성공한 게임과 실패한 게임: 『햄릿』과 『리어 왕』을 중심으로
The Successful game vs. Failed game: Focusing upon Hamlet and King Lear
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The date of composition and first performance of Hamlet and King Lear were at the close of the Elizabeth and early in the James Ⅰ era. According to the Hamlet’s words, the purpose of playing is that to hold the mirror up to nature. It is also the issue that how could we represent the present political, social and cultural situation in Renaissance which was probably a subject of conversation’s of Shakespeare, too. Shakespeare thought that the play is the abstracts and brief chronicles of the time. At this point, he contrived a new kind of game. “The play-within-a-play” in Hamlet and “Love contest” in King Lear are new kinds of games which get to the heart of the plays. Hamlet inserts some lines in The Murder of Gonzago and makes new one ‘The Mousetrap’ which has designed to catch the conscience of Claudius. The play-within-a-play carries out as planned of Hamlet and succeed in proof Claudius’ crime. After that Claudius became the “thing” to Hamlet and Hamlet was the center of the play and secured a subjectivity. On the contrary, King Lear works out “Love contest” which asked his daughters to engaged in a contest that will decide who shall get divided kingdom. Gonerill and Regan play along her father’s game and pretend to be a dutiful daughter. After he divided up kingdom and abdicate the throne, he was contained by them. But Cordelia says “nothing” which senses the natural relationships of man. She goes her own way as ‘true game’. For the “Love contest” which was failed game he designed, Lear fell so low as to become a “beggar”. It shows that Shakespeare adapted the histories and discourses in Renaissance for the stage and let us find to true meaning of Britain’s society in his represented texts.
Abstract
The date of composition and first performance of Hamlet and King Lear were at the close of the Elizabeth and early in the James Ⅰ era. According to the Hamlet’s words, the purpose of playing is that to hold the mirror up to nature. It is also the issue that how could we represent the present political, social and cultural situation in Renaissance which was probably a subject of conversation’s of Shakespeare, too. Shakespeare thought that the play is the abstracts and brief chronicles of the time. At this point, he contrived a new kind of game. “The play-within-a-play” in Hamlet and “Love contest” in King Lear are new kinds of games which get to the heart of the plays. Hamlet inserts some lines in The Murder of Gonzago and makes new one ‘The Mousetrap’ which has designed to catch the conscience of Claudius. The play-within-a-play carries out as planned of Hamlet and succeed in proof Claudius’ crime. After that Claudius became the “thing” to Hamlet and Hamlet was the center of the play and secured a subjectivity. On the contrary, King Lear works out “Love contest” which asked his daughters to engaged in a contest that will decide who shall get divided kingdom. Gonerill and Regan play along her father’s game and pretend to be a dutiful daughter. After he divided up kingdom and abdicate the throne, he was contained by them. But Cordelia says “nothing” which senses the natural relationships of man. She goes her own way as ‘true game’. For the “Love contest” which was failed game he designed, Lear fell so low as to become a “beggar”. It shows that Shakespeare adapted the histories and discourses in Renaissance for the stage and let us find to true meaning of Britain’s society in his represented texts.
참고문헌 (16)
- Bacon, Francis, "Essays", pp.18~ (1995), Prometheus Books
- Bate, Jonathan, "The Romantics on Shakespeare - King Lear" (1992), Penguin Classics
- Edward, Philip, "Shakespeare: A Writer’s Progress" (1986), Oxford UP
- Fergusson, Francis, "The Idea of a Theatre" (1949), Princeton UP
- Kastan, David. S., "Shakespeare and English history, In The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare", pp.167~ (2001), Cambridge UP
- Leggatt, Alexander, "English Drama: Shakespeare to the Restoration 1590-1660" (1988), Longman
- Marcus, Leah S., "Puzzling Shakespeare" (1988), U of California P
- Nuttall, A. D., "Shakespeare the Thinker" (2007), Yale UP
- Onions, C. T., "Shakespeare Glossary" (1911), Oxford UP
- Sandler, Robert, "Northrop Frye on Shakespeare", pp.2~3 (1986), Yale UP
- Smith, Horatio, "Festivals, Games, and Amusements, Ancient and Modern" (1831), Henry Colburn and Richard Bentley
- Taylor, Michael, "Shakespeare Criticism in the Twentieth Century" (2001), Oxford UP
- Weimann, Robert, "History and the Issue of Authority in Representation: The Elizabethan Theater and Reformation, In Representation of Authority: a Reader in New Historicism", pp.453~455 (1988), U of North Carolina P
- Weimann, Robert, "Shakespeare and the Popular Tradition in the Theater" (1987), The Johns Hopkins UP
- Wilson, John. D., "The Essential Shakespeare: A Biographical Adventure" (1932), Cambridge UP
- Willbern, David, "Shakespeare’s Nothing, In Representing Shakespeare: New Psychoanalytic Essays", pp.253~ (1980), The Johns Hopkins UP