도회전설의 전파 텍스트로서 고골의 「외투」: 화자의 담화 분석
Gogol’s "Overcoat" as a Performance of Urban Legend Text: Narrative Analysis
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Gogol’s Overcoat is famous for its text which does not reveal exact meanings due to the narrator’s ambivalent attitude to characters and events. This paper describes that this short story’s unique narrative reveals the characteristics of the realization of urban legend text. The first-person narrator is a creator of a funny and grotesque story, but simultaneously is an observer of a real story. He tells these stories to other people in a skaz on the basis of rumors and his own and other people’s memories and informations. The narrator’s ambivalent attitude to characters and events, and various tones shifts(realistic, sentimental, rhetoric, comic, or ironic) can be read as a means the author uses to catch and maintain the interest of the audience and defend his stance against their rebuttals in advance, and as a way to avoid responsibility for his own conclusive judgements later on when he shares the incredible urban legend. It could be possible to say that the narrator enjoys the propagation process of the urban legend which he performs in a skaz, hiding behind the mask of propagator. The Overcoat represents the formation and the propagation process of the urban legend. In the first half of the novel, the narrator presents the real story as a part of the urban legend he propagates. In the latter half he represents the collaborative creation process, how the urban legend originates from the real story of the first half and how new details extend it when it goes through many people’s lips. As a result the short story itself becomes the realization of the urban legend in the form of fiction. This urban legend imparts the moral lesson that “if you don’t deal with people equally and personally, you will have bitter experiences.” The Overcoat could be determined as a performance of the urban legend text which represents its’ formation, propagation and functioning.
Abstract
Gogol’s Overcoat is famous for its text which does not reveal exact meanings due to the narrator’s ambivalent attitude to characters and events. This paper describes that this short story’s unique narrative reveals the characteristics of the realization of urban legend text. The first-person narrator is a creator of a funny and grotesque story, but simultaneously is an observer of a real story. He tells these stories to other people in a skaz on the basis of rumors and his own and other people’s memories and informations. The narrator’s ambivalent attitude to characters and events, and various tones shifts(realistic, sentimental, rhetoric, comic, or ironic) can be read as a means the author uses to catch and maintain the interest of the audience and defend his stance against their rebuttals in advance, and as a way to avoid responsibility for his own conclusive judgements later on when he shares the incredible urban legend. It could be possible to say that the narrator enjoys the propagation process of the urban legend which he performs in a skaz, hiding behind the mask of propagator. The Overcoat represents the formation and the propagation process of the urban legend. In the first half of the novel, the narrator presents the real story as a part of the urban legend he propagates. In the latter half he represents the collaborative creation process, how the urban legend originates from the real story of the first half and how new details extend it when it goes through many people’s lips. As a result the short story itself becomes the realization of the urban legend in the form of fiction. This urban legend imparts the moral lesson that “if you don’t deal with people equally and personally, you will have bitter experiences.” The Overcoat could be determined as a performance of the urban legend text which represents its’ formation, propagation and functioning.
참고문헌 (30)
- 김문황, "｢외투｣와 ｢광인일기」비교연구", 비교문화연구, 13(1), pp.5~28 (2009), 비교문화연구소
- 김연경, "고골의 ‘페테르부르크 이야기’와 근대의 문제", 슬라브학보, 23(4), pp.121~147 (2008), 한국슬라브․유라시아학회
- 디폰조 니콜라스, "루머 심리학" (2008), 한국산업훈련연구소
- 디폰조 니콜라스, "루머 사회 : 솔깃해서 위태로운 소문의 심리학" (2012), 흐름출판
- 오원교, "은닉된 논쟁: 고골의 ｢외투｣와 체홉의 ｢관리의 죽음｣의 비교 분석", 러시아연구, 21(1), pp.53~78 (2011), 러시아연구소
- 에이헨바움, "고골의 ｢외투｣는 어떻게 만들어졌는가?", pp.94~121 (1993), 민음사
- 이경완, "｢외투｣의 불가해성에 대한 성서적 고찰: 사랑과 욕망 개념을 중심으로", 러시아어문학연구논집, 44(44), pp.237~267 (2013), 한국러시아문학회
- Бочаров С. Г., "Проблемы типологии русскогореализма", pp.210~240 (1969), Наука
- Вайскопф М., "Сюжет Гоголя: Морфология. Идеология. Контекст", pp.358~359 (2002), центр Российского государственного гуманитарногоуниверситета
- Гоголь Н. В., "Собрание художественных произведений в пяти томах. Т. 3" (1959), Изд. Академии Наук СССР
- Ермаков Дм., "Очерки по анализу творчеству Н. В. Гоголя", pp.154~161 (1923), Гос. Изд.
- Маркович В., "Петербургские повести Н. В. Гоголя" (1989), Худож. лит
- "The Slavonic and East European Review", 1990, 22~40
- "PMLA", 1975, 53~61
- Driessen F. C, "Gogol as A Short Story-Writer" (1965), Mouton & Co
- Erlich V, "Gogol" (1969), Yale University Press
- Fanger D, "The Creation of Nikolay Gogol" (1979), The Belkap Press of Harvard University Press
- : A Further Interpretation, "The Slavic and East European Journal", 1976, 121~129
- Karlinsky S, "The Sexual Labyrinth of Nikolai Gogol" (1976), The University of Chicago Press
- Maguire R. A, "Exploring Gogol" (1994), Stanford University Press
- : The Pathetic Passages Reconsidered, "PMLA", 1974, 1106~1111
- Mullen Patrick D., "Modern Legend and Rumor Theory", Journal of Folklore Institute, 9(2), pp.95~109 (1972)
- Peace R, "The Enigma of Gogol" (1981), Cambridge University Press
- and Its Mode of Closure, "Studies in Short Fiction", 1977, 35~40
- Rancour-Laferriere D, ": A Psychoanalytic Study" (1982), Ardis
- as A Travesty of Hagiography, "The Slavic and East European Journal", 1972, 36~41
- Tangherlini Timothy R., "It Happened Not Too Far from Here...”: A Survey of Legend Theory and Characterization", Western Folklore, 49(4), pp.371~390 (1990)
- [URL]
- Tree Jean E. Fox, "Retelling Urban Legends", The American Journal of Psychology, 120(3), pp.459~476 (2007)