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.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida is a curious play which has been regarded as history, comedy, tragedy, satire, tragic satire, or comical satire. The genre is ambiguous. So is the world the play depicts. It baffles readers, particularly those who expect Homeric heroism and grandeur. An extremely ironical world is presented to the readers, in which a fool rails at the so-called “great” heroes who blindly fight for the vain glory in an absurd war. It may be the reason why the play has been simply called one of Shakespeare’s “problem” plays.
Many critics agree that the trustworthy commentator of the play is Thersites. However, while he remains a spectator-commentator, Cressida is a player-commentator who reveals the seamy underside of the great world of ancient heroes with her body, the traditional antifeminist text. She is the real center of the play. Throughout the play, compared with Cressida’s reasonable and practical, though inconstant, behaviors, other male heroes are blindly idealistic and hypocritical. Rhetoric inflates the heroic stature of all the great male heroes. But their inconsistencies deflate their greatness. When we are looking into the play through Cressida’s eyes, then, the play is no longer problematic because we realize that the ancient heroic world is an idealized picture of the readers’ imagination, just as Cressida is Troilus’ ideal beauty of his own.
Many critics agree that the trustworthy commentator of the play is Thersites. However, while he remains a spectator-commentator, Cressida is a player-commentator who reveals the seamy underside of the great world of ancient heroes with her body, the traditional antifeminist text. She is the real center of the play. Throughout the play, compared with Cressida’s reasonable and practical, though inconstant, behaviors, other male heroes are blindly idealistic and hypocritical. Rhetoric inflates the heroic stature of all the great male heroes. But their inconsistencies deflate their greatness. When we are looking into the play through Cressida’s eyes, then, the play is no longer problematic because we realize that the ancient heroic world is an idealized picture of the readers’ imagination, just as Cressida is Troilus’ ideal beauty of his own.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
"This is and is not Cressida" : Troilus And Cressida에 나타난 여성의 아이덴터티의 문제
Shakespeare Review
1995 .12
-
The "Naked" Antifeminist Text and Male Heroism: Cressida's Laugh in Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida
영미문학페미니즘
1996 .01
-
Troilus and Cressida에 나타난 사랑
Shakespeare Review
1991 .06
-
Troilus and Cressida : 여성의 이중적 죽음
Shakespeare Review
1997 .06
-
Troilus and Cressida 에 나타난 명예의 추구
Shakespeare Review
1995 .12
-
환멸의 희극적 수용 : 『트로일러스와 크레시더』(Troilus and Cressida)의 경우
신영어영문학
2002 .08
-
Body Politics and Commerce of Desire in Troilus and Cressida
영미문학페미니즘
1998 .01
-
가치의 상대화, 언어적 단절, 정체성의 혼돈 : 『트로일러스와 크레시다』와 비극의 몰락
Shakespeare Review
2000 .09
-
Troilus and Cressida : 황무지의 한계상황
Shakespeare Review
1994 .06
-
“이것은 크레시더(Cressid)인 동시에 크레시더가 아니다” : 초서의 크리세이더(Criseyde)와 비교를 통하여
Shakespeare Review
2012 .12
-
『트로이러스와 크레시다』에 나타난 시간의 메타포
신영어영문학
2002 .08
-
『트로일러스와 크레시다』 : 확실성과 절대성의 상실
Shakespeare Review
2008 .03
-
Troilus and Cressida: 차이를 통한 위장(僞裝) : 대상관계 정신분석 이론을 중심으로
Shakespeare Review
1995 .06
-
"War and lechery confound all" : Troilus and Cressida 硏究
Shakespeare Review
1973 .04
-
드라이든의 셰익스피어 다시 쓰기 : 『트로일로스와 크레시다; 또는 너무 늦게 알려진 진실』을 중심으로
Shakespeare Review
2008 .06
-
『트로일러스와 크레시다』와 시간, 가치, 재현의 문제
영어영문학연구
2003 .01
-
Re-reading of Shakespeare’s Troilus and Cressida through Bill Brown’s ‘Thing Theory'
Shakespeare Review
2019 .06
-
『트로일러스와 크렛시다』 : 모험 이데올로기의 부재
Shakespeare Review
2001 .12
-
『트로일러스와 크레시더』: 주체의 육체성
새한영어영문학
2004 .03
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-840-016410627