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
Jonghwan Kim (Keimyung University)
저널정보
한국셰익스피어학회 Shakespeare Review Shakespeare Review Vol.56 No.4
발행연도
2020.12
수록면
645 - 663 (19page)

이용수

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

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
To traditional historicists, Falstaff in Shakespeare’s Henry IV and Henry V is a subversive force that must be observed and contained by the authority and power. However, to new historicists, Falstaff is a scapegoat who is manipulated and rejected by Prince Harry. The evaluation’s differences are due to the various premises between historical criticism and new-historicism on reality and history. Historicists have believed in the stability of history and reality. New historicists, however, do not believe in their stability. New historicists regard Prince Harry as a Machiavellian who manipulates Falstaff for his political purpose. In contrast, traditional historicists accept him as an ideal prince who emerged into the most powerful monarch who embodies ‘Tudor Myth.’ Prince Harry’s turning away from prodigal Falstaff is presented in the ‘Rejection of Falstaff’ scene. However, it cannot be considered a real transformation. Prince Harry is not changed but pretends to be changed. He is a self-conscious cunning figure who appropriates Falstaff for his political purpose, and the rejection of Falstaff shows the image of a hypocritical ruler and the cruel power mechanism operated by the display of power. This paper explores the political implication embedded in the rejection of Falstaff and the theatrical display of power in Shakespeare’s Henry IV and Henry V, focusing on manipulating others practiced by the political power concerning new historicism.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (26)

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