본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

『굿나잇 데스데모나 (굿모닝 줄리엣)』에서 콘스탄스의 꿈: 비극의 대안으로서 셰익스피어의 희극적 다시쓰기

Constance’s Dream in Goodnight Desdemona (Good Morning Juliet): Comedic Rewriting of Shakespeare As an Alternative of Tragedy

0

조회

0

다운로드

1

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류영어와문학

초록

This essay argues that Shakespeare's Timon of Athens dramatizes Timon’s four types of human relationship in terms of both the possibilities and impossibilities of friendship. It further claims that the play uncovers the complexities and ambiguities inherent in the practice or ‘malpractice’ of friendship. Timon’s relationship with what I call “false friends” is the first case in point. Timon takes them for his true friends, but they betray him. This mistake, however, is not something that gullible, giving Timon can only make. Rather, it is a structural problem of friendship within which his own experience with “false friends” is possible. Anyone who desires to pursue friendship would face the same dilemma as Timon has. Betrayal, in other words, is the very condition of friendship. Or to say the least, it is the only way to experience the possibilities and impossibilities of friendship at the same time. Timon’s three other types of relationship with Steward, Alcibiades, and Apemantus respectively can be understood in this context. For instance, Timon’s relationship with Steward is complex and ambiguous. Whether or not Steward is Timon’s true and faithful friend depends on one’s perspective. Shakespeare seems to intentionally open both possibilities in order for the audience to see the ways in which the complexities and ambiguities operate in the name of friendship. In a similar fashion, the bard creates his own version of Alcibiades from a historical figure presumably for the sake of his dramatic purpose. In doing so, Shakespeare seems to suggest that Alcibiades’s apparent or dubious acts of friendship may or may not fulfill his alleged purposes. One can interpret them one way or another, to simply put. This is why Timon’s relationship with Apemantus can be addressed in the light of friendship as well. When true friendship is always already a matter of the future tense in both Shakespeare’s dramatic world and the world in which we live, Apermantus’s unfriendly, or even antagonistic relationship with Timon can be seen as a quasi ideal case in which deception and falsity in the guise of friendship might be hardly at work. Perhaps Apermantus is Timon’s true, if not best, friend in an ironical sense. The tragedy, of course, is that Timon’s relationship with him ought to be understood only in terms of the self and the other, which absolutely resist any possibilities of unity. Their friendship, in other words, is an ironic and paradoxical case in which something is possible only by negating itself. To conclude, this play hardly dramatizes exemplary friendships as best shown in relationships between Hamlet and Horatio, Antonio and Basanio, and Prince Hal and Falstaff, but it nevertheless successfully examines the fundamental nature of friendship.

Abstract

This essay argues that Shakespeare's Timon of Athens dramatizes Timon’s four types of human relationship in terms of both the possibilities and impossibilities of friendship. It further claims that the play uncovers the complexities and ambiguities inherent in the practice or ‘malpractice’ of friendship. Timon’s relationship with what I call “false friends” is the first case in point. Timon takes them for his true friends, but they betray him. This mistake, however, is not something that gullible, giving Timon can only make. Rather, it is a structural problem of friendship within which his own experience with “false friends” is possible. Anyone who desires to pursue friendship would face the same dilemma as Timon has. Betrayal, in other words, is the very condition of friendship. Or to say the least, it is the only way to experience the possibilities and impossibilities of friendship at the same time. Timon’s three other types of relationship with Steward, Alcibiades, and Apemantus respectively can be understood in this context. For instance, Timon’s relationship with Steward is complex and ambiguous. Whether or not Steward is Timon’s true and faithful friend depends on one’s perspective. Shakespeare seems to intentionally open both possibilities in order for the audience to see the ways in which the complexities and ambiguities operate in the name of friendship. In a similar fashion, the bard creates his own version of Alcibiades from a historical figure presumably for the sake of his dramatic purpose. In doing so, Shakespeare seems to suggest that Alcibiades’s apparent or dubious acts of friendship may or may not fulfill his alleged purposes. One can interpret them one way or another, to simply put. This is why Timon’s relationship with Apemantus can be addressed in the light of friendship as well. When true friendship is always already a matter of the future tense in both Shakespeare’s dramatic world and the world in which we live, Apermantus’s unfriendly, or even antagonistic relationship with Timon can be seen as a quasi ideal case in which deception and falsity in the guise of friendship might be hardly at work. Perhaps Apermantus is Timon’s true, if not best, friend in an ironical sense. The tragedy, of course, is that Timon’s relationship with him ought to be understood only in terms of the self and the other, which absolutely resist any possibilities of unity. Their friendship, in other words, is an ironic and paradoxical case in which something is possible only by negating itself. To conclude, this play hardly dramatizes exemplary friendships as best shown in relationships between Hamlet and Horatio, Antonio and Basanio, and Prince Hal and Falstaff, but it nevertheless successfully examines the fundamental nature of friendship.

참고문헌 (15)

  1. 김희진, "“내가 바로 작가야!”: 여성 작가의 새로 쓰는 셰익스피어, 앤-메리 맥도널드의 『잘자 데스데모나(잘잤니 줄리엣)』", Shakespeare Review, 43(1), pp.57~76 (2007), 한국셰익스피어학회
  2. 이덕수, "희극적 갈등양식과 셰익스피어 희극" (2002), 영남대학교출판부
  3. Bamber, Linda, "Comic Women, Tragic Men: A Study of Gender and Genre in Shakespeare" (1982), Stanford UP
  4. Berggren, Paula S, "The Woman’s Part: Female Sexuality as Power in Shakespeare’s Plays", pp.17~34 (1980), Illinois UP
  5. Burnett, Linda, "‘Redescribing a World:’Towards a Theory of Shakespearean Adaptation in Canada", Canadian Theatre Review, 111, pp.4~9 (2002)
  6. Carlson, Susan, "Women and Comedy: Rewriting the British Theatrical Tradition" (1991), Michigan UP
  7. Djordjecvic, Igor, "Goodnight Desdemona (Good Morning Juliet): From Shakespearean Tragedy to Postmodern Satyr Play", Comparative Drama, 37(1), pp.89~115 (2003)
  8. Erickson, Peter, "Rewriting Shakespeare, Rewriting Ourselves" (1991), California UP
  9. Evans, Gareth Lloyd, "Shakespeare’s Fools: The Shadow and the Substance of Drama, In Shakespeare’s Comedies", pp.142~59 (1972), Edward Arnold
  10. Gay, Penny, "As She Likes It: Shakespeare’s Unruly Women" (1994), Routledge
  11. Glenn, Susan A, "Female Spectacle: The Theatrical Roots of Modern Feminism" (2000), Harvard UP
  12. MacDonald, Ann-Marie, "Goodnight Desdemona (Good Morning Juliet)" (1998), Grove Press
  13. or Ourselves: Plays by Ann-Marie MacDonald and Paula Vogel, In Transforming Shakespeare: Contemporary Women’s Re-visions in Literature and Performance, "Saving Desdemona and", pp.2000, Novy, Marianne
  14. Porter, Laurin R, "Shakespeare’s “Sisters”: Desdemona, Juliet, and Constance Ledbelly in Goodnight Desdemona (Good Morning Juliet)", Modern Drama, 38(3), pp.362~377 (1995)
  15. Waller, Gary, "Shakespeare’s Comedies" (1991), Longman

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (7건)