아이스퀼로스와 셰익스피어 비교연구: 『오레스테이아』(Ὀρεστεια) 삼부작과 『맥베스』(Macbeth)에 나타난 운명의 이중성
A Comparative Study on Shakespeare’s Macbeth and Aeschylus’ Oresteia Trilogy: the Ambivalence of Fate
1
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Fate, in Aeschylus and Shakespeare, is not the destiny given mechanically by divinities, but the oracle open to humans’ free will and choice. The tragic heroes, evil doers in this case have to answer for the results of their fate, since their ethos, or character works as a main force driving their life to tragic fall, as is the case of Adam and Eve. Remarkably, it is their own hybris, or pride that drives Agamemnon and Macbeth to fall a victim to the oracle, an oracle that is so ambivalent as to play the devil with their life. The oracle “in a double sense” is simply up to their choice or free will, and the result is really the product of “things bad begun” arising from their hybris. The dynamics of myth and reason in the 5th century BC accounts for the “double sense” aesthetics of fate linking Aeschylus and Shakespeare, with the court of Areopagus trying to accomplish justice, regardless of the oracle.
Abstract
Fate, in Aeschylus and Shakespeare, is not the destiny given mechanically by divinities, but the oracle open to humans’ free will and choice. The tragic heroes, evil doers in this case have to answer for the results of their fate, since their ethos, or character works as a main force driving their life to tragic fall, as is the case of Adam and Eve. Remarkably, it is their own hybris, or pride that drives Agamemnon and Macbeth to fall a victim to the oracle, an oracle that is so ambivalent as to play the devil with their life. The oracle “in a double sense” is simply up to their choice or free will, and the result is really the product of “things bad begun” arising from their hybris. The dynamics of myth and reason in the 5th century BC accounts for the “double sense” aesthetics of fate linking Aeschylus and Shakespeare, with the court of Areopagus trying to accomplish justice, regardless of the oracle.
참고문헌 (15)
- 김라옥, "인간 타락의 담화로서의 『맥베스』: 『맥베스』와 『제니시스』 3장의 비교 연구", 세계문학비교연구, (17), pp.87~108 (2006), 세계문학비교학회
- 정해갑, "에우리피데스의 여성인물 연구: 『메데이아』(Μηδεια), 『헤카베』 (Ἑκαβη), 『박카이』(Βακχαι)에 나타난 이중성을 중심으로", Shakespeare Review, 52(1), pp.97~116 (2016), 한국셰익스피어학회[DOI]
- 정해갑, "아이스퀼로스(Αἰσχυλος)의 극장정치에 관한 연구: 『아가멤논』(Ἀγαμεμνων)과 『페르시아인들』(Περσαι)을 중심으로", Shakespeare Review, 54(1), pp.53~76 (2018), 한국셰익스피어학회[DOI]
- 정해갑, "그리스 비극을 통해 본 신성모독과 불경함에 관한 연구: 『 박카이』 (Βακχαι)와 『 오이디푸스 왕』 (Οἰδιπους Τυραννος)의 경우", 영미어문학, (114), pp.173~191 (2014), 한국영미어문학회
- 정해갑, "A Study on Free Will in Dante’s La Divina Commedia and St. Augustine’s De Libero Arbitrio", 비평과이론, 14(1), pp.245~264 (2009), 한국비평이론학회
- Aeschylus, "Aeschylos Opera Omnia" (2001), Nebu P
- Aeschylus, "Aeschylus I: Oresteia" (1953), U of CP
- Dodds, E. R., "The Ancient Concept of Progress and Other Essays on Greek Literature" (1973), Oxford UP
- Goldhill, Simon, "Reading Greek Tragedy" (1986), Cambridge UP
- Petrovic, Andrej, "Inner Purity and Pollution in Greek Religion: Volume I: Early Greek Religion" (2016), Oxford UP
- Ricoeur, Paul, "The Symbolism of Evil" (1967), Beacon P
- Rocco, Christopher, "Tragedy and Enlightenment: Athenian Political Thought and the Dilemmas of Modernity" (1997), UCP
- Shakespeare, "The Complete Works of Shakespeare" (1961), Scott
- Sophocles., "Sophocles Opera Omnia" (2011), Nebu P
- Wohl, Victoria, "Intimate Commerce: Exchange, Gender, and Subjectivity in Greek Tragedy" (1997), UTP