wishbone Posted December 31, 2004 Report Share Posted December 31, 2004 A movie version of Shakespeare's "Merchant of Venice" was released this year (starring Al Pacino as Shylock -- ought to be fun). Warning: I guess I should warn that this post contains spoilers for anyone here who does not know the story. Disclaimer: The story is based in the past and I am not criticizing the play nor trying to crtiticize the different standards of the past. The play was mere a catalyst to make me think about this issue. Having said that... In the play, "a pound of flesh" is given as security against the repayment of a debt. The debt is in default and the creditor demands the pound of flesh. Question 1: Should such a contract be legally enforceable? In the play, the technicality used to let the warrantor off the hook is that the contract did not stipulate any blood being given. So, the creditor could be allowed his pound of flesh only if he could figure out a way to take it without shedding a drop of blood. Since this is not possible, the creditor could not get the flesh. Question 2: If shedding blood is a necessary condition for extracting a pound of flesh, shouldn't any contract stipulating the payment of a pound of flesh can be presumed to imply the shedding of the necessary amount of blood? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommyedison Posted December 31, 2004 Report Share Posted December 31, 2004 In the play, the technicality used to let the warrantor off the hook is that the contract did not stipulate any blood being given. So, the creditor could be allowed his pound of flesh only if he could figure out a way to take it without shedding a drop of blood. Since this is not possible, the creditor could not get the flesh. What do you mean by shedding a drop of blood? A drop of blood appearing on the skin or a drop of blood falling to the ground (both cases which can be prevented by absorbing the blood on cotton)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inspector Posted December 31, 2004 Report Share Posted December 31, 2004 Liposuction can femove body tissues without much blood loss... of course what exactly "flesh" is is another story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
labrat Posted January 1, 2005 Report Share Posted January 1, 2005 Liposuction can femove body tissues without much blood loss... of course what exactly "flesh" is is another story. I believe unlike muscle, "flesh" should include fat. So liposuction could have worked. But I seem to remember that Shylock specified that he wanted the pound of flesh from Antonio's breasts. So it would be hard to do the liposuction there even if the technique were available in 16th century Venice! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.