Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Merchant of Venice & To Kill A Mockingbird:

No description

Matthew Varlow

on 10 June 2014

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Merchant of Venice & To Kill A Mockingbird:

Merchant of Venice & To Kill A Mockingbird:
Flawed Legal Systems
Both To Kill A Mockingbird and Merchant of Venice contain the same issue of having a flawed legal system.
In, To Kill A Mockingbird:
• Bob Ewell abuses his children, hunts off-season, abuses welfare money by spending it on alcohol despite having children to feed.
In, Merchant of Venice:
• One can put another’s life on a legal bond.
• Jury filled with only white males, not in the favor of non-whites, and sometimes women. Makes it near impossible for a black man to win a case.
• There was not enough evidence to bring Tom to court in the first place.
• No one was guarding Tom Robinson when the mob showed up. Except for one who shouldn’t have to, Atticus. This put Atticus in danger.
• There was enough evidence against Bob Ewell of assault on Mayella.
• Sheriff Tate lied about Bob Ewells death. Boo killed him, while Tate said Bob fell on his knife.
Bob Ewell is guilty of lots, but does not get in any trouble.
Tom should never have been accused of rape, if he had not have been, of course he would not have been killed.
In a way, he did it for a good reason, but as an officer he has duty to report what actually happened.
• There was no background check on “Balthazar” or Portia when filling in for Bellario.
Portia filling in could be a reason Antonio won the case.
• A Jew can be penalized for bringing a Christian to court.
• Antonio as well as other Christians spat in Shylocks face and kicked him, etc. And was not penalized for doing so.
• Court takes all of Shylocks possessions, and makes him convert to Christianity.
This should not be a valid punishment in any case.
Both The Merchant of Venice and To Kill A Mockingbird involve a court case where the defendant does not deserve to be in trial in the first place.
Although Antonio did go past the 3-month mark that the bond stated Shylock must have his money by, the issue should not have been brought to court. One's life should not be allowed to be put on a bond. Additionally, at that time Shylock was offered way more money than he lended to Antonio, but he refused to take it.
Tom Robinson
Tom Robinson
There was not enough evidence to bring Tom Robinson to court. There were no witnesses other than Bob Ewell. and the father of the victim should not be the only witness, especially if it is Bob Ewell. Simply, if Tom hadn't have been brought to court, then he would not have been chosen as guilty by the jury, and would not have been killed.
This art piece relates directly to the issues in the two pieces of writing. The illustration depicts how a "jury" - a random group of people chosen to prove whether or not someone is guilty, should not be the base of the law system, as they have limited knowledge of the people and the case. The jury is ultimately deciding ones fate.
This illustration was made by Jim Pavlidis, an Australian man fairly recently.
In court, a jury could possibly have benefited either Shylock or Antonio. Since one was not given, there were less people there to decide the outcome of the case. Considering the time period, the jury would most likely have been predominantly Christians, which would have certainly lead to an easy win for Antonio.
In The Merchant Of Venice
In To Kill A Mockingbird
In court there is a jury, one that is predominantly white males. During that time period, it makes it nearly impossible for another ethnicity specifically black to win a trail against a white person. In Tom's case, it is obvious that he is innocent. But the jury had to decide, and did not set their prejudices aside.

1. Why is Antonio brought to Court?
2. Why is Shylock forced to covert to Christianity?
3. Why is Antonio never punished for beating up Shylock?
4. Why does Heck Tate not accuse Boo Radley for killing Bob?
5. Why does Bob Ewell say Tom raped Mayella?
8. How is the jury held responsible for the killing of Tom?
7. What is the main reason Tom lost the trial?
6. Why is Atticus asked to defend Tom?
Antonio was at the end of his 3-month bond, and Shylock wanted his flesh.
Shylock took a Christian man to court and lost. Converting to Christianity was part of his punishment.
Antonio is a Christian and is therefore not punished for abusing his "lesser" Jew.
He believes it would lead to unwanted attention for Boo.
He says this to cover up the fact that he is the one to beat her.
Judge Taylor knows Atticus will try his best at defending Tom.
The prejudices of the jury.
There was enough evidence proving Tom innocent, but they still decided he was guilty.
By: Ethan and Matt
This poem is written by an 18 year-old Muslim spoken word poet living in the suburbs of Philadelphia, PA. He is currently undergoing a continuous 52 weeks of writing poetry. His self-stated goal is to, “Create a Better Yesterday”.
This poem relates to both pieces of writing because justice is not fair in either. Though to some, the justice systems may seem okay, to others they fall to the hands of justice.
Full transcript