English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 6481/11653
Visitors : 22962677      Online Users : 104
RC Version 3.2 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Adv. Search
LoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://ir.ncue.edu.tw/ir/handle/987654321/9806

Title: Desire, Lack, Objet a: Quomodo's and Iago's Jouissance of Play-writing
慾望、匱缺、小對物:闊莫多與伊亞戈的編劇原樂
Authors: 儲湘君
Contributors: 英語學系
Keywords: Desire;Lack;Objet a;Jouissance;Michaelmas term;Othello;Playwright-character;Lacan;Gaze
慾望;匱缺;小對物;原樂;米迦勒節開庭期;奧賽羅;劇作家似人物;拉岡;觀視
Date: 2005-11
Issue Date: 2012-04-26T09:11:02Z
Publisher: 彰化師大文學院
Abstract: This study compares two stage villains--Quomodo in Michaelmas Term and Iago in Othello--in their unparalleled genius of “dramaturgy.” They are playwright-characteristers: They dramatize roles for themselves or for others, create mini-plays to deceive others, and improvise action with any available resources. Quomodo lies, cheats, plays tricks, and disregards morality and conscience in order to seize a piece of land from a young gallant Esay. He dupes the latter with a commodity scam, which involves cunning operations of polts, disguises and traps. Iago, in an even more sophisticate way, carefully and calculatingly composes scripts for all of his fellow characters. He manipulates the illusion to the extent that it becomes reality for Othello, who is taken in by false appearance and smothers Desdemona in fits of jealousy and rage initiated and intensified by the malicious show staged by Iago. Both plays highlight the dialectic of illusion and reality, imagination and truth. They reveal the artificial construction of meaning. In addition, drawing on Lacanian theory of the subject of lack, I would like to point out that these tricksters' manipulations of others mark out their desire and lack. To temporarily fill up the hole of lack, they acquire some satisfaction from the sheer pleasure of invention and construction of plots and of seeing how they work. It is a Jouissance of form, which is charged with erotic dynamics and repetition compulsion. But they are doomed to encounter their void and lack because they take the Lacanian object a to be a stand-in for the lost object that satisfies their desire.
本論文比較《米迦勒節開庭期》的闊莫多與《奧塞羅》的伊亞戈兩位劇作家似人物,他們有如劇作家般運用過人的機智與想像形塑假象、操控他人、設計戲中戲欺敵、甚至就地取材即興演出。闊莫多為了奪取易立的土地,他說謊、詐騙、施計,不顧道德規範與良心譴責,讓初到城市的年輕仕紳易立以地契交換不值錢的布匹。同樣地,伊亞戈小心翼翼策劃一齣精心製作的復仇劇,報復奧塞羅、凱西歐等人。經由獨白,伊亞戈將計謀與觀眾分享,由於他精巧的編排,奧塞羅聽信了伊亞戈所捏造的故事,憤而勒死妻子黛絲蒙娜。這兩齣戲都凸顯出虛幻與現實、想像與真實的辯證,呈現意義的建構過程。另外,從拉岡的匱乏主體理論觀之,劇作家似的人物對他人的操控暴露出他們的深層慾望,進而標示出他們的匱缺。他們藉著操控別人,得到形式所帶來的原樂,藉著強制性的重複,企求填補自身的匱乏。但是,他們終將面對主體的匱缺與空白,因為兩人誤將拉岡提出的小對物當作早已失落的慾望物。
Relation: 彰化師大文學院學報, 4: 163-189
Appears in Collections:[英語學系] 期刊論文

Files in This Item:

File SizeFormat
2040201110006.pdf1217KbAdobe PDF433View/Open


All items in NCUEIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

 


DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback