메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
Fang Li (Hankuk University of Foreign Studies)
저널정보
19세기영어권문학회 19세기 영어권 문학 19세기 영어권 문학 제20권 제1호
발행연도
2016.2
수록면
229 - 251 (23page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
When the complete text of Oscar Wilde’s crie de coeur “De Profundis” was at last made available to the public sixty-five years after it was written, the poet W. H. Auden was unimpressed by its artistic manifesto but fascinated by its treatment of Wilde’s doomed romance with Lord Alfred Douglas. In this paper, we revisit and re-evaluate both, using the late Ruqaiya Hasan’s delicate distinction between “literary text,” in which the primary intention of a text is some act of communication in an extant context of situation, and “literature text,” in which the primary meaning lies in what Barthes calls a secondary order of semiosis-not necessarily a fictional one, but one which is not a communication in an immediate context of situation. Hasan finds that secondary acts of semiosis seem to create, through “symbolic articulation,” e.g. through stylized verbalization and through characterization, a constellation of themes that are supererogatory-a surplus of meaning that creates its own context. We argue that we can read the cuts made to the original manuscript when it was published in 1905 as the first step in transforming Wilde’s letter to his former lover from a literary text into a literature text, and we can read Wilde’s final work, “The Ballad of Reading Gaol,” as a belated but nevertheless successful fulfillment of its manifesto. While this reading foregrounds precisely those elements that Auden finds “childish and boring” and backgrounds those he finds replete with “the insight, the honesty, and unself-conscious style of a great writer,” it has the advantage of relegating the once central figure of Douglas to a position more appropriate to his stature in literary history: neither a tragic hero nor a comical villain, but a trivial footnote in the history of the production of literature texts.

목차

Introduction: Two Texts and Auden’s Appraisals
Repetitions and Incoherence
“Literary Text” and “Literature Text”: The Theoretical Distinction
“Literary Text” and “Literature Text”: The Empirical Differences
Wilde’s Post-Prison Writing
Conclusion: Reappraising Bosie’s Role
Works Cited
Abstract

참고문헌 (19)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2016-840-002680487