The Rejection of Falstaff and the Display of Power in Henry IV and Henry V
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
To traditional historicists, Falstaff in Shakespeare’s Henry IV and Henry V is a subversive force that must be observed and contained by the authority and power. However, to new historicists, Falstaff is a scapegoat who is manipulated and rejected by Prince Harry. The evaluation’s differences are due to the various premises between historical criticism and new-historicism on reality and history. Historicists have believed in the stability of history and reality. New historicists, however, do not believe in their stability. New historicists regard Prince Harry as a Machiavellian who manipulates Falstaff for his political purpose. In contrast, traditional historicists accept him as an ideal prince who emerged into the most powerful monarch who embodies ‘Tudor Myth.’ Prince Harry’s turning away from prodigal Falstaff is presented in the ‘Rejection of Falstaff’ scene. However, it cannot be considered a real transformation. Prince Harry is not changed but pretends to be changed. He is a self-conscious cunning figure who appropriates Falstaff for his political purpose, and the rejection of Falstaff shows the image of a hypocritical ruler and the cruel power mechanism operated by the display of power. This paper explores the political implication embedded in the rejection of Falstaff and the theatrical display of power in Shakespeare’s Henry IV and Henry V, focusing on manipulating others practiced by the political power concerning new historicism.
Abstract
To traditional historicists, Falstaff in Shakespeare’s Henry IV and Henry V is a subversive force that must be observed and contained by the authority and power. However, to new historicists, Falstaff is a scapegoat who is manipulated and rejected by Prince Harry. The evaluation’s differences are due to the various premises between historical criticism and new-historicism on reality and history. Historicists have believed in the stability of history and reality. New historicists, however, do not believe in their stability. New historicists regard Prince Harry as a Machiavellian who manipulates Falstaff for his political purpose. In contrast, traditional historicists accept him as an ideal prince who emerged into the most powerful monarch who embodies ‘Tudor Myth.’ Prince Harry’s turning away from prodigal Falstaff is presented in the ‘Rejection of Falstaff’ scene. However, it cannot be considered a real transformation. Prince Harry is not changed but pretends to be changed. He is a self-conscious cunning figure who appropriates Falstaff for his political purpose, and the rejection of Falstaff shows the image of a hypocritical ruler and the cruel power mechanism operated by the display of power. This paper explores the political implication embedded in the rejection of Falstaff and the theatrical display of power in Shakespeare’s Henry IV and Henry V, focusing on manipulating others practiced by the political power concerning new historicism.
참고문헌 (26)
- Barish, Jonas A., "The Turning Away of Prince Hal", Shakespeare Studies, 1, pp.9~17 (1965)
- Berger Jr, Harry, "Postmodern Shakespeare", pp.242~276 (1999), Garland
- Bloom, Harold, "Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human" (1998), Riverhead Books
- Dickinson, Hugh, "The Reformation of Prince Hal", Shakespeare Quarterly, 12, pp.33~46 (1961)
- Dollimore, Jonathan, "Political Shakespeare: New Essays in Cultural Materialism", pp.2~17 (1985), Manchester UP
- Dutton, Richard, "Shakespeare: A Bibliographical Guide", pp.337~380 (1990), Oxford UP
- Fraser, Scott R., "‘The king has killed his heart’: The Death of Falstaff in Henry V", SEDERI, 20, pp.145~157 (2010)
- Grady, Hugh, "Shakespeare, Machiavelli, and Montaigne" (2002), Oxford UP
- Greenblatt, Stephen, "Shakespearean Negotiations: The Circulation of Social Energy in Renaissance England" (1988), U of California P
- Gurr, Andrew, "King Henry V. New Cambridge Shakespeare" (1992), Cambridge UP
- Kim, Jonghwan, "Subversion and Containment in Henry IV and Henry V", Shakespeare Review, 22, pp.41~59 (1993)
- Marcus, Leah S., "Puzzling Shakespeare: Local Reading and its Discontents" (1988), U of California P
- McDonald, Russ, "Shakespeare: An Anthology of Criticism and Theory 1945-2000", pp.417~421 (2004), Blackweell
- Montrose, Louis A., "The New Historicism", pp.15~36 (1989), Routledge
- Mullaney, Steven, "The Place of the Stage: Licence, Play, and Power in Renaissance England" (1988), U of Chicago P
- Neale, J. E., "Elizabeth I and Her Parliaments, 1584-1601, vol 2" (1965), Cape
- Nuttall, A. D., "A New Mimesis: Shakespeare and the representation of reality" (1983), Methuen
- Orgel, Stephen, "The Illusion of Power: Political Theater in the English Renaissance" (1975), California UP
- Rabkin, N., "Rabbits, Ducks, and Henry V", Shakespeare Quarterly, 28(3), pp.279~296 (1977)
- Rosenblum, Joseph, (1999), Barnes & Noble Books
- Ruiter, David, "Shakespeare’s Festive History: Feasting, Festivity, Fasting and Lent in the Second Henriad" (2003), Ashgate
- Selden, Raman, "A Readers Guide to Contemporary Literary Theory" (1993), Harvester
- Shakespeare, William, "The Complete Works. The Oxford Shakespeare" (1988), Oxford UP
- 송창섭, "Henry’s Contradictions and Falstaff as the Margin of Henry’s Symbolic Order in Henry IV I", Shakespeare Review, 38(3), pp.553~572 (2002), 한국셰익스피어학회
- Tennenhouse, Leonard, "Political Shakespeare: New essays in cultural materialism", pp.109~128 (1985), Manchester UP
- Watts, Cedric, "Henry V" (2000), Wordsworth Editions