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
- 2006.12
- 수록면
- 611 - 639 (29page)
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Until the 1960s, criticism of King Lear was dominated by overtly or implicitly Christian accounts. Despite the play's pagan setting and deliberate reduction of the Christian allusions overpopulating its chief dramatic source, a host of critics had laboured to turn the tragedy back into the kind of drama whose doctrinal clutch it was plainly anxious to escape. Still more had followed the less blatant trail blazed by A. C. Bradley and G. Wilson Knight, who devised readings in which Christian patterns and concepts survived in figurative disguise with their moralizing spirituality intact.
The idea of King Lear as a dramatized parable of sin, sacrifice and redemption took a nosedive, however, after Barbara Everett's sceptical attack in 1960, and never regained height after the publication of W. R. Elton's King Lear and the Gods. Such refutations helped foster the environment in which two new critical dynasties emerged to contest the throne from which the Christian interpretation of King Lear was being toppled. Conservative humanist critics redefined Lear's heroism as his capacity to absorb endless agonies and endure death itself without prospect of salvation, finding his life's purpose in this world rather than beyond the grave. Pitted against this view was a far bleaker reading of the playas refusing altogether the consolation of significance, whether Christian or secular, and abandoning us at the close without any support from systems of moral or artistic belief at all.
But the framework of assumptions and objectives within which these and other kinds of reading are now pursued has altered so dramatically over the last ten years as to justify our speaking of a new era in the study of King Lear. The reasons for the shift in direction can be summed up in one word: politics. Hitherto, critical quarrels about the vision of King Lear has largely been conducted in blithe indifference to the play's social implications for the present or its past political function reconsidered from a modern point of view. But the 1980s spawned a whole series of theoretically informed, polemical studies of Shakespeare, which exposed the conservative consequences of established approaches to his drama and promoted instead a range of perspectives committed to re-reading the plays in the light of innovative work on gender, race, power, language and the function of criticism itself.
The idea of King Lear as a dramatized parable of sin, sacrifice and redemption took a nosedive, however, after Barbara Everett's sceptical attack in 1960, and never regained height after the publication of W. R. Elton's King Lear and the Gods. Such refutations helped foster the environment in which two new critical dynasties emerged to contest the throne from which the Christian interpretation of King Lear was being toppled. Conservative humanist critics redefined Lear's heroism as his capacity to absorb endless agonies and endure death itself without prospect of salvation, finding his life's purpose in this world rather than beyond the grave. Pitted against this view was a far bleaker reading of the playas refusing altogether the consolation of significance, whether Christian or secular, and abandoning us at the close without any support from systems of moral or artistic belief at all.
But the framework of assumptions and objectives within which these and other kinds of reading are now pursued has altered so dramatically over the last ten years as to justify our speaking of a new era in the study of King Lear. The reasons for the shift in direction can be summed up in one word: politics. Hitherto, critical quarrels about the vision of King Lear has largely been conducted in blithe indifference to the play's social implications for the present or its past political function reconsidered from a modern point of view. But the 1980s spawned a whole series of theoretically informed, polemical studies of Shakespeare, which exposed the conservative consequences of established approaches to his drama and promoted instead a range of perspectives committed to re-reading the plays in the light of innovative work on gender, race, power, language and the function of criticism itself.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
『리어왕』(King Lear)의 기독교적 해석
영어영문학연구
2004 .01
-
King Lear에 나타난 non-communication연구
Shakespeare Review
1995 .06
-
『리어왕』의 비평의 흐름 : 1800년에서 현재까지
Shakespeare Review
2008 .06
-
말과 眞實 : King Lear를 中心으로
Shakespeare Review
1973 .04
-
The Significance of Some Images of King Lear
Shakespeare Review
1986 .08
-
King Lear의 영적 자아
영어영문학
1992 .05
-
King Lear에 나타난 이상주의
Shakespeare Review
1996 .06
-
Studies of Shakespeare's Four Great Tragedies in Korea (Ⅱ) : Macbeth and King Lear
동서문화
1992 .12
-
King Lear에 나타난 시간과 의미의 부재
동서문화
1997 .02
-
Appearance and Reality in King Lear
Shakespeare Review
1985 .08
-
셰익스피어 비극의 역사성 : 『리어왕』을 중심으로
한신논문집
1996 .11
-
『리어왕』의 질서회복
영어영문학연구
2004 .01
-
「리어왕」에 나타나는 노인문제
Shakespeare Review
2012 .09
-
King Lear 硏究 : 心象과 性格發展
Shakespeare Review
1974 .04
-
King Lear가 지닌 총체적 의미 : Morality Play 와의 관련성을 통한 고찰
Shakespeare Review
1985 .08
-
키츠의 시를 통해 보는 『리어왕』: 「다시 한 번 『리어왕』을 읽으려고 앉아서」
영미어문학
2020 .01
-
선(禪)의 시각에서 본 『리어왕』
영어영문학연구
2015 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
『리어 왕』에 나타난 봉건적 이데올로기와 신흥 자본주의 이데올로기의 충돌
권오숙
Shakespeare Review
2005
.06
『리처드 3세』(Richard III)에 나타난 악의 비전 : 반복과 고착, 무와 무능
김문규
Shakespeare Review
2015
.12
『왕은 살아있다』: 치유를 향한 긴 여정
조숙희
Shakespeare Review
2014
.06
셰익스피어의 『리어왕』과 스마일리의 『천 에이커』 : 딸들의 잊힌 기억 이야기
김용태
Shakespeare Review
2014
.06
키에르케고르의 불안의 개념과 실존의 3단계의 관점에서 『리어왕』읽기
이경옥
Shakespeare Review
2013
.09
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-840-003106779