跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(100.28.2.72) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/06/14 00:15
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:劉川豪
研究生(外文):Liu, Chuan-Haur
論文名稱:重探莎劇《亨利四世》(上)、(下)及《亨利五世》中的馬基維利主義:權力、修辭、與戲劇再現
論文名稱(外文):Revisiting Machiavellism in Shakespeare’s Two Parts of Henry IV and Henry V: Power, Rhetoric, and Theatrical Representation
指導教授:金守民金守民引用關係林建國林建國引用關係
指導教授(外文):Kim, MargaretLim, Kien Ket
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立交通大學
系所名稱:外國語文學系外國文學與語言學碩士班
學門:人文學門
學類:外國語文學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2010
畢業學年度:99
語文別:英文
論文頁數:63
中文關鍵詞:馬基維利《君王論》莎士比亞《亨利四世》(下)《亨利四世》(下)《亨利五世》卡恩權力修辭戲劇再現
外文關鍵詞:MachiavelliThe PrinceShakespeare1 Henry IV2 Henry IVHenry VKahnpowerrhetorictheatrical Representation
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:482
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:92
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
本論文旨在透過「修辭」以及「戲劇再現」兩種視角探討莎劇《亨利四世》(上)、
(下)及《亨利五世》中,關於馬基維利式權力建構的議題。本文將以維多利亞‧卡恩
(Victoria Kahn) 對於馬基維利名著《君王論》(The Prince)的重新詮釋,作為重探莎士比亞此三齣史劇的理論基礎。根據卡恩的論點,修辭與戲劇再現乃馬基維利政治思想中的兩項核 心概念。卡恩指出,馬基維利企圖藉由《君王論》闡述一要旨,亦即:君王的首要課題並非 學會如何「當」個稱頭的王,而是懂得如何「演」得像個稱頭的王;卡恩也表示,王權或政 權的本質,大體而言,往往建構於形象塑造或角色扮演的工夫上。事實上,此種將王權視為 一種演現(performance)的思考模式也同時存在於莎翁的三齣史劇之中。莎翁將霍爾王子(Prince Hal)──也就是後來的亨利五世(Henry V)──形塑成一位擅於利用表演以及辯才來鞏固自身權力的君主,試圖展現在操作權力的過程中,戲劇再現及修辭經常是不可或缺 的手段。藉由仔細重讀《君王論》、《亨利四世》(上)、(下)以及《亨利五世》,筆者發現馬基維利與莎士比亞均嘗試探究權劇再現之間的關係,並且以一種較為戲劇化的觀點重新思考政治的運作。更重要的是,從兩者作品間的相似之處,我們不但得以一窺文藝 復興時期的人如何以更為世俗的眼光反思政治的本質,亦能明瞭權力(或政治)與戲劇之間的界線並非總是涇渭分明。
This thesis aims to explore the topic of Machiavellian power construction in Shakespeare’s two parts of Henry IV and Henry V from the perspective of rhetoric and of theatrical representation. The main approach applied to the rereading of the three history plays is based on Victoria Kahn’s revisionary interpretation of Machiavelli’s Prince. According to Kahn, rhetoric and theatrical representation are the two key concepts in Machiavelli’s political thought. The most important message Machiavelli intends to convey in The Prince, she explains, is that the primary lesson that a prince is required to learn is not how to “be” a proper prince but how to “act” like a proper prince, suggesting that the essence of kingship or political power, to a great extent, is constructed upon image-making or role-play. Such a way of understanding that kingship as a performance, in fact, can also be found in Shakespeare’s two parts of Henry IV and Henry V. Through his portrayal of Prince Hal/Henry V as a monarch well understanding how to maintain power with the moderation of acting and eloquence, Shakespeare attempts to present the idea that theatrical representation and rhetoric are often used as indispensable methods in the practice of power. By carefully rereading The Prince and the three history plays, I discover that both Machiavelli and Shakespeare endeavor to investigate the relationship between power and theatrical representation, trying to reconsider the working of politics in a more theatrical aspect. More significantly, from the parallel between their works, we can not only see how Renaissance men reflect the essence of politics in a more secular view but also realize that the distinction between power (or politics) and theater can be very blurred at times.
Table of Contents i

Acknowledgement ii

English Abstract iii

Chinese Abstract iv

Chapter One: Introduction 1

Chapter Two:
Staging the Political Figure: the Idea of “Political Theater” in Machiavelli’s The Prince 7

Chapter Three:
Playing the Role of an Ideal Prince: The Representation of Hal’s Political Image and Rhetorical Skill in The Two Parts of Henry IV and Henry V 29

Chapter Four: Conclusion 55

Works Cited 61
Bulman, James C. “Henry IV, Parts 1 and 2.” Ed. Michael Hattaway. The
Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare’s History Plays. Cambridge:
Cambridge UP, 2002. 158-76.

Craik, T. W. Introduction. The Life of Henry the Fifth. By William Shakespeare.
Ed. T. W. Craik. The Arden Shakespeare: King Henry V. New York:
Routledge, 1995. 1-111.

Grady, Hugh. Shakespeare, Machiavelli, and Montaigne: Power and Subjectivity
from Richard II to Hamlet. New York: Oxford UP, 2002.

Grafton, Anthony. Introduction. The Prince. By Niccolo Machiavelli. Trans.
George Bull. London: Penguin, 1999. xv-xxix.

Greenblatt, Stephen. “Invisible Bullets.” Shakespearean Negotiations: The
Circulation of Social Energy in Renaissance England. Berkeley: U of
California P, 1988. 21-65.

Holderness, Graham. Shakespeare Recycled: The Making of Historical Drama.
Hertfordshire, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1992.

Howard, Jean E. “1 Henry IV.” Introduction. The History of Henry the Fourth.
By William Shakespeare. Eds. Stephen Greenblatt, Walter Cohen, Jean E.
Howard, and Katharine Eisaman Maus. The Norton Shakespeare. London:
Norton, 1997. 1147-56.

Humphreys, A. R. Introduction. The Second Part of King Henry the Fourth. By
William Shakespeare. Ed. A. R. Humphreys. The Arden Shakespeare: King
Henry IV, Part 2. London: Methuen, 1966. xi-xci.

Kahn, Victoria. Machiavellian Rhetoric: From the Counter-Reformation to
Milton. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1994.

Kastan, David Scott. Introduction. King Henry IV, Part One. By William
Shakespeare. Ed. David Scott Kastan. The Arden Shakespeare: King Henry
IV, Part 1. London: Thomson, 2002. 1-132.

Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince. Trans. Geogre Bull. London: Penguin, 1999.

---. The Discourses. Trans. Leslie J. Walker, S. J. London: Penguin, 2003.

---. The Prince. Trans. Russell Price. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2008.

Mason, Pamela. “Henry V: ‘the quick forge and working house of thought.’”
Ed. Michael Hattaway. The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare’s History
Plays. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2009. 177-92.

Maus, Katharine Eisaman. “Henry V.” Introduction. Greenblatt et al.: 1445-52.

McAlindon, Tom. “Testing the New Historicism: ‘Invisible Bullets’
Reconsidered.” Rev. of Renaissance Self-Fashioning: From More to
Shakespeare, by Stephen Greenblatt. Studies in Philology. Vol. 92, No. 4
(Autumn, 1995): 411-38.

Melchiori, Giorgio. Introduction. The Second Part of King Henry IV. By William
Shakespeare. Ed. Giorgio Melchiori. The New Cambridge Shakespeare: The
Second Part of King Henry IV. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1989. 1-52.

Pocock, J. G. A. The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and
the Atlantic Republican Tradition. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2003.

Raab, Felix. The English Face of Machiavelli: A Changing Interpretation 1500-
1700. New York: Routledge, 1964.

Ribner, Irving. “The Significance of Gentillet’s Contre-Machiavel.” Modern
Language Quarterly 10.2 (1949): 153-7.

Shakespeare, William. The True Tragedy of Richard Duke of York and the
Good King Henry the Sixth (3 Henry VI). Greenblatt et al.: 299-369.

---. The First Part of Henry the Sixth. Greenblatt et al.: 443-506.

---. The History of Henry the Fourth. Greenblatt et al.: 1157-1224.

---. The Merry Wives of Windsor. Greenblatt et al.: 1234-91.

---. The Second Part of Henry the Fourth. Greenblatt et al.: 1304-79.

---. The Life of Henry the Fifth. Greenblatt et al.: 1454-1523.

---. The Life of Henry the Fifth. T. W. Craik: 113-371.

---. The Life of Henry the Fifth. Ed. Andrew Gurr. The New Cambridge
Shakespeare: King Henry V. New York: Cambridge UP, 2005. 73-219.

---. The Life of Henry the Fifth. Ed. Gary Taylor. The Oxford Shakespeare:
Henry V. New York: Oxford UP, 2008. 87-281.

Skinner, Quentin. Introduction. The Prince. By Niccolo Machiavelli. Trans.
Russell Prince. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2008. ix-xxiv.

Spevack, Marvin. The Harvard Concordance to Shakespeare. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Belknap P of Harvard UP, 1974.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Ed. Edward N. Zalta. Stanford U. 15 June
2010. <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/machiavelli/#3>.

Taylor, Gary. Introduction. Taylor: 1-86.

Tillyard, E. M. W. Shakespeare’s History Plays. London: Penguin, 1944.

Vickers, Brian. Appropriating Shakespeare: Contemporary Critical Quarrels.
New Haven and London: Yale UP, 1993.

Walter, J. H. Introduction. King Henry V. By William Shakespeare. Ed. J. H.
Walter. The Arden Edition of the Works of William Shakespeare: King Henry
V. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard UP, 1954. xi-xlvii.

Wells, Stanley, Gary Taylor, John Jowett, and William Montgomery. William
Shakespeare: A Textual Companion. New York: Norton, 1997.

Wu, Tsung-wen (吳宗雯). Shakespeare’s Machiavellianism in Two Tetralogies:
King Richard III and King Henry IV. Thes. National Sun Yat-Sen U, 2001.
Kaohsiung: NSYSU, 2001.
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關期刊