톰 스토파드의 『점퍼스』에서 드러나는 애매성의 문제
The Question of Ambiguity in Tom Stoppard’s Jumpers
1
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The ambiguity of Jumpers originates from the ethical/philosophical debate itself between George Moore and Jumpers as no one seems to emerge as a definite winner. However, Stoppard’s strategy to overcome this ambiguity can best be described as “getting it both ways while making a distinction between the opposing views.” Stoppard arranges various episodes and events in Jumpers in such a way that they tacitly support George’s argument, and enlivens George’s speech with familiar expressions and strong emotional appeal. As a result, if the battle of logic ends in a draw, George manages to triumph in the end. The ambiguity of Jumpers also originates from the fact that it is woven together from various strands of a who-dun-it, a play of idea, and a comedy to compensate for its lack of a coherent plot. Some scenes and episodes remain isolated, and defy a meaningful interpretation, which may invite a charge that Jumpers is not fully brought into aesthetic or intellectual focus. Still, it can safely be said that Stoppard largely succeeds in joining the various strands into something quite close to his dramatic ideal of the perfect marriage between the play of ideas and high comedy.
Abstract
The ambiguity of Jumpers originates from the ethical/philosophical debate itself between George Moore and Jumpers as no one seems to emerge as a definite winner. However, Stoppard’s strategy to overcome this ambiguity can best be described as “getting it both ways while making a distinction between the opposing views.” Stoppard arranges various episodes and events in Jumpers in such a way that they tacitly support George’s argument, and enlivens George’s speech with familiar expressions and strong emotional appeal. As a result, if the battle of logic ends in a draw, George manages to triumph in the end. The ambiguity of Jumpers also originates from the fact that it is woven together from various strands of a who-dun-it, a play of idea, and a comedy to compensate for its lack of a coherent plot. Some scenes and episodes remain isolated, and defy a meaningful interpretation, which may invite a charge that Jumpers is not fully brought into aesthetic or intellectual focus. Still, it can safely be said that Stoppard largely succeeds in joining the various strands into something quite close to his dramatic ideal of the perfect marriage between the play of ideas and high comedy.
참고문헌 (29)
- 김태우, "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead에서 드러나는 다양한 컨텍스트", 현대영미드라마, 14(1), pp.57~86 (2009)
- Bennett, Jonathan, "Philosophy and Mr Stoppard", Philosophy, 50, pp.5~18 (1975)
- Blackburn, Simon, "Truth, a Guide" (2005), Oxford UP
- Bragg, Melvin, "Tom Stoppard in Conversation", The Moral Vision of the Major Plays
- Crump, G. B., "Tom Stoppard, A Casebook", pp.153~172 (1988), Garland P
- Delaney. Paul, "Tom Stoppard: The Moral Vision of the Major Plays" (1990), Macmillan
- Delaney. Paul, "Tom Stoppard in Conversation" (1994), U of Michigan P
- Eichelbaum, Stanley, "Tom Stoppard in Conversation", pp.77~79, Paul Delaney
- Elam, Keir, "After Magritte, After Carroll, After Wittgenstein: What Tom Stoppard’s Tortoise Taught Us", Modern Drama, 36, pp.469~485 (1993)
- Gabbard, L., "Tom Stoppard’s Jumpers: A Mystery Play", pp.138~151, John Harty
- Gollob, David, "Tom Stoppard in Conversation", pp.150~166, Paul Delaney
- Gussow, Mel, "Tom Stoppard in Conversation", pp.73~76, Paul Delaney
- Harty, John, "Tom Stoppard, A Casebook" (1988), Garland P
- Hinden, Michael, "Jumpers: Stoppard and the Theater of Exhaustion", Twentieth Century Literature, 27, pp.1~15 (1981)
- Hudson, Roger, "Tom Stoppard in Conversation", pp.51~72, Paul Delaney
- James, Clive, "Tom Stoppard: Count Zero Splits the Infinite", pp.27~34, Anthony Jenkins
- Jenkins, Anthony, "Critical Essays on Tom Stoppard" (1990), G. K. Hall
- Jensen, Henning, "Jonathan Bennett and Mr Stoppard", Philosophy, 52, pp.214~217 (1977)
- Kerensky, Oleg, "Tom Stoppard in Conversation", pp.85~88, Paul Delaney
- Klemke, E. D., "Contemporary Analytic and Linguistic Philosophies" (1983), Prometheus Books
- Kreps, Barbara, "How Do We Know That We Know What We Know in Tom Stoppard’s Jumpers", Twentieth Century Literature, 32(2), pp.187~208 (1986)
- McCulloch, Joseph, "Tom Stoppard in Conversation", pp.38~45, Paul Delaney
- Monk, Ray, "Ludwig Wittgenstein: The Duty of Genius" (1991), Vantage
- Philips, D. Z., "From Fantasy to Faith: The Philosophy of Religion and Twentieth-Century Literature" (1991), Macmillan Education
- Stoppard, Tom, "Something to Declare", Sunday Times, 47~ (1968)
- Stoppard, Tom, "But for the Middle Classes", Times Literary Supplement, 3, pp.677~ (1977)
- Stoppard, Tom, "Jumpers" (1986), Faber and Faber
- Weightman, John, "A Metaphysical Comedy", Encounter, 38(1), pp.44~45 (1972)
- Zeifman, Hersh, "Tomfoolery: Stoppard’s Theatrical Puns", pp.175~193, Anthony Jenkins