Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
The Oppressor and the Oppressed: A Study of Arthur Miller''s "The Crucible"
本論文以女性主義的觀點來分析亞瑟米勒（Arthur Miller）的《熔爐》（The Crucible）劇中的主要女性角色，並探討人性與權力慾望之間的關係。
第一章介紹米勒的寫作動機及巫術的起源。1950年代美國陷入共產主義的恐慌中，並掀起一股反共的熱潮。就在這股白色恐怖中，米勒有感而發創作此劇，以替無辜者發出不平之鳴。米勒讓觀眾看到1692年的冤獄及不合理的獵殺行動，進而引發新的省思。第二章到第四章是作品分析。第二章以女性主義的觀點分析Abigail 及 Elizabeth 在社會中的地位。西蒙‧波娃（Simone de Beauvoir）明白地指出：長久以來，女性都被視為「他者」（The Other）；女性是第二性，因為第一性已被男人自行決定了。Abigail 和Elizabeth兩位其實就是所有在父權社會中受壓迫的女性的縮影。第三章的觀點包括不論是凡人或神職人員，對於人性中的慾望及反叛性都很難克服，而這種反叛性格也可從作者創作此劇的形式中看出來。第四章則是談論文字、語言所代表的權威及此權威如何運作及壓迫個人。主要依傅科 （Foucault）觀點：正文本身的言談（discourse）並無真理或意義可言──意義是存在於正文本身跟讀者之間而已。第五章結論，總結前述論點。|
Abstract This thesis attempts to analyze the oppression on the main female characters in Arthur Miller's The Crucible in a feminist perspective. This thesis also discusses the relationship between human desires and power. First is the introduction which tells the background of this playwriting and the history of witchcraft. In the 1950s, the American people were surrounded by the fear of Communism and the anti-Communist activities were held frantically throughout the country. It was among the terror that Miller wanted to defend the innocent. The subsequent three chapters are the main body of this thesis. Chapter One analyzed the positions of Abigail and Elizabeth in the society. Simone de Beauvoir indicated that in history, women have been treated as “the Other.” Women have been the Second Sex only because the First Sex has been taken by men arbitrarily. Abigail and Elizabeth are actually the representatives of the oppressed ones in the patriarchal society. Chapter Two discusses the difficulty for people to resist the inner desires. For the mortal beings, even God's servants, it is hard to fight against desire and rebellion, which belong to the human nature. The rebellious act can also be seen in Miller's writing of this play. Chapter Three concentrates on the power and authority of written words and discourse, and how they work to oppress the crowd. For Foucault, the discourse of the text does not contain any truthfulness or meaning. The only meaning existes between the text and the reader. Finally is the conclusion which summarizes the foregoing discussions.
|Appears in Collections:||外國語文學系所|
Show full item record
TAIR Related Article
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.