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.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2013.9
- 수록면
- 481 - 500 (20page)
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This article aims to interpret Antony and Cleopatra as an analogy of the mental apparatus of human nature. Through seeing this Roman history play as an analogy of human nature according to Freudian theory of psychoanalysis, we can reconsider why it is regarded as one of the most ambiguous plays of Shakespeare.
In Freudian theory, id is considered an original instinctual impulse while ego, the pleasure seeker, carries out the id’s intention. Superego is the apparatus whose function is to chide and repress the ego’s intention. According to this theory, Cleopatra, described as a serpent of old Nile, can be compared to id, specifically the sexual impulse, libido. Antony, one of the Roman triumvirates, neglects his responsibility in Rome and pursues pleasure in Egypt, thus becoming a symbol of the ego in human beings. Octavius Caesar, who holds power in Rome, consistently reprimands Antony for his wantonness, thus playing the role of superego.
Egypt, over which Cleopatra reigns, can be regarded as a barbarian world and Rome, the domain of Caesar, a world of law and order. Antony leaves Egypt for Rome and Rome for Egypt as the ego must in order to relate to the external reality. This creates a distance between the lovers. In being so distant, their mutual desire for unity also go astray. Ultimately, the desire to complete their love is accomplished only through death. Much like the instinctual id can not be completed by ego as it is controlled and repressed by superego, the love between Antony and Cleopatra fails. In their defeat in the Actium War, Antony and Cleopatra, in being beset by Caesar, exemplified how the needs of ego and id(Antony and Cleopatra) are irreconcilable with those of the superego, Caesar. Through the triumph of Caesar, the superego, and the suggestion of the renewal of the life force of the two lovers, there seems to be a kind of comic hope at the end of drama.
Because each character represents a part of human nature, the main characters in this drama necessarily look inconsistent and unrealistic with ambiguous and incompatible personalities. If we see the theme of this drama as not merely Antony’s love for Cleopatra, but their roles as symbols of the parts of human nature, their ambiguity can be understood. Through dramatization of the Plutarch’s Lives, Shakespeare again shows us truth about human nature.
In Freudian theory, id is considered an original instinctual impulse while ego, the pleasure seeker, carries out the id’s intention. Superego is the apparatus whose function is to chide and repress the ego’s intention. According to this theory, Cleopatra, described as a serpent of old Nile, can be compared to id, specifically the sexual impulse, libido. Antony, one of the Roman triumvirates, neglects his responsibility in Rome and pursues pleasure in Egypt, thus becoming a symbol of the ego in human beings. Octavius Caesar, who holds power in Rome, consistently reprimands Antony for his wantonness, thus playing the role of superego.
Egypt, over which Cleopatra reigns, can be regarded as a barbarian world and Rome, the domain of Caesar, a world of law and order. Antony leaves Egypt for Rome and Rome for Egypt as the ego must in order to relate to the external reality. This creates a distance between the lovers. In being so distant, their mutual desire for unity also go astray. Ultimately, the desire to complete their love is accomplished only through death. Much like the instinctual id can not be completed by ego as it is controlled and repressed by superego, the love between Antony and Cleopatra fails. In their defeat in the Actium War, Antony and Cleopatra, in being beset by Caesar, exemplified how the needs of ego and id(Antony and Cleopatra) are irreconcilable with those of the superego, Caesar. Through the triumph of Caesar, the superego, and the suggestion of the renewal of the life force of the two lovers, there seems to be a kind of comic hope at the end of drama.
Because each character represents a part of human nature, the main characters in this drama necessarily look inconsistent and unrealistic with ambiguous and incompatible personalities. If we see the theme of this drama as not merely Antony’s love for Cleopatra, but their roles as symbols of the parts of human nature, their ambiguity can be understood. Through dramatization of the Plutarch’s Lives, Shakespeare again shows us truth about human nature.
목차
1. 서론
2. 클레오파트라, 안토니, 옥타비우스의 정체성
3. 이드, 에고, 초자아의 역학관계
4. 결론
인용문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (26)
참고문헌 신청
1. [단행본] - Belsey, Catherine / 1996 / Cleopatra’s Seduction, In Alternative Shakespeare / Routledge : 38 ~ 62
2. [단행본] - Brown, John Russell / 2001 / Shakespeare: The Tragedies / Palgrave
3. [단행본] - Dollimore, Jonathan / 1984 / Radical Tragedy: Religion, Ideology and Power in the Drama of Shakespeare and His contemporaries / Harvester
4. [단행본] - Dowden, Edward / 1967 / Shakespeare: A Critical Study of His Mind and Art / Routledge
5. [단행본] - Fernie, Ewan / 2005 / Spiritual Shakespeares / Routledge
2. [단행본] - Brown, John Russell / 2001 / Shakespeare: The Tragedies / Palgrave
3. [단행본] - Dollimore, Jonathan / 1984 / Radical Tragedy: Religion, Ideology and Power in the Drama of Shakespeare and His contemporaries / Harvester
4. [단행본] - Dowden, Edward / 1967 / Shakespeare: A Critical Study of His Mind and Art / Routledge
5. [단행본] - Fernie, Ewan / 2005 / Spiritual Shakespeares / Routledge
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0