發(fā)布時間：2018-03-02 14:02

  本文選題：身份　切入點：東方主義　出處：《河北師范大學》2009年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】： 莎士比亞的最后一個劇本《暴風雨》于1611年創(chuàng)作完成,儀僅在幾年前第一個殖民地剛剛在新世界建立。因此,其特殊的歷史背景使得這部劇不同與莎士比亞的諸多其它劇本,并為此劇渲染了殖民主義的色彩。即使不作任何改動或改編,《暴風雨》這個劇本就已經(jīng)在呼喚著對它的殖民主義解讀;而當賽撒爾改寫此劇本時,已有學者在殖民主義視角下對《暴風雨》作了解讀與分析。賽撒爾的《暴風雨》是對莎氏《暴風雨》的重寫,填補了莎士比亞所隱藏的空白,因此那些被遺忘的便可以被憶起并言說。而且,賽撒爾以莎劇《暴風雨》為范式,反映出歐洲對于他者的態(tài)度受到了當時政治文化背景的很大影響,并且突出強調(diào)了歐洲對新世界殖民的險惡后果。鑒于這兩個劇本,尤其是賽撒爾的《暴風雨》,并未得到中國學界的太多關注,本論文便提出了這樣的疑問,即莎士比亞的劇本如何言說了殖民主義話語,而賽撒爾又是如何在后殖民語境下解讀劇本中的主要人物的。為了解答這些問題,本論文借用了愛德華·薩義德,安東尼·葛蘭西,羅伯特·菲利普森,霍米·巴巴及斯皮瓦克的一些后殖民理論觀點,仔細地對比和分析了兩個劇本中共有的三個人物的不同身份。 論文共分三章進行論述: 第一章依據(jù)東方主義理論對比和分析了普洛斯彼羅的不同身份,進而揭示出賽薩爾改寫的莎士比亞的《暴風雨》是對歐洲殖民主義的一種回應。 第二章集中討論兩個凱力班的不同身份。 第三章聚焦愛麗爾的不同身份問題。 最后,本論文指出雖然在兩個劇本中普洛斯彼羅都被視為一個殖民者,而凱力班與愛麗爾都被標記為“他者”,但他們的不同作用以及劇作家的不同態(tài)度都蘊含在他們的不同身份之中。
[Abstract]:Shakespeare's last play, the Storm, was written in 1611, only a few years ago when the first colony was established in the New World. And the play has the color of colonialism. Even if nothing is changed or adapted, the Tempest is already calling for a colonial interpretation of it; and when Sesar rewrote it, Some scholars have interpreted and analyzed Tempest from the perspective of colonialism. Thesare's Tempest is a rewriting of Thesar's Tempest, which fills in the blank hidden by Shakespeare. So the forgotten ones can be remembered and spoken, and, in the paradigm of Shakespeare's Tempest, the European attitude towards the other was greatly influenced by the political and cultural background of the time. And it highlights the pernicious consequences of European colonization of the new world. In view of the fact that these two plays, especially Sesar's Tempest, have not received much attention from the Chinese academic community, this paper raises such a question. How Shakespeare's plays speak of colonialism, and how Saisal interprets the main characters in the postcolonial context. To answer these questions, this paper borrows Edward said. Anthony Gramsci, Robert Phillips, Homi Baba, and Spivak's postcolonial theories carefully contrast and analyze the different identities of the three characters shared in the two plays. The thesis is divided into three chapters:. The first chapter contrasts and analyzes Prospero's different identities according to Orientalism theory, and then reveals that Cesar's adapted Shakespeare's Tempest is a response to European colonialism. Chapter two focuses on the different identities of the two classes. The third chapter focuses on the different identity of Ariel. Finally, the thesis points out that although Prospero is regarded as a colonizer in both plays, Both Kelliban and Ariel are labeled "the other", but their different roles and different attitudes of playwrights are contained in their different identities.
【學位授予單位】：河北師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2009
【分類號】：I106.3;I0-03

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前3條

1 孫惠柱;《暴風雨》與殖民敘事[J];戲劇-中央戲劇學院學報;2005年01期

2 王建疆;;反思全球化背景下的“傳統(tǒng)”和“話語霸權”[J];學術月刊;2006年11期

3 張德明;加勒比英語文學與本土語言意識[J];浙江大學學報(人文社會科學版);2005年03期

，

本文編號：1556820