사회적 텍스트로 본 『스캔들 학교』
The School for Scandal as a Social Text
1
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The School for Scandal (1777) is Richard Sheridan’s representative play of the Restoration comedy, dealing with the process of producing scandals and distributing them to the public and thereby doing mischief to the innocent victims. Therefore, the characters are classified into two groups in the play: so called the students of the school of scandal, and the good people who fall victim to malicious scandals or stand far away from the harmful circle. In that respect, this play has been classified as an example of “sentimental comedy” of which main message is poetic justice. However, two important characters—Charles Surface and Mrs. Teazle—show some ambiguities which make it rather difficult to categorize them into good guys within the paradigm of traditional sentimental comedy. It is mainly because their behaviors—seemingly genuine and moral—can be interpreted as those derived from an ultimately mercenery and self-interested motivation. In the play, even good characters cannot be immune to the megatrend of new commercialism and consumerism of the society at that time. Therefore, one can better understand the loophole of the characterization of the play as a sentimental comedy, through reading the play as a social text that vividly shows the social trends of the English society in the late 18th century.
Abstract
The School for Scandal (1777) is Richard Sheridan’s representative play of the Restoration comedy, dealing with the process of producing scandals and distributing them to the public and thereby doing mischief to the innocent victims. Therefore, the characters are classified into two groups in the play: so called the students of the school of scandal, and the good people who fall victim to malicious scandals or stand far away from the harmful circle. In that respect, this play has been classified as an example of “sentimental comedy” of which main message is poetic justice. However, two important characters—Charles Surface and Mrs. Teazle—show some ambiguities which make it rather difficult to categorize them into good guys within the paradigm of traditional sentimental comedy. It is mainly because their behaviors—seemingly genuine and moral—can be interpreted as those derived from an ultimately mercenery and self-interested motivation. In the play, even good characters cannot be immune to the megatrend of new commercialism and consumerism of the society at that time. Therefore, one can better understand the loophole of the characterization of the play as a sentimental comedy, through reading the play as a social text that vividly shows the social trends of the English society in the late 18th century.
참고문헌 (22)
- 김소임, "'추문 학교', 가치 부재의 세계인가?", 고전 르네상스 영문학, 12(1), pp.10~214 (2003), 한국 고전 르네상스 영문학회
- 나동일, "영국의 역사" (2005), 한울 아카데미
- Auburn, Mark S, "Sheridan’s Comedies" (1977), U of Nebraska P
- Berry, Helen, "Polite Consumption: Shopping in Eighteenth-Century England", Transactions of the RHS, 12, pp.375~394 (2002)
- Brown, Laura, "English Dramtic Form, 1660-1760: An Essay in Generic History" (1981), Yale UP
- Durant, Jack D, "The Moral Focus of The School for Scandal", South Atlantic Bulletin, 37(4), pp.44~53 (1972)
- Durant, Jack D, "Sheridan’s Picture-Auction Scene: A Study in Contexts", Eighteenth Century Life, 11(3), pp.34~47 (1987)
- Evans, James E, "Sentimental Economics in The School for Scandal", New Perspectives on the Eighteenth Century, 8, pp.51~63 (2011)
- Hogan, Robert, "Plot, Character, and Comic Language in Sheridan, In Comedy from Shakespeare to Sheridan: Change and Continuity in the English and European Dramatic Tradition", pp.274~285 (1986), U of Delaware P
- Jackson, J. R. de J, "The Importance of Witty Dialogue in The School for Scandal", Modern Language Notes, 76(7), pp.601~607 (1961)
- Kowaleski-Wallace, Elizabeth, "Consuming Subjects: Women, Shopping, and Business in the Eighteenth Century" (1997), Columbia UP
- Loftis, John, "Political and Social Thought in the Drama, In The London Theatre World 1660-1800", pp.253~285 (1800), Southern Illinois UP
- Morwood, James, "Sheridan Studies" (1995), Cambridge UP
- Nicoll, Allardyce, "A History of Restoration Drama 1660-1700, 2nd ed" (1928)
- O’Quinn, Daniel, "Staging Governance: Theatrical Imperialism in London, 1770-1800" (2005), Johns Hopkins UP
- Picker, John M, "Disturbing Surfaces: Representations of the Fragment in The School for Scandal", ELH, 65(3), pp.637~652 (1998)
- “Sir Peter Teazle”, "The Origins of the School for Scandal: “The Slanderers”", pp.1986, Redford, Bruce
- Schiller, Andrew, "The School for Scandal: The Restoration Unrestored", PMLA, 71(4), pp.694~704 (1956)
- Sheridan, Richard, "The School for Scandal. Restoration and Eighteenth-Century Comedy, In A Norton Critical Edition", pp.277~340 (1973), Norton
- Spacks, Patricia M, "Gossip" (1986), U of Chicago P
- Tayler, George, "Plays by Samuel Foote and Arthur Murphy" (1984), Cambridge UP
- Wall, Cynthia, "The English Auction: Narratives of Dismantlings", Eighteenth-Century Studies, 31(1), pp.1~25 (1997)