The Utopia in Flames: The Allegory of Harmless Politics in Byron's Tragedy Sardanapalus
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Sardanapalus is read here as Byron's paradoxical construction, a non-violent kingship staged inside a conquest-based empire, an ideal of harmless rule founded on peace, moral clarity, and individual autonomy. The paper argues that Byron does not simply celebrate nonviolence but dramatizes its political impracticality within imperial structures. Through Sardanapalus's rejection of militarism, conquest, and performative kingship, the play initially presents a Romantic alternative to coercive authority. However, the rebellion that unfolds highlights the structural fragility of such politics—namely, the absence of institutional binding mechanisms and the ease of coordinated elite defection in a conquest-based polity. Sardanapalus's vision of benevolent rule collapses not only under external threat but also under its own contradictions: the tension between private ethics and public authority. His final act of self-immolation, while politically ineffective, becomes a symbolic refusal to authorize future coercion. Tracing the arc from utopian aspiration to tragic downfall, the paper shows how Byron's tragedy both envisions and deconstructs the possibility of moral politics in a world governed by violence. This examination of Sardanapalus's rule underscores the complex interaction between visionary politics and imperial decay. Ultimately, Sardanapalus reveals the Romantic impulse to imagine ideal governance even as it acknowledges its limits.
Abstract
Sardanapalus is read here as Byron's paradoxical construction, a non-violent kingship staged inside a conquest-based empire, an ideal of harmless rule founded on peace, moral clarity, and individual autonomy. The paper argues that Byron does not simply celebrate nonviolence but dramatizes its political impracticality within imperial structures. Through Sardanapalus's rejection of militarism, conquest, and performative kingship, the play initially presents a Romantic alternative to coercive authority. However, the rebellion that unfolds highlights the structural fragility of such politics—namely, the absence of institutional binding mechanisms and the ease of coordinated elite defection in a conquest-based polity. Sardanapalus's vision of benevolent rule collapses not only under external threat but also under its own contradictions: the tension between private ethics and public authority. His final act of self-immolation, while politically ineffective, becomes a symbolic refusal to authorize future coercion. Tracing the arc from utopian aspiration to tragic downfall, the paper shows how Byron's tragedy both envisions and deconstructs the possibility of moral politics in a world governed by violence. This examination of Sardanapalus's rule underscores the complex interaction between visionary politics and imperial decay. Ultimately, Sardanapalus reveals the Romantic impulse to imagine ideal governance even as it acknowledges its limits.