莎士比亞《威尼斯商人》中的社會契約

The Social Contract in Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice

讀者公認莎士比亞的《威尼斯商人》攸關法律與正義，然而由夏洛克的挫敗可知，與其說管轄威尼斯的是捍衛眾人平等的法律，不如說是強調性別、種族、階級差異的社會契約。《威尼斯商人》包括三個子情節：借約情節、彩匣情節、婚戒情節，三者均與社會契約有關。論者向來認為社會契約乃社會生活基石，其目的在追求共同利益，今日這些概念因女性主義及種族觀點而廣受批評，咸認社會契約落實了性別及種族不平等。本論文援用莫妮克•維蒂格的「直心態」理論，探討《威尼斯商人》三個子情節中的社會契約，並且分析劇中波黠的角色，檢視她究竟動搖了威尼斯的社會契約，抑或臣服於它。

Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice has been widely read as a play about law andjustice. Shylock’s defeat, however, demonstrates that Venice is governed not so much by alaw that safeguards human equality as by a social contract that highlights differences interms of gender, race, and class. The Merchant of Venice consists of three sub-plots: thebond plot, the casket plot, and the ring plot. All of them deal with the social contract,which has been considered the foundation of social life and whose goal has been directedtoward the common good. Today these concepts are confronted by critiques mainly fromfeminist and racial perspectives. It is generally recognized that the naturalization of thesocial contract has justified gender and racial inequality. Drawing upon Monique Wittig’stheory of “the straight mind,” this paper explores the social contract in the three sub-plotsof The Merchant of Venice. The paper also analyzes Portia’s role in this play to examinewhether she has subverted the Venetian social contract or has submitted to it.