지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2004.12
- 수록면
- 841 - 868 (28page)
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Shakespeare's Roman plays, wedged between his great tragedies and late Romance plays, put on stage the extreme pursuit, and its tragic effects, of heroism and honour. With the exception of Titus Andronicus, which is an experiment in Senecan blood tragedy of revenge, his Roman plays--Julius Caesar, Antony and Cleopatra, and Coriolanus--all put in opposition masculine virtues of discipline, manhood, measure, temperance and cold reason against the feminine elements of indulgence, overflowing, idleness, infinite variety of imagination, and emotion. These Roman plays depict the male fear of effeminization and pollution of manhood through contact with the feminine. For example, Coriolanus sucked his courage from the breast of his mother, Volumnia, and achieved his colossal selfhood and pride thereby. However, his final kneeling down before the pleas of his mother on the brink of his triumphal attack on Rome proves himself the boy of his mother. And this means the self-destruction of manhood by the feminine.
Antony and Cleopatra, among his Roman plays, seemingly dramatizes the polar conflicts of values between Rome and Egypt with its epic shifts of elusive thirty-six scenes in total. Rome is the world of men in contrast to the Egyptian world of women. This apparent polarity, however, is put into question in this play of paradoxes and ambiguities. The negative values of Egypt are transmuted into positives ones in the later parts of the play, while Roman pursuit of honour and heroic militarism is proven self-deceiving and expedient as is shown by Pompey in his galley. By his dramatic strategy of transvaluation, Shakespeare appears to maintain that every fact and truth are possible dependent on the given situation, and therefore partial at most. Here any perspective is the mutable one of the viewer projecting his own desires into the object of his gaze.
The ever-present renewal and undecidability of meanings is one of Shakespeare's strategies to criticize the strongly self-willed virtues of Roman Caesarism and 'civilized' imperialism done through male power and violence at the cost of the feminine elements. Shakespeare reads new and different meaning into his cultural tradition by transforming Aeneas, the hero and builder of Rome and civilization, into the hero of love. Shakespeare performs his "cultural susurrus," or cultural negotiation with his literary heritage of history as a kind of a text. Antony identifies himself with Aeneas, not the stoic hero of Rome, but the idle lover of Dido, the Queen of Carthage. This historical misreading goes against the grain of Virgil and Marlowe. The heroics of love and death of Antony with Cleopatra exalt them above the barren earth of kingdoms and clay. Death is experienced as a consummation and a part of life, which makes the tragic vision of the play somewhat affected and makes it similar to the vision of the tragicomedies of Shakespeare's final phase. The heroics of love and death of the titular hero and heroine, together with their aristocratic virtues of generosity and affection, is suggested as an alternative, if not a substitution for, to the Roman values of colonialism and imperialism. Shakespeare's Roman plays in general, and Antony and Cleopatra in particular, prepare the way to the happily mingled resolution of the masculine and the feminine in his Romance plays.
Antony and Cleopatra, among his Roman plays, seemingly dramatizes the polar conflicts of values between Rome and Egypt with its epic shifts of elusive thirty-six scenes in total. Rome is the world of men in contrast to the Egyptian world of women. This apparent polarity, however, is put into question in this play of paradoxes and ambiguities. The negative values of Egypt are transmuted into positives ones in the later parts of the play, while Roman pursuit of honour and heroic militarism is proven self-deceiving and expedient as is shown by Pompey in his galley. By his dramatic strategy of transvaluation, Shakespeare appears to maintain that every fact and truth are possible dependent on the given situation, and therefore partial at most. Here any perspective is the mutable one of the viewer projecting his own desires into the object of his gaze.
The ever-present renewal and undecidability of meanings is one of Shakespeare's strategies to criticize the strongly self-willed virtues of Roman Caesarism and 'civilized' imperialism done through male power and violence at the cost of the feminine elements. Shakespeare reads new and different meaning into his cultural tradition by transforming Aeneas, the hero and builder of Rome and civilization, into the hero of love. Shakespeare performs his "cultural susurrus," or cultural negotiation with his literary heritage of history as a kind of a text. Antony identifies himself with Aeneas, not the stoic hero of Rome, but the idle lover of Dido, the Queen of Carthage. This historical misreading goes against the grain of Virgil and Marlowe. The heroics of love and death of Antony with Cleopatra exalt them above the barren earth of kingdoms and clay. Death is experienced as a consummation and a part of life, which makes the tragic vision of the play somewhat affected and makes it similar to the vision of the tragicomedies of Shakespeare's final phase. The heroics of love and death of the titular hero and heroine, together with their aristocratic virtues of generosity and affection, is suggested as an alternative, if not a substitution for, to the Roman values of colonialism and imperialism. Shakespeare's Roman plays in general, and Antony and Cleopatra in particular, prepare the way to the happily mingled resolution of the masculine and the feminine in his Romance plays.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
『안토니와 클레오파트라』다시 읽기 : Theatre and World
Shakespeare Review
2001 .03
-
『앤터니와 클레오파트라』에 나타난 인간관계의 초월적 속성
Shakespeare Review
2001 .06
-
『안토니와 클레오파트라』에 나타난 욕망과 도덕성의 갈등의 기상도
Shakespeare Review
2002 .06
-
프로이드의 욕망이론에 비춰본 『앤토니와 클레오파트라』
Shakespeare Review
2003 .03
-
담론과 타자 재현의 양상 : 『앤토니와 클레오파트라』
Shakespeare Review
2004 .06
-
『안토니와 클레오파트라』에 나타난 전복성
영어영문학21
2017 .01
-
인간 본성의 상징으로 본 『안토니와 클레오파트라』
Shakespeare Review
2013 .09
-
A Political Value of Love in Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra, against the Regime og Brothers
고전 르네상스 영문학
2008 .01
-
『안토니와 클레오파트라』에서의 이중 파국
Shakespeare Review
2007 .09
-
『안토니와 클레오파트라』: 사랑의 비극에 나타난 사랑의 담론과 여성의 주체성
Shakespeare Review
2003 .12
-
역설과 과장 : 『앤토니와 클레오파트라』의 시적 표현법 연구
신영어영문학
2006 .11
-
디도와 클레오파트라
고전 르네상스 영문학
2014 .01
-
Antony and Cleopatra에 나타난 성역할의 전도
Shakespeare Review
1990 .06
-
선전선동전의 관점에서 본 『안토니와 클레오파트라』: 알렉산드리아 영토분할령 전후에 유포된 흑색 루머
Shakespeare Review
2019 .09
-
『앤토니와 클레오파트라』에 나타난 “존재”와 “생성”의 융합
Shakespeare Review
2000 .03
-
크롬웰의 공화정을 전후한 극장건축구조 변화에 따른 극적 담론과 공연방식의 차이 : 『안토니와 클레오파트라』와 『사랑을 위하여』 사례연구
새한영어영문학
2006 .02
-
『안토니와 클레오파트라』에 나타난 페미니즘 전략과 그 한계
Shakespeare Review
2006 .12
-
옥타비우스 시저의 권력에의 의지와 역사인식
Shakespeare Review
2008 .12
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
『안토니와 클레오파트라』에 나타난 욕망과 도덕성의 갈등의 기상도
박현수
Shakespeare Review
2002
.06
인간 본성의 상징으로 본 『안토니와 클레오파트라』
이행수
Shakespeare Review
2013
.09
담론과 타자 재현의 양상 : 『앤토니와 클레오파트라』
김종환
,
권진영
Shakespeare Review
2004
.06
『안토니와 클레오파트라』에서의 이중 파국
이용관
Shakespeare Review
2007
.09
Shakespeare's Characterization of Cleopatra as a Female Ruler
홍옥숙
Shakespeare Review
2007
.03
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-840-003139330