개인구독
소속 기관이 없으신 경우, 개인 정기구독을 하시면 저렴하게
논문을 무제한 열람 이용할 수 있어요.
지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Memory shapes many of Samuel Beckett’s plays. It seems that for Beckett memory plays a key role in understanding the human mind and behavior, on which he meditated throughout his entire life. Memory theory, thus, will help to illuminate a significant aspect of Beckett’s art. Commentators and scholars of Beckett studies typically employ theoretical discourses on memory based on a mechanistic view of the human mind, in which memory has been explained as a mechanism of retrieval. As a corollary, this mechanism of retrieval assumes past stored images or information that can be represented in the present act of recalling. This dual concept of memory involving both stored mental images and the process reactivating these images has been central to the tradition of memory theory. Meanwhile, advanced scientific investigations of our brain from the fields of neurophysiology and cognitive science provide us with the biological model of memory. Gerald M. Edelman introduces the concept of “reentry” to deploy his theory of Neural Darwinism. According to Edelman, memory is a process of continual recategorization because the brain has no replicative memory. Based on Edelman’s theory of embodied memory, I examine the subject of corporeality of memory through the discussion of Beckett’s three plays, Waiting for Godot, Krapp’s Last Tape, and Not I.
Beckett’s suspicion about memories and the integrity of the self is found as early as his Proust essay of 1931, which seems to reflect the inadequacy between the existing discourses on memory and Beckett’s own observation guided by Proust. Beckett’s characters have a defective memory and are uncertain about everything, even the existence of God. There is no stable basis for the outer world. Beckett’s unnamable voices seem to subvert the traditional concept of the self as a stable entity. Beckett’s characters are ungraspable due to this flow and only the constant babble the voices utter can prove what is happening in our brain. The metaphors Beckett uses, vessels containing the fluid of time, and decantation remind me of what Edelman considers to be a neurophysiological basis of human mind. For Beckett, the self, once observed in the Proustian sense in the dimension of time, is characterized by a constant change and the subject’s identity, which supposedly provides the stable medium, vanishes leaving no trace. For Beckett, as Edelman aptly observes, memory is not the authentic medium that constitutes identity, it is a (evolutionary) necessity to construct the fiction of the self, facilitating self-definition as well as the relationship to others and to the hostile environment.
The topic of time is closely related to memory. For Beckett, time is considered a subjective experience. His use of metaphor, “decantation of the fluid of time”, happening in the subject would support my statement. Edelman agrees with Beckett in this matter. He contends that because we have memory, we can construct the sense of time, past, present, and future. In this respect, Edelman’s neurophysiological explanation of memory serves as a useful framework to analyze Beckett’s works dealing with memory. In conclusion, I claim that Beckett’s memory plays demonstrate a shift in thinking about the mind, from a stable machine for retrieval to a dynamic interpretive processor.
Beckett’s suspicion about memories and the integrity of the self is found as early as his Proust essay of 1931, which seems to reflect the inadequacy between the existing discourses on memory and Beckett’s own observation guided by Proust. Beckett’s characters have a defective memory and are uncertain about everything, even the existence of God. There is no stable basis for the outer world. Beckett’s unnamable voices seem to subvert the traditional concept of the self as a stable entity. Beckett’s characters are ungraspable due to this flow and only the constant babble the voices utter can prove what is happening in our brain. The metaphors Beckett uses, vessels containing the fluid of time, and decantation remind me of what Edelman considers to be a neurophysiological basis of human mind. For Beckett, the self, once observed in the Proustian sense in the dimension of time, is characterized by a constant change and the subject’s identity, which supposedly provides the stable medium, vanishes leaving no trace. For Beckett, as Edelman aptly observes, memory is not the authentic medium that constitutes identity, it is a (evolutionary) necessity to construct the fiction of the self, facilitating self-definition as well as the relationship to others and to the hostile environment.
The topic of time is closely related to memory. For Beckett, time is considered a subjective experience. His use of metaphor, “decantation of the fluid of time”, happening in the subject would support my statement. Edelman agrees with Beckett in this matter. He contends that because we have memory, we can construct the sense of time, past, present, and future. In this respect, Edelman’s neurophysiological explanation of memory serves as a useful framework to analyze Beckett’s works dealing with memory. In conclusion, I claim that Beckett’s memory plays demonstrate a shift in thinking about the mind, from a stable machine for retrieval to a dynamic interpretive processor.
목차
Ⅰ. 들어가는 글
Ⅱ. 기억 이론의 전통과 베케트의 기억에 대한 사유
Ⅲ. 신경과학적 기억의 모델
Ⅳ. 기억과 자아의 재구성
Ⅴ. 기억의 객관성 vs. 습관: 자아의 정체성은 어디에 기초하는가?
Ⅵ. 기억의 생물학적 바탕: 뇌의 시냅스
Ⅶ. 나가는 글
인용문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (1)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
Beckett's Players are "not there"
현대영미드라마
1992 .08
-
Beckett의 작품에 나타나는 반복의 문제 : "부재"(不在)와의 관계를 중심으로
현대영미드라마
1999 .11
-
사무엘 베케트의 『놀이의 끝Fin de partie』의 극작법 전략
외국문학연구
2001 .06
-
Visual Beckett
신영어영문학
2009 .08
-
Samuel Beckett and Biography: ThreeBiographies and Krapp's Last Tape
영어영문학연구
2006 .01
-
베케트 극에 나타난 반복성의 제의적 의미
현대영미드라마
2001 .10
-
기억에 관한 기독교교육적 연구
기독교교육정보
2006 .12
-
Ambiguous Stage : Beckett's Scenography
현대영미드라마
2006 .04
-
비전에서 체화된 비전으로: 노울슨에서 맥뮬런으로 이어지는 베케트 연극미학론의 계보 분석
현대영미드라마
2019 .12
-
사무엘 베켓의 정치성
현대영미드라마
2006 .12
-
Beckett의 'nothing'과 Pinter의 'anything' 비교
현대영미드라마
1997 .08
-
사무엘 베켓의 평론을 통해 본 그의 작품세계
현대영미드라마
2005 .08
-
들뢰즈와 베케트의 이미지에 대한 사유 : 베케트의 텔레비전 드라마 . . .but the clouds. . .와 Nacht und Träume를 중심으로
현대영미드라마
2003 .08
-
Catastrophe : Beckett's Individualist Politics Manifested
현대영미드라마
2005 .04
-
All That Fall에 나타난 움직임과 언어의 무의미성 연구
현대영미드라마
2001 .10
-
Memory of the Day etc.
시조시학
2001 .09
-
진리의 윤리학과 벌거벗은 생명 : 바디우와 베케트
현대영미드라마
2011 .08
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-842-002943345