首页> 外文学位 >George Eliot's 'Middlemarch' and Lev Tolstoy's 'Anna Karenina': A comparative reading.
【24h】

George Eliot's 'Middlemarch' and Lev Tolstoy's 'Anna Karenina': A comparative reading.

机译:乔治·埃利奥特(George Eliot)的《中间人》和列夫·托尔斯泰(Lev Tolstoy)的《安娜·卡列尼娜(Anna Karenina)》:比较读物。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Middlemarch and Anna Karenina each embody a particular version of the tragic view of life. In each novel, two major protagonists possess many of the character traits we typically associate with the heroes and heroines of tragedy and appear in circumstances that ultimately lead, or nearly lead, to their destruction--that is, to the tragic waste of a rare and valuable human life. As in many tragedies, their fates are complicated by other characters, by the particular set of circumstances within which they strive to realize their individual conceptions of a good life, and by their own errors of judgment and perception.;Eliot and Tolstoy both understood contingency, indifference, and destructiveness as built-in features of the common human condition that continually impinge upon our efforts to live good lives. Comparative readings of Middlemarch and Anna Karenina show how this version of the tragic view of life is embodied both in the structure and the substance of each novel. These readings also show how each novelist's handling of plot, character, irony, and metaphor richly fulfills many of the basic criteria established by Aristotle and by A. C. Bradley in their seminal discussions of tragedy.;While both Middlemarch and Anna Karenina describe a world in which contingency, indifference, and destructiveness play a much larger role in shaping human fate than we usually like to admit, each novel promotes a different response to the tragic view of life. Both Eliot and Tolstoy encourage us to see ourselves, our relation to others, and our place in the world, in the light of something much larger than ourselves. Eliot, however, invites us to do so against the backdrop of the collective life of humanity, while Tolstoy invites us to do so against the backdrop of our relation to God. The study concludes by contrasting Eliot's humanist response, as embodied in Middlemarch, with Tolstoy's religious response, as embodied in Anna Karenina, to the recognition that tragedy is an eternally-recurring form of human experience.
机译:Middlemarch和Anna Karenina分别体现了悲剧性人生观的特定版本。在每本小说中,两个主要主人公都拥有我们通常与悲剧中的英雄人物相关的许多性格特征,并出现在最终导致或几乎导致其毁灭的环境中,也就是说,造成了罕见的悲剧性浪费和宝贵的人类生活。就像在许多悲剧中一样,他们的命运因其他角色,努力实现自己的美好生活构想的特定环境以及他们自己的判断力和知觉错误而变得更加复杂;艾略特和托尔斯泰都理解了偶然性。 ,冷漠和破坏性是人类共同生活条件的固有特征,不断影响着我们过上美好生活的努力。米德尔玛奇和安娜·卡列尼娜的比较读物显示了这种悲剧性的人生观是如何在每部小说的结构和实质中体现的。这些读物还表明,每位小说家对情节,性格,讽刺和隐喻的处理方式如何充分满足亚里士多德和AC布拉德利在悲剧性开创性讨论中确立的许多基本标准。尽管米德尔马奇和安娜·卡列尼娜都描述了一个世界,偶然性,冷漠和破坏性在塑造人类命运中起着比我们通常所承认的更大的作用,每本小说都对人生的悲剧观产生不同的反应。艾略特(Eliot)和托尔斯泰(Tolstoy)都鼓励我们从比自己更大的角度看待自己,与他人的关系以及我们在世界上的地位。但是,艾略特邀请我们在人类集体生活的背景下这样做,而托尔斯泰则邀请我们在我们与上帝的关系的背景下这样做。该研究的结论是,将艾略特(Miodmarch)中体现的艾略特(Eliot)的人道主义回应与安娜·卡列尼娜(Anna Karenina)所体现的托尔斯泰(Tolstoy)的宗教回应进行对比,以认识到悲剧是人类经历的永恒形式。

著录项

  • 作者

    Welsh, Robert Paul.;

  • 作者单位

    Southern Illinois University at Carbondale.;

  • 授予单位 Southern Illinois University at Carbondale.;
  • 学科 Literature Comparative.;Literature English.;Literature Slavic and East European.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1997
  • 页码 312 p.
  • 总页数 312
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号