Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/7131
標題: 普羅斯伯羅的全視監獄:《暴風雨》的權力操演
Prospero''s Panopticon: Exercises of Power in The Tempest
作者: 廖郁淳
Liao, Yu-Chun
關鍵字: Shakespeare;莎士比亞;The Tempest;Prospero;Panopticon;Power;暴風雨;普羅斯伯羅;全視監獄;權力
出版社: 外國語文學系所
引用: Works Cited Barbour, Kathryn. “Flout ''em and Scout ''em and Scout em and Flout ''em: Prospero's Power and Punishments in The Tempest.” Shakespearean Power and Punishment. Ed. Gillian Murray Kendall. Cranbury: Associated UP, 1998, 159-172. Berges, Sandrine. “Plato, Nietzsche, and Sublimation.” <http://www.bilkent.edu.tr/~berges/Phron.htm>. Visited 27 December, 2008. Best, Michael. Shakespeare''s Life and Times. Internet Shakespeare Editions, University of Victoria: Victoria, BC, 2001-2005. <http://ise.uvic.ca/Library/SLT/>. Visited 29January, 2009. Bevington, David. Shakespeare Faces Retirement. Nora and Edward Ryerson Lecture at the University of Chicago. 1999. Bloom, Harold, ed. Modern Critical Interpretations: William Shakespeare''s The Tempest. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1988. Boas, Frederick S. Shakespeare and His Predecessors. New York: Charles Scribner''s Sons, 1896. Boyce, Charles. Dictionary of Shakespeare. UK: Wordsworth, 1996, 91, 193, 513. Brown, Paul. “This Thing of Darkness / I Acknowledge Mine: The Tempest and the Discourse of Colonialism.” Modern Critical Interpretation: William Shakespeare''s The Tempest. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1988, 99-112. Cookson, Linda, and Bryan Loughrey. The Tempest. London: Longman Group Limited, 1988. Copleston, Frederick Charles. A History of Philosophy. New York: Image, 1994. Dotterer, Ronald L. Shakespeare: Text, Subtext, and Context. Selinsgrove, Penn.: Susquehanna UP, 1989, 108. Dowden, Edward. Shakespere: A Critical Study of His Mind and Art‎. New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers and Distributors, 2003. Dreyfus, Hubert L., Paul Rabinow. “From the Repressive Hypothesis to Bio-power.” Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics. Chicago: U Of Chicago P, 1983. Durant, Will. The Story of Philosophy: The Lives and Opinions of The Great Philosophers. Simon and Schuster, 1926. Edwards, Phillip &quot;Shakespeare''s Romances, 1900-1957.&quot; Shakespeare Survey 11: 1-10. Cambridge: Cambridge UP 1958, 141. Evans, Gwynne Blakemore, ed. Riverside Shakespeare. Wilmington: Houghton Mifflin Company. 1974. Foster, Verna A. The Name and Nature of Tragicomedy. London: Ashgate, 2004. Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage Books, 1979. Grady, Hugh. “Shakespeare Criticism,1600-1900.” The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2001. 266-7. Hankins, J. E. “Caliban the Bestial Man.” P.M.L.A. LXII (Sept. 1947): 793-801. Hoy, David Couzens. “Power, Repression, Progress: Foucault, Luke, and the Frankfurt School.” Foucault: A Critical Reader. Ed. Hoy, David Couzens. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1986. Kermode, Frank. The Tempest. London: Methuen, 1954. Montaigne, Michel. “Of Cannibals.” The Complete Essays of Montaigne. 1580. Ed. Donald M. Frame. Stanford: Stanford UP, 1948 Moore, Roger. &quot;The Tempest: Prospero and Shakespeare.&quot; eNotes: The Tempest. Ed. Penny Satoris. Seattle: Enotes.com Inc, October 2002. eNotes.com. <http://www.enotes.com/tempest/prospero-shakespeare>. Visited 28 January, 2009. Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm. Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Trans. T. Common. Plain Label Books, 1967. --------. The Will to Power. Trans. Walter Arnold Kaufmann, Walter Kaufmann, R. J. Hollingdale. Vintage Books, 1968. Orgel, Stephen. “Prospero''s Wife.” Modern Critical Interpretations: The Tempest.” Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1988, 99-112. Palmer, D. J., ed. Shakespeare: The Tempest. London: Macmillan Press Ltd, 1968. Rooney, Kathy, ed. Encarta World English Dictionary. London: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 1999. Rouse, Joseph. “Power / Knowledge.” The Cambridge Companion to Foucault. Ed. Gary Gutting. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1994. Schwartz, Debora B. “Shakespeare''s Four Final Plays: the Romances.” California Polytechnic State University. 1996-2005. http://72.14.235.132/search?q=cache:dnYO-WCChTUJ:cla.calpoly.edu/~dschwart/engl339/romance.html+Shakespeare%E2%80%99s+Four+Final+Plays:+the+Romances,+Schwartz&hl=zh-TW&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=tw. Visited 10 October, 2008. Seiden, Melvin. “Utopianism in The Tempest.” Modern Language Quarterly 31(1970): 3-21. Skura, Meredith Anne. “Discourse and the Individual: The Case of Colonialism in The Tempest.” Shakespeare: An Anthology of Criticism and Theory, 1945-2000‎. Ed. Russ McDonald. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2004. Strier, Richard. “''I am Power'': normal and magical politics in The Tempest.” Writing and Political Engagement in Seventeenth-Century England. Ed. Derek Hirst and Richard Strier. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1999, 10-30. Thilly, Frank. A History of Philosophy. New York: Herry Holt and Co., 1951. Urmson, J. O. and Jonathan R&eacute;e. The Concise Encyclopedia of Western Philosophy and Philosopher. British: Taylor & Francis Group, 2005. Vaughan, Alden T., and Virginia Mason Vaughan. Shakespeare's Caliban: A Cultural History. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1991. Young, Alan R. “Prospero''s Table: The Name of Shakespeare's Duke Milan.” Shakespeare Quarterly 30.3 (1979) Summer: 408-10.
摘要: 
本論文引用尼采(Nietzsche)及傅柯(Foucault)的權力理論來探討莎士比亞《暴風雨》中之權力操演,藉以研究分析劇中複雜多變的權力關係,並反映出莎士比亞一生創作對「權力」的深刻詮釋。此劇乃莎士比亞一生最後一部獨力完成作品,而劇中豐富且巧妙的權力關係安排,不失為其在人生最後階段中,針對社會裡無法避免的權力爭奪,所提出完美的、建議性的解決之道。
在此篇論文中,筆者引用尼采提出之「權力意志」(Will to Power)理論,探討劇中每個角色不同程度地展現出對權力掌控的渴望及追求;其中主角普羅斯伯羅更是幾乎達到尼采所謂「超人」(Superman)之境界。另也引用傅柯對權力運作的詮釋,分析劇中每個權力關係中的施為者(agent)、目標(target)、及施展權力的方法,並研究普羅斯伯羅如何以幾近藝術般的高度技巧來施展其權力,達成其目標。而傅柯在《規訓與懲罰》一書中引用邊沁 (Bentham) 提出之「全視監獄」(Panopticon)概念,亦可用來詮釋此劇中的場景。普羅斯伯羅所統治的小島,幾乎可說是「全視監獄」的實踐,其中角色不但具有監獄與犯人的關係,更同時具有多種主僕關係,進而展現出豐富的權力對抗模式。
如同此劇劇名「暴風雨」所暗示的,權力之於人亦有如暴風雨。它可以是破壞力量、也可以是保存力量,可以是正面、也可以是負面,端看個人如何拿捏。除了掌控權力,如何能像普羅斯伯羅一般,在適當時機不顧一切地放下權力,才是人生中最難習得的一門課題。

This thesis aims to discuss the exercises of power in Shakespeare''s The Tempest by adopting Nietzsche''s and Foucault''s power theories. Through the analyses of diverse and complicated power relationships in this play, we can observe Shakespeare''s preference to and insight into the theme of power. As the last play allegedly written all by Shakespeare, The Tempest contains various kinds of power relationships, and its implied understanding may be regarded as his last suggestive resolution for the power struggles in the human world.
In this thesis, Nietzsche''s theory of“will to power” is used to interpret the characters'' desire and pursuit of power. Among the characters, the protagonist Prospero has shown the strongest will to power, and he almost approaches Nietzsche''s ideal of “Superman.” On the other hand, Foucault''s theory of power is also used to interpret this play. Analyses are made of the power relationships within the play in regard to the agents, targets, and the ways of exercising power. The case of Prospero can be seen as an excellent example to explore how to exercise power artfully. The idea of a Panopticon can be applied to Prospero''s island; the characters on it are Prospero''s prisoners in a sense. Moreover, there are also master/slave relationships as well as the contrast of nature with nurture on it.
As the title of the play suggests, the tempest can be regarded as a symbol of power. It can be seen as a power of destruction or preservation; it can be regarded as a negative or positive power. As suggested by Prospero''s case, knowing how to discard one''s power at the most critical moment is a more important lesson one should learn than knowing how to hold one''s power.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/7131
其他識別: U0005-1603200910320300
Appears in Collections:外國語文學系所

Show full item record
 

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.