메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국셰익스피어학회 Shakespeare Review Shakespeare Review Vol.36 No.4
발행연도
2000.12
수록면
651 - 674 (24page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Since the Romantic era, the emphasis on Shakespeare's plays as literary works has become a certain kind of tradition and it may be true that his plays are as excellent as any other poems or novels written to be read in private by solitary readers. It is clear that a Shakespearean play which is often extraordinarily rich in blank verse has features in common with a poem, and that has features in common with a work of narrative fiction which presents a sequence of events. If his plays are treated only as literary works he created autonomously, however, it would be a positive way to distort the nature of a Shakespearean play. Since it is a dramatic work intended not for readers but for performance in public, we should talk through what is going on the stage during the performance.
One of the good and clear example for the importance of non-verbal stage languages which estableshed by the theatrical context is found in Macbeth Act 5, scene 5, when Macbeth asked Seyton about the noise heard from off-stage. The scholars added stage directions with the "[ r for Seyton later to make the logical context. But if these added stage direction are not correct, Seyton becomes the one who can tell what is going on off-stage withing seeing it. In other words, this scene could have more satanic energy without the added stage directions. On the other hand, in Hamlet, what Hamlet heard from the ghost is presented in two different ways: the dumb show and the play-within-the-play. The one is presented with non-verbal gestures, and the other is presented with verbal language. In these performances, what should be common and what should be different?
Another example is found in King Lear Act IV, scene vi where disguised Edgar escorts blinded Gloucester to the dover cliff. In this scene, Shakespeare uses the Elizabethan theatrical convention the other way: the audience in the auditorium who is accustomed to the Elizabethan stage conventions is puzzled by what disguised Edgar said and eventually identified with what blinded Gloucester replied. They could not know verbally what Edgar meant until this scene is fully unfolded in theatrically.
As performance critics argues, performance is not simply a matter of enacting scenes from the words of a play script. Performing Shakespeare's play, in particular, is primarily a matter of making meaning embedded in the words of a play. Shakespeare's play is a script above all, a code for performance, which meant to lead actors and eventually an audience to matters that are not visible on the page. Besides, as we all know, since performing art is ephemeral, it remains to be achieved anew with each performance of the play. Therefore, every single words in the play take on precise meanings and effects only in relation to the particular context in which they are used, so the meanings generated by the words of a play script become specific and precise only within the particular theatrical context established by a host of non-verbal stage languages.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-840-003151567