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
- 2000.12
- 수록면
- 753 - 774 (22page)
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Samuel Johnson has been considered as one of the best critics of Shakespeare. He was the representative critic in the neoclassical period who had a balanced critical point of view. In the preface of his edition of Shakespeare, published in 1765, Johnson wrote: "Nothing can please many, and please long, but just representation of general nature. . . . Shakespeare is the poet of nature; the poet that holds up to his readers a faithful mirror of manners and of life." This is Johnson's praise of Shakespeare as the poet of nature, that is the poet of human nature. So to read Shakespeare's works is to read the book of life as it is. Johnson believed that each of Shakespeare's characters is not an individual but the entire species and that he represents "general properties and large appearances."
Ben Jonson, in 1623, praised Shakespeare saying that "he was not of an age, but for all time." For Addison, Shakespeare was an inimitable poet born with "all the seeds of poetry." Nevertheless, the following praise of Johnson is the most memorable paragraph dedicated to Shakespeare. Immortal Shakespeare drew "each change of many-color'd life," "exhausted worlds, and then imagin'd new .... panting Time toil'd after him vain." Johnson praised Shakespeare as the poet of nature who represented "a faithful mirror of manners and of life." However, he never forgot to criticize Shakespeare's defects.
To teach truths through delights had been the classical ideal since Horace emphasized it. It was also the basic principle of Johnson's criticism, so that Johnson criticized Shakespeare's lack of moral instruction: "He sacrifices virtue to convenience, and so much more careful to please than to instruct, that he seems to write without any moral purpose." This was the primary defect of Shakespeare that Johnson argued. Johnson criticized several other defects of Shakespeare: his plots, loosely and carelessly formed; his catastrophe, improbably produced or imperfectly represented; geographical and chronological improprieties; his narrations which are pompous and wearisome; his inflation of trivial sentiments and vulgar ideas; his fascination of the quibble and pun.
Samuel Johnson's dislike of Shakespeare's lack of poetic justice and excessive uses of pun and quibble reflected the taste of the neoclassical period. His view of Shakespeare was limited by his neoclassical principles, and his prejudices were shared with other critics in the period of neoclassicism. Nevertheless, his broad mind was not confined within the Aristotelian concept of the three unities, which was the most basic rule for the dramatic criticism in the period.
Johnson defended Shakespeare's disregard of the unities of time and place, pointing out the negative aspects of the esthetic of delusion. He also defended Shakespeare's "mingled drama," and his defence was based on his belief that the tragic-comedy was able to exhibit the real state of a real world and to fulfill the purpose of literature, to instruct by pleasing. He compared the works of regular writers to "a garden," accurately formed and scented with flowers, and the irregular plays of Shakespeare to "a forest, in which oaks extend their branches and pines tower in the air." This is the praise for the varieties and comprehensions represented in Shakespeare's works.
Dryden praised Shakespeare as a poet who had "the largest and most comprehensive soul." Likewise, Johnson can be remembered as a critic who had "the most comprehensive soul" in the field of Shakespearean criticism, because he supported us to have a comprehensive understanding of Shakespeare's merits as well as his faults.
Ben Jonson, in 1623, praised Shakespeare saying that "he was not of an age, but for all time." For Addison, Shakespeare was an inimitable poet born with "all the seeds of poetry." Nevertheless, the following praise of Johnson is the most memorable paragraph dedicated to Shakespeare. Immortal Shakespeare drew "each change of many-color'd life," "exhausted worlds, and then imagin'd new .... panting Time toil'd after him vain." Johnson praised Shakespeare as the poet of nature who represented "a faithful mirror of manners and of life." However, he never forgot to criticize Shakespeare's defects.
To teach truths through delights had been the classical ideal since Horace emphasized it. It was also the basic principle of Johnson's criticism, so that Johnson criticized Shakespeare's lack of moral instruction: "He sacrifices virtue to convenience, and so much more careful to please than to instruct, that he seems to write without any moral purpose." This was the primary defect of Shakespeare that Johnson argued. Johnson criticized several other defects of Shakespeare: his plots, loosely and carelessly formed; his catastrophe, improbably produced or imperfectly represented; geographical and chronological improprieties; his narrations which are pompous and wearisome; his inflation of trivial sentiments and vulgar ideas; his fascination of the quibble and pun.
Samuel Johnson's dislike of Shakespeare's lack of poetic justice and excessive uses of pun and quibble reflected the taste of the neoclassical period. His view of Shakespeare was limited by his neoclassical principles, and his prejudices were shared with other critics in the period of neoclassicism. Nevertheless, his broad mind was not confined within the Aristotelian concept of the three unities, which was the most basic rule for the dramatic criticism in the period.
Johnson defended Shakespeare's disregard of the unities of time and place, pointing out the negative aspects of the esthetic of delusion. He also defended Shakespeare's "mingled drama," and his defence was based on his belief that the tragic-comedy was able to exhibit the real state of a real world and to fulfill the purpose of literature, to instruct by pleasing. He compared the works of regular writers to "a garden," accurately formed and scented with flowers, and the irregular plays of Shakespeare to "a forest, in which oaks extend their branches and pines tower in the air." This is the praise for the varieties and comprehensions represented in Shakespeare's works.
Dryden praised Shakespeare as a poet who had "the largest and most comprehensive soul." Likewise, Johnson can be remembered as a critic who had "the most comprehensive soul" in the field of Shakespearean criticism, because he supported us to have a comprehensive understanding of Shakespeare's merits as well as his faults.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
Shakespeare In Korea
Shakespeare Review
2002 .09
-
Colonial Shakespeares : Shakespeare in Korea, 1906-1945
Shakespeare Review
1997 .12
-
Shakespeare연구의 성과
비평문학
1990 .09
-
한국에서의 Shakespeare 연구 조사(Ⅱ)
Shakespeare Review
1995 .06
-
Shakespeare in Japanese
Shakespeare Review
2002 .09
-
19세기 아동 문학 풍토와 램 남매의 『셰익스피어 이야기』각색 연구
Shakespeare Review
2017 .03
-
민족시인의 형성 : 왕정복고기와 18세기 영국의 셰익스피어
Shakespeare Review
2015 .09
-
Shakespeare on the Nature of Poetry
Shakespeare Review
1984 .08
-
셰익스피어 부흥과 여성 관객의 역할—“셰익스피어 레이디스 클럽”
영어영문학21
2012 .01
-
Shakespeare극중 초자연적 요소의 고찰
비평문학
1991 .10
-
셰익스피어와 1990년대 이후 미국 대중문화 : 『윌 파워!』에서 『햄릿의 블랙베리』까지 자기계발서를 중심으로
Shakespeare Review
2013 .03
-
On Teaching Shakespeare
Shakespeare Review
2016 .09
-
Computer에 의한 Shakespeare연구와 국제협력
Shakespeare Review
1972 .04
-
Shakespeare Translation in Korea
Shakespeare Review
1975 .04
-
Teaching Shakespeare in China
Shakespeare Review
2002 .09
-
코울리지의 셰익스피어 비평
Shakespeare Review
2005 .06
-
셰익스피어의 극과 음악
새한영어영문학
2012 .02
-
Shakespeare`s Dramatic Design
영어영문학
2005 .12
-
드라이든과 포프의 셰익스피어 비평
신영어영문학
2002 .08
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-840-003151527