이항대립의 불확정성—『리어 왕』의 경우
The Uncertainty of Binary Opposition in King Lear
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The meaning of King Lear is not easily unveiled in the play’s language. In her response to her father’s demand, Cordelia says “Nothing, my lord.” Cordelia represents truth that stands outside of signification. The language she uses delays or defers confirmation of meaning. King Lear’s response, “Nothing will come of nothing,” warns that she risks banishment. They say “nothing,” but they don’t really mean nothing, for in King Lear, every word drips with significance. A key to understanding the meaning of language in King Lear is to recognize the unstable nature of its signification. The arbitrary relation between signifier and signified is exemplified in the text of King Lear. It is difficult to find the connection between signifier and signified in the three daughters’ responses to Lear’s question, Edmund’s forged letter which is used to discredit his legitimate brother Edgar, and the scene of Edgar’s disguise. The play presents the unstable nature of signification as well as the arbitrariness of binary structure, such as presence and absence, truth and falsity, reason and madness, justice and injustice, and good and evil. This paper investigates the instability of language and the uncertain relationship of binary opposition in King Lear. The paradox of language in the text will also be discussed.
Abstract
The meaning of King Lear is not easily unveiled in the play’s language. In her response to her father’s demand, Cordelia says “Nothing, my lord.” Cordelia represents truth that stands outside of signification. The language she uses delays or defers confirmation of meaning. King Lear’s response, “Nothing will come of nothing,” warns that she risks banishment. They say “nothing,” but they don’t really mean nothing, for in King Lear, every word drips with significance. A key to understanding the meaning of language in King Lear is to recognize the unstable nature of its signification. The arbitrary relation between signifier and signified is exemplified in the text of King Lear. It is difficult to find the connection between signifier and signified in the three daughters’ responses to Lear’s question, Edmund’s forged letter which is used to discredit his legitimate brother Edgar, and the scene of Edgar’s disguise. The play presents the unstable nature of signification as well as the arbitrariness of binary structure, such as presence and absence, truth and falsity, reason and madness, justice and injustice, and good and evil. This paper investigates the instability of language and the uncertain relationship of binary opposition in King Lear. The paradox of language in the text will also be discussed.
참고문헌 (13)
- Bergeron, David M, "Deadly Letters in King Lear", Philological Quarterly, 72(2), pp.157~76 (1993)
- Burckhard, Sigurd, "King Lear: The Quality of Nothing.” Shakespearean Meanings", pp.237~59 (1968), Princeton UP
- Calderwood, J. L, "Creative Uncreation in King Lear", Shakespeare Quarterly, 37(1), pp.5~19 (1986)
- Derrida, Jacques, "Of Grammatology" (1974), Johns Hopkins UP
- Derrida, "Differance.Deconstruction in Context" (1986), U of Chicago P
- Eagleton,Terry, "William Shakespeare" (1986), Blackwell
- Elton,William R., "King Lear and the Gods" (1966), Huntington Library
- Heilman,Robert B., "This Great Stage:Image and Structure in King Lear" (1948), Lousiana State UP
- Herbert,Judd, "Tragedy and Tragic in Western Culture" (1982), Determination
- Kott, Jan, "Shakespeare Our Contemporary" (1965), Methuen
- Levin,Harry, "Shakespeare and the Revolution of the Times" (1976), Oxford UP
- Shakespeare, William, "King Lear. The Riverside Shakespeare" (1974), Houghton Mifflin
- Sypher,Wylie, "The Ethic of Time" (1976), The Seabury P