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
- 2012.12
- 수록면
- 140 - 171 (32page)
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Main concern of this essay is to identify and discuss the different concepts of time which the four characters of Waiting for Godot profess or signify during the course of the play. The argument begins with the proposition that the most fundamental conflict of Waiting for Godot occurs between the two contrasting images of mobility and immobility which reflect the aporia faced by the post war intelligentsia. Pozzo and Lucky’ relentless movement toward the unseen Marche de Saint-Sauveur is driven by their belief in the progress and the panacea promised by the development of modern technology and industry, in an inseparable alliance with the power of market. Their mobility contrasts with the static, self-reflecting post war consciousness of Estragon and Vladimir. Surrounded by threatening others and lacking in positive initiation for the suffering others, their everyday existence as such consists in habitus-present, which Gilles Deleuze defines as one of the characteristics of modern time.
In Waiting for Godot, both of the blind belief in the future (progress) and the reactive memory of the past deprive them of the positive power to act. Curiously, it is Estragon, without memory of the past promise or illusory expectation for the future, who stands out to be the one character of the play whose notion of time does not change throughout the play. He allegorically personifies or is tantamount to the artistic principle of the play which can be summarized to be ‘he in-betweenness’ the ‘erhaps’principle, or the undeterminable 50/50 ratio of the virtual coexistence of the possible.
In Waiting for Godot, both of the blind belief in the future (progress) and the reactive memory of the past deprive them of the positive power to act. Curiously, it is Estragon, without memory of the past promise or illusory expectation for the future, who stands out to be the one character of the play whose notion of time does not change throughout the play. He allegorically personifies or is tantamount to the artistic principle of the play which can be summarized to be ‘he in-betweenness’ the ‘erhaps’principle, or the undeterminable 50/50 ratio of the virtual coexistence of the possible.
목차
인용문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
반복의 미학가 Waiting for Godot : 프로이트와 들뢰즈, 그리고 베케트
윤화영
현대영미드라마
2000
.10
『고도를 기다리며』(Waiting for Godot) : 표시할 수 없는 좌표 속에 육체를 위치시키며
박지숙
신영어영문학회 학술발표회 자료집
2003
.01
모순과 반복의 시학 연구 : 베케트의 『고도를 기다리며』를 중심으로
이영석
외국문학연구
2010
.11
아도르노의 미학이론과 베케트 : ‘부정사유’와 ‘자율적 예술의 정치성
윤화영
현대영미드라마
2010
.04
『고도를 기다리며』-표시할 수 없는 좌표속에 육체를 위치시키며
박지숙
코기토
2002
.12
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2014-842-000462932