首页> 外文OA文献 >Oral-visual contradiction : seeing and hearing in Shakespeare’s history plays
【2h】

Oral-visual contradiction : seeing and hearing in Shakespeare’s history plays

机译:口头与视觉的矛盾:莎士比亚历史剧中的视听

摘要

Scholarship in the latter half of the twentieth century did much to rehabilitate Shakespeare’s early histories into the canon. Discarded on the grounds of collaborative authorship or lack of unity, the Henry VI trilogy has perhaps suffered the most. This dissertation brings together sensory and historiographical theories in order to demonstrate that the first tetralogy exposes the limitations of historical narrative. Historical ‘truth’ is easily distorted: initially through the individual’s failure to interpret sensory information and then through the writer who records those events. These fundamental questions about the credibility of knowledge and truth remain a central concern throughout the second tetralogy, King John and Henry VIII.\udThe questionable truth-telling powers of sight and sound independent from one another are a recurring motif in Shakespeare’s histories; skewed perception or selective hearing can have disastrous consequences. Motives are frequently ambiguous and the plays abound in trial scenes that are never satisfactorily resolved. Often the audience are invited to accept a ‘truth’ that contradicts the evidence of the play either in its text, its performance or in comparison to contemporary history plays.\udHenry VIII, with its titular claim that ‘All is True’ alongside glaring historical omissions, is an example of the early modern obsession with paradox. Cranmer’s highly selective presentation of a glorious untroubled future, though clearly not true, is a satisfying and restorative narrative. A similar contradiction reveals itself in my case study of preaching at St Mary Spital. At this event, preachers and City Fathers collude in a highly selective presentation of London as a charitable and exemplary city, though this may well have been contradicted by other visual evidence on the occasion. Both plays and sermons thus presented the paradox of a fictive narrative that could be openly contradicted, but that simultaneously provided consolation.
机译:二十世纪后半叶的奖学金极大地恢复了莎士比亚的经典历史。由于合作作者身份或缺乏团结而被抛弃,亨利六世三部曲也许遭受了最大的损失。本文将感官和史学理论结合在一起,以证明第一部四部曲揭示了历史叙事的局限性。历史上的“真相”很容易被扭曲:首先是由于个人未能解释感官信息,然后才是通过记录这些事件的作家。这些关于知识和真理的可信度的基本问题仍然是整个第二部四部曲(约翰国王和亨利八世)中的中心问题。\ ud相互之间相互独立的视听声音的可疑真相表达力是莎士比亚历史上反复出现的主题。偏见或选择性听觉可能会造成灾难性的后果。动机常常是模棱两可的,并且在从未令人满意地解决的审判场景中,戏剧比比皆是。通常,观众会被邀请接受一个“真实性”,该真实性与剧本的文字,表现或与当代历史剧本的对比都与之相矛盾。\ udHenry VIII,其名义上宣称“一切都是真实的”,同时炫耀历史遗漏,是现代人对悖论的早期痴迷的一个例子。克兰默(Cranmer)对光辉灿烂的未来的高度选择性的呈现,虽然显然不是事实,但却是一种令人满意且具有恢复性的叙述。我在圣玛丽教堂(St Mary Spital)讲道的案例研究中也显示出类似的矛盾。在这次活动中,传教士与城市之父勾结在一起,对伦敦作为一个慈善和模范城市进行了高度选择性的介绍,尽管这很可能与当时的其他视觉证据相矛盾。因此,戏剧和布道都表现出虚构叙事的悖论,这可以公开矛盾,但同时提供了安慰。

著录项

  • 作者

    Suman, Sonia Davi;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2014
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 {"code":"en","name":"English","id":9}
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

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