To begin I invite you to look at this image:
What do you notice
Do you see the wheelchair first?
Her Gender?
Her skin colour?
Just based on this image, who do you think this person is?
This is Aaron Rose Phillip she was the first black, transgender and physically disabled high
fashion model.
To what extent did your first impression align with this?
In 5-7 seconds upon meeting a person the human mind constructs a narrative, as I just
invited you to do. This story is irrespective of truth and is subconsciously absorbed from
those around us. It’s human nature to be biassed, however its concentration results in the
marginalisation of communities, as people’s ‘first impressions’ are instead extrapolations of
preconceived truths.
These prejudices exist in two forms; explicit and implicit. Those who acknowledge and
consciously apply their bias as opposed to biases formed unconsciously and applied
automatically. Social psychologist Anthony Greenwald created a test for this second and
much more prevalent form, with its ongoing data showing from February of 2020 that 7075% of people unknowingly hold prejudices based on race.
It’s the prevalence of these two types of prejudice that largely underpin the differences in
human experiences when comparing Shakespearean England to 21st century western
society. Shakespeare's play the Merchant of Venice shows prejudice as a force that divides
the people of Venice. Named only 6 times in the play, Shylock is alternatively referred to as
‘the Jew’ 22 times in a disparaging ratio that shows the theological conflict between the
Jewish and Christians in the play. Where in a Christian dominated society, Jews were
dismissed as ‘other’ and ostracised to ghettos. Shakespeare's use of Monologue in Act 3
scene 2 allows for a new perspective of Shylock where beyond his role as antagonist he is
instead a victim of the universal human experience of exclusion. Calling on this hatred
through a series of conditional sentences, Shylock’s increasing self-composure as he
proceeds logically in a convincing catechism shows a plea for collective humanity. Resulting
in the justification of his revenge. “Hath not a Jew eyes? … If you prick us do we not bleed?
…If you poison us, do we not die?” The power behind the rhetorical questioning increases
through syntactical repetition to reach the climatic “And if you wrong us shall we not
revenge?”. The effect of this on the audience is an understanding of the universal experience
of prejudice whereby Shylock can be seen as a man who experiences the exclusion of
society, who also happens to be a Jew, instead of simply ‘The Jew’.
In saying this by act 4 Shakespeare returns Shylock to his caricature role as monster in line
with the Christian status quo as seen in the line ‘Why doust thou whet thy knife so earnestly
… Not on thy sole, but on thy soul, harsh Jew’. This representation in a society with existing
characters such as Barabas is representative of the evilness the actors would have
attributed to Shylock. However, in a contemporary society post world war 2 where Jews and
other marginalised groups are recognised and familiar, actors would have portrayed
Shylock in a more sympathetic light. Shakespeare's return to society's fixed assumptions
shows that Shylock is not defined by his ‘Jewishness’ but instead his explicitly prejudiced
society.
Rejecting the white gaze as exemplified by Shakespeare's representation of Judaism, Threa
Almontasers reclaims her experience as a Yemeni American in ‘The Wild Fox of Yemen’.
Weaving together language, culture and community Almontaser shows the irrevocable shift
their country's response to 9/11 had on the human experiences of Muslim Americans. Her
experience with human hatred and vilification is introduced from the first poem exemplified
in the line, “Truth is, I quit being cautious in third grade / when the towers fell &, later, wore
/ the city’s hatred as hijab.”. The use of the hijab as a metaphor of society's extrapolation of
truth in order to create certainty in an uncertain world. Within 5-7 seconds society sees the
Hijab and associates it with the truth of ISIS islamics roots, to the effect of isolating an
entire community. This prejudice is seen to manifest throughout the collection seen in airport
suspicions, racist epithets and the much more implicit “it tells baristas / my name is tina,”.
This suppression of culture is evident in the white washed translation, translation of which is
demonstrative of the fragilities and limitations of language. Almontaser borrows Arabic
language in an attempt to find self significance and understanding where the English
language fails. However in ‘borrowing’ this language Almontaser is unable to authentically
connect with her culture and identity. This is exemplified in the monological “white guys”
merely “compliment my accent” and “make me write their names in Arabic / to show their
tattoo artists later”. Unable to connect with her cultural community through language, she is
equally unable to connect to her habitual community leaving Almontaser with only herself as
an audience. “Never,” the poet exclaims, “will they interpret me correctly.” This lack of
connection with either community and feeling of being ‘alien’ is reminiscent of Jessica's
alienation in Merchant where she was neither accepted by the Christinans nor the Jews.
Demonstrative of how belonging to a cultural group enables self significance .
In a society aware of xenophobia and cancel culture the media sensationalises prejudice,
however in our 21st century society prejudice, especially in implicit forms are just as
prevalent and need to be addressed. The effect of this bias is especially troubling as it
creates biases within minority groups as through fear they themselves feel uncertain.