.
34.Shapiro J., Shakespeare and the Jews, New York 1996.
35.Tiffany G., Names in The Merchant of Venice, in: J.W. Mahon, E.M. Mahon (eds.), The Merchant of Venice. New Critical Essays, New York–London 2000.
36.Szatek K., The Merchant of Venice and the Politics of Commerce, in: J.W. Mahon, E.M. Mahon (eds.), The Merchant of Venice. New Critical Essays, New York and London 2000.
37.Tarnawski W., O polskich przekładach dramatów Szekspira, Kraków 1914.
38.Wojciechowski M., Charakter działalności gospodarczej Żydów w średniowiecznej Polsce, in: K. Marinow, K. Szadkowski, K. Węgrzyńska (eds.), Varia Mediaevalia. Studia nad średniowieczem w 1050 rocznicę chrztu Polski, Łódź 2016.
39.Wright C.T., Some Conventions Regarding the Usurer in Elizabethan Literature, “Studies in Philology” 1934, No. 31(2).
40.Zimmermann R., The Law of Obligations. Roman Foundations of the Civilian Tradition, Oxford–New York 1990.