『베니스의 상인』: 란슬롯의 극적 의미

Abstract

The Merchant of Venice is one of the most controversial in Shakespeare’s plays, having enjoyed theatrical popularity as much as Hamlet. Despite a great range of criticism, Lancelot Gobbo, the clownish servant, has been slighted by a lot of scholars whose interests are directed to Shylock and the problem of anti-Semitism in the work. In this article, therefore, I would like to examine Lancelot's dramatic significance with regard to one of the main thematic issues of the play such as justice versus mercy, which is subsequently intertwined with the matter of good and evil as well as that of right and wrong. Before discussing how abundantly Lancelot's soliloquy presents those moral problems, I conduct a brief survey of critical history on anti-Semitism and its consequent moral themes and then investigate the extra-dramatic potential of Lancelot who is very likely to have been played by one of the most influential comic actors in the Shakespearean age, William Kempe. The second part of the article investigates the repartee between his father Gobbo and himself in Act 2 scene 2. Here, his fundamental problem is whether he should leave Shylock, that is, he faces the moral and religious dilemmas of keeping or breaking his bond with Shylock his master. It allegorically represents the problem of Portia and Jessica who should decide to either follow or betray their father’s will. Breaking a bond is also closely related to the matter of Antonio and Bassanio, who cannot avoid breaking their respective ties with Shylock and Portia in one way or another. The final section follows with a substantial analysis of Lancelot's allegorical and satiric soliloquy where he delves into the serious moral problem of good and evil and consequently justice and mercy. In his repercussive role of mirroring the moral dilemma of main characters like Portia, Bassanio, Jessica and so on, he morally dramatizes his problem in which two opposite parties insist on their own opinions. Particularly, Lancelot's soliloquy, predicting the court room scene in Act 4, consists of two pairs of opposites, that is, ‘good’ and ‘honest’ and devil and conscience. Through a complicated crisscross match of these two contrasting pairs, Shakespeare shows how deeply Lancelot falls into the abyss of ambivalence between good and evil and ultimately demonstrates the impasse of judgment between them. Lancelot’s comical wondering in his soliloquy challenges the complacency of simplistic moral divisions, drives the audience into a complete cul-de-sac of judgment, and continuously engenders a myriad of almost unanswerable questions just as the play itself does.