『자에는 자로』에 나타난 관객 반응 연구
Audience's Response in Measure for Measure
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper aims to study the audience's response in the problem play, Measure for Measure. It does not permit its audience to become emotionally involved to any extent. Characters' inconsistencies and contradictions prevent the audience from identifying with them. Instead, this play frequently reminds audience that he or she is the only observer of these perplexing characters. Likewise, the obvious display of thematic issues tends to de-emphasize emotional involvement. Measure for Measure initially draws the attention of the audience, but after the opening act of the play, the audience's relationship to the play begins to change. The audience's expectations, based on its assumption that this play is romance, are soon frustrated during the second or the third act. A new identity does not emerge to serve as a guideline for directing the audience's anticipations. The audience cannot reconcile the Duke's inclination for manipulation and his questionable morals with the role of the conventional Disguised Ruler of romance. The most distinctive form which distinguishes this play from other comedies is that the final scene of the play is open-ended. The play frustrates the audience's expectations by ending inconclusively. The audience leaves the theater without the comfort of a genuine resolution often because the seemingly happy endings seem to be only mechanical results of the plot. Marriage, for example, is usually the most satisfactory comic conclusion in romance. But the marriages at the end of Measure for Measure produce the opposite effect on the audience. The ending of Measure for Measure leaves the audience disconnected, so the audience remains in a state of indecision. The audience leaves the theater unable to solve the dilemma of the play's ending. In a sense, the play continues to involve the audience with the play precisely because it lacks the solution. Shakespeare keeps the audience concerned with the dilemma which the play causes after the audience leaves the theater. Thus this play, Measure for Measure, is Shakespeare's highly experimental one.
Abstract
This paper aims to study the audience's response in the problem play, Measure for Measure. It does not permit its audience to become emotionally involved to any extent. Characters' inconsistencies and contradictions prevent the audience from identifying with them. Instead, this play frequently reminds audience that he or she is the only observer of these perplexing characters. Likewise, the obvious display of thematic issues tends to de-emphasize emotional involvement. Measure for Measure initially draws the attention of the audience, but after the opening act of the play, the audience's relationship to the play begins to change. The audience's expectations, based on its assumption that this play is romance, are soon frustrated during the second or the third act. A new identity does not emerge to serve as a guideline for directing the audience's anticipations. The audience cannot reconcile the Duke's inclination for manipulation and his questionable morals with the role of the conventional Disguised Ruler of romance. The most distinctive form which distinguishes this play from other comedies is that the final scene of the play is open-ended. The play frustrates the audience's expectations by ending inconclusively. The audience leaves the theater without the comfort of a genuine resolution often because the seemingly happy endings seem to be only mechanical results of the plot. Marriage, for example, is usually the most satisfactory comic conclusion in romance. But the marriages at the end of Measure for Measure produce the opposite effect on the audience. The ending of Measure for Measure leaves the audience disconnected, so the audience remains in a state of indecision. The audience leaves the theater unable to solve the dilemma of the play's ending. In a sense, the play continues to involve the audience with the play precisely because it lacks the solution. Shakespeare keeps the audience concerned with the dilemma which the play causes after the audience leaves the theater. Thus this play, Measure for Measure, is Shakespeare's highly experimental one.
참고문헌 (19)
- Booth, Stephen, "On the Value of Hamlet. Reinterpretations of Elizabethan Drama" (1940), Columbia UP
- Burke, Kenneth, "The Philosophy of Literary Form" (1941), Random House
- Campbell, O. J., "Comicall Satyre and Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida" (1938), Adcraft
- Cohen, Derek, "The Politics of Shakespeare" (1993), St. Martin's
- Doran, Madeleine, "Endeavors of Art: A Study of Form in Elizabethan Drama" (1954), Wisconsin UP
- Gelb, Hal, "Duke Vincentio and the Illusion of Comedy or All's Not Well That Ends Well", Shakespeare Quarterly, 22, pp.25~34 (1971)
- Harding, Davis P., "Elizabethan Betrothals and Measure for Measure", Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 49, pp.139~158 (1950)
- Knight, L. C., "The Ambiguity of Measure for Measure, Shakespeare: Measure for Measure" (1971), MacMillan
- Lawrence, William W., "Measure for Measure and Lucio", Shakespeare Quarterly, 9, pp.443~453 (1958)
- Lawrence, William W., "Shakespeare's Problem Comedies" (1931), Frederick
- Leech, Clifford, "The 'Meaning' of Measure for Measure", Shakespeare Survey, 3, pp.66~73 (1950)
- Rabkin, Norman, "Meaning and Shakespeare, Shakespeare 1971" (1972), Toronto UP
- Schanzer, Ernest, "The Marriage Contracts in Measure for Measure", Shakespeare Survey, 13, pp.81~89 (1960)
- Sewell, Arthur, "Character and Society in Shakespeare" (1951), Clarendon
- Smith, Barbara Herrnstein, "Poetic Closure: A Study of How Poems End" (1968), Chicago UP
- Shakespeare, William, "Measure for Measure, The Arden Shakespeare" (1980), Methuen
- Stevenson, David Lloyd, "The Achievement of Shakespeare's Measure for Measure" (1966), Cornell UP
- Tillyard, E. M. W., "Shakespeare's Problem Plays" (1949), Toronto UP
- Weil, Herbert, "Form and Contexts in Measure for Measure", Critical Quarterly, 12, pp.55~72 (1970)
