『픽윅 페이퍼즈』와『데이빗 코퍼필드』를 중심으로 에 나타나는 코믹 인물을 민속 축제적인 인물형식인 어릿광대, 악당, 바보와 비교하여 살펴보고, 『픽윅 페이퍼즈』와『데이빗 코퍼필드』, 『리틀 도릿』의 언어에 있어서 혼종화, 대화화 양상을 고찰했다. 디킨즈의 코믹인물에 있어서의 카니발적 성격화와 그들에 의한 사회비판의 카니발화는 사회 사회문제로 혹은 사회폭력으로까지 나타나는 사회통념으로 고착된 기존의 모든 가치 혹은 이데올로기를 가능한 우스꽝스럽고 낯설게 제시함으로써 통념에 의한 인간성의 왜곡과 인간관계의 단절을 회복시키는데 그 초점이 맞춰졌다. 이러한 인간성의 왜곡과 인간관계의 단절은 바흐친 식으로 말하자면 기존의 잘못된 대상-관념 연계에 의한 결과물이라고 볼 수 있는데, 소설가 디킨즈는 사회문제를 지배층이나 지배 이데올로기의 문제로 통찰했다는 점에서 바흐친이나 라블레와 인식을 같이했던 것으로 보인다. 라블레처럼 그는 기존의 모든 잘못된 대상-관념 연계를 거꾸로 혹은 앞뒤를 뒤바꿔서, 즉 카니발적으로 제시함으로써 그 오류를 인식시켰다고 볼 수 있다. 카니발적인 언어구사는 소설에 이질어들을 유입시키는 주요요인 중 하나로 디킨즈 소설에 다양한 이질어가 넘쳐나는 것도 그가 언어를 카니발적으로 구사하고 있기 때문이다. 앞에서 우리는 디킨즈 소설 속에 유입되어 있는 모든 이질어를 바흐친의 혼종화 개념으로 포괄하여 작가의 말과 그들 간의 대화적 상관관계를 살펴보았다. 그 결과 디킨즈 소설은 사회문제의 핵심을 통과하는 단어나 문구가 필요에 따라서는 타 장르 요소를 아주 다양하게 혼종화하는 양상을 보이고 있었는데, 이처럼 다양한 이질어의 혼종화를 가능하게 한 것은 바흐친이 말하는 코믹-패로디적 재처리라는 특수한 방법이라는 설명이 가능하다. 다시 말해 디킨즈는 소설언어에 직접적인 혼종화가 불가능해 보이는 이질어들을 패로디적으로 처리함으로써 작가 자신의 견해가 객관적인 것처럼 서술하고 있었으며, 그것도 모두를 유쾌하게 웃게 하기 위하여 과장이나 ...
『픽윅 페이퍼즈』와『데이빗 코퍼필드』를 중심으로 에 나타나는 코믹 인물을 민속 축제적인 인물형식인 어릿광대, 악당, 바보와 비교하여 살펴보고, 『픽윅 페이퍼즈』와『데이빗 코퍼필드』, 『리틀 도릿』의 언어에 있어서 혼종화, 대화화 양상을 고찰했다. 디킨즈의 코믹인물에 있어서의 카니발적 성격화와 그들에 의한 사회비판의 카니발화는 사회 사회문제로 혹은 사회폭력으로까지 나타나는 사회통념으로 고착된 기존의 모든 가치 혹은 이데올로기를 가능한 우스꽝스럽고 낯설게 제시함으로써 통념에 의한 인간성의 왜곡과 인간관계의 단절을 회복시키는데 그 초점이 맞춰졌다. 이러한 인간성의 왜곡과 인간관계의 단절은 바흐친 식으로 말하자면 기존의 잘못된 대상-관념 연계에 의한 결과물이라고 볼 수 있는데, 소설가 디킨즈는 사회문제를 지배층이나 지배 이데올로기의 문제로 통찰했다는 점에서 바흐친이나 라블레와 인식을 같이했던 것으로 보인다. 라블레처럼 그는 기존의 모든 잘못된 대상-관념 연계를 거꾸로 혹은 앞뒤를 뒤바꿔서, 즉 카니발적으로 제시함으로써 그 오류를 인식시켰다고 볼 수 있다. 카니발적인 언어구사는 소설에 이질어들을 유입시키는 주요요인 중 하나로 디킨즈 소설에 다양한 이질어가 넘쳐나는 것도 그가 언어를 카니발적으로 구사하고 있기 때문이다. 앞에서 우리는 디킨즈 소설 속에 유입되어 있는 모든 이질어를 바흐친의 혼종화 개념으로 포괄하여 작가의 말과 그들 간의 대화적 상관관계를 살펴보았다. 그 결과 디킨즈 소설은 사회문제의 핵심을 통과하는 단어나 문구가 필요에 따라서는 타 장르 요소를 아주 다양하게 혼종화하는 양상을 보이고 있었는데, 이처럼 다양한 이질어의 혼종화를 가능하게 한 것은 바흐친이 말하는 코믹-패로디적 재처리라는 특수한 방법이라는 설명이 가능하다. 다시 말해 디킨즈는 소설언어에 직접적인 혼종화가 불가능해 보이는 이질어들을 패로디적으로 처리함으로써 작가 자신의 견해가 객관적인 것처럼 서술하고 있었으며, 그것도 모두를 유쾌하게 웃게 하기 위하여 과장이나 그로테스크, 낯설게 하기, 말장난, 반복, 문장 전환하기 등 다양한 수사법과 문법적 변형을 통하여 가능한 우스꽝스럽게 패로디하고 있었다. 디킨즈는 이 코믹-패로디적 재처리 방법을 이용하여 거의 모든 수준의 모든 이질어들을 혼종화할 수 있었던 것이다.
『픽윅 페이퍼즈』와『데이빗 코퍼필드』를 중심으로 에 나타나는 코믹 인물을 민속 축제적인 인물형식인 어릿광대, 악당, 바보와 비교하여 살펴보고, 『픽윅 페이퍼즈』와『데이빗 코퍼필드』, 『리틀 도릿』의 언어에 있어서 혼종화, 대화화 양상을 고찰했다. 디킨즈의 코믹인물에 있어서의 카니발적 성격화와 그들에 의한 사회비판의 카니발화는 사회 사회문제로 혹은 사회폭력으로까지 나타나는 사회통념으로 고착된 기존의 모든 가치 혹은 이데올로기를 가능한 우스꽝스럽고 낯설게 제시함으로써 통념에 의한 인간성의 왜곡과 인간관계의 단절을 회복시키는데 그 초점이 맞춰졌다. 이러한 인간성의 왜곡과 인간관계의 단절은 바흐친 식으로 말하자면 기존의 잘못된 대상-관념 연계에 의한 결과물이라고 볼 수 있는데, 소설가 디킨즈는 사회문제를 지배층이나 지배 이데올로기의 문제로 통찰했다는 점에서 바흐친이나 라블레와 인식을 같이했던 것으로 보인다. 라블레처럼 그는 기존의 모든 잘못된 대상-관념 연계를 거꾸로 혹은 앞뒤를 뒤바꿔서, 즉 카니발적으로 제시함으로써 그 오류를 인식시켰다고 볼 수 있다. 카니발적인 언어구사는 소설에 이질어들을 유입시키는 주요요인 중 하나로 디킨즈 소설에 다양한 이질어가 넘쳐나는 것도 그가 언어를 카니발적으로 구사하고 있기 때문이다. 앞에서 우리는 디킨즈 소설 속에 유입되어 있는 모든 이질어를 바흐친의 혼종화 개념으로 포괄하여 작가의 말과 그들 간의 대화적 상관관계를 살펴보았다. 그 결과 디킨즈 소설은 사회문제의 핵심을 통과하는 단어나 문구가 필요에 따라서는 타 장르 요소를 아주 다양하게 혼종화하는 양상을 보이고 있었는데, 이처럼 다양한 이질어의 혼종화를 가능하게 한 것은 바흐친이 말하는 코믹-패로디적 재처리라는 특수한 방법이라는 설명이 가능하다. 다시 말해 디킨즈는 소설언어에 직접적인 혼종화가 불가능해 보이는 이질어들을 패로디적으로 처리함으로써 작가 자신의 견해가 객관적인 것처럼 서술하고 있었으며, 그것도 모두를 유쾌하게 웃게 하기 위하여 과장이나 그로테스크, 낯설게 하기, 말장난, 반복, 문장 전환하기 등 다양한 수사법과 문법적 변형을 통하여 가능한 우스꽝스럽게 패로디하고 있었다. 디킨즈는 이 코믹-패로디적 재처리 방법을 이용하여 거의 모든 수준의 모든 이질어들을 혼종화할 수 있었던 것이다.
This thesis aims to approach Dickens''s novels in the carnivalesque point of view of M. M. Bakhtin, who was a famous Russian theorist. So far Dickens''s novels have been known as comic ones, including lots of socially critical meanings. But it is true that we didn''t make sure of the clear reasons w...
This thesis aims to approach Dickens''s novels in the carnivalesque point of view of M. M. Bakhtin, who was a famous Russian theorist. So far Dickens''s novels have been known as comic ones, including lots of socially critical meanings. But it is true that we didn''t make sure of the clear reasons why they are so interesting and critical alike. But the articles dealing with the comicality are not as many as are supposed to be. Some articles are on the basis of Henri Bergson''s laughter theory, such as James R. Kincaid''s Dickens and the Rhetoric of Laughter and Bank Sylvia Manning''s Dickens a Satirist, and others including Northrop Frye''s ideas. As such ideas are composed through approaching comedy, both Bergson''s and Frye''s essentially appear to have aspects which are not suitable for the novel genre. These theories show the discord between the character''s actions and words, which makes readers laugh. For example, when a character''s property is replaced by an animal''s, readers laugh. But in most cases of Dickens''s when the former and the latter are reversed it seems to cause laughter. As a matter of fact, almost everything tends to be reversed in Dickens''s novels, especially in The Posthumous Papers of Pickwick Club. This is the reason why Dickens''s humor should be called a carnivalesque one. Because most of the reversed images of characters are reflected by the values of classes, Dickens''s humor carries extremely radical social criticism. Bakhtin thinks what we all are always oppressed by ― social ideologies, and, otherwise, even by psychological self-checks ― prevents us from our having desirable relationships and, as a result, causes us to alienate one another, forces our society to be separated, and social antipathy spread. He also thinks laughter is what liberates us from the bad influences of such ideologies, and makes us recover our good relationships and integrates our society in a sensible way. In this point of view Bakhtin studied the laughter in the carnival of the Middle Ages and how its properties had a great influence on Rabelais''s novels. At last he holds that the carnival-laughter in Rabelais''s novels appears to have an authentic power of liberation. As Bakhtin argues, there are clowns, rogues, and fools in the carnival of the Middle Ages, who led the carnival-amusements, such as putting out others'' candles, crowning and decrowning their czar, and burning the dummy of their czar with vital and joyful laughter. And Rabelais modelled after them and created his characters. As time has passed, the clowns, rogues, and fools in the carnival have effected all literary genres and cultures. The influence on public genres is the most outstanding. Dickens, who liked public amusements and plays, created his characters, Pickwick and Sam, the Micawbers and so on by using such carnival-characters. Furthermore, Dickens criticized his social ideologies, such as Victorianism, reason-centered thought, the Christian view of death, mammonism, commercialism, industrialism, social system etc. through comic happenings similar to public and carnivalesque amusments. He makes his readers laugh and know what are the ideological absurdities of his society, showing such social dominant ideologies by decrowning the authority of his characters like Pickwick and on the other hand, crowning the strengths of his ones like Sam, the Micawbers, Mr Dick, etc.. As Bakhtin argues in the study of Rabelais''s novels, droll behaviors are to show and destroy the wrong links of object-idea. That is true in many of Dickens''s novels. First of all, it goes without saying that most of his characters'' comic behaviors contain Dickens''s critical comments. Dickens can accomplish both laughter and social criticism in The Posthumous Papers of Pickwick Club and David Copperfield. He materializes the established links of object-idea as ridiculously as possible through his comic characters'' droll behaviors, and shows the links are distorted by social ideologies because all object-idea links are combined according to the logic of object. Like Bakhtin and Rabelais, he seems to believe that when we all realize such unnatural links we can liberate ourselves from the oppression of social ideologies, have desirable relationships between us, and solve social problems positively. Besides, Dickens represents his social criticism through the relevant heteroglossia, with which his language has an inclination to be hybridized with many real meanings in the social and historical contexts at that time. In Bakhtin''s standpoint Dickens''s novel can be said to have as many viewpoints as the heteroglossia hybridized there. By means of such hybridization Dickens can maintain the proper distance in his narration and, as Bakhtin indicated, avoid not only its pathos-charged expression, but also its Sentimental one. So his novel becomes a field through which many social problems in those days are able to be discussed. Moreover Dickens makes his narrator extol his criticized characters, and such false praises look like those of many other people by hybridizing different voices, for instance public opinion in the case of Little Dorrit. As a result their false praises come to reaccentuate the author''s socio-critical meanings by making them objective. For this reason Bakhtin calls the public opinion hybridized in that novel an example of pseudo-objective motivation. There are many examples making the narrator''s praises objective but eventually ridiculous, such as the Biblical style, epic style and so forth, especially in the narration of the Merdles and the Barnacles. That is why it is called a parody. However Dickens'' narrator praises some overpowered characters like Amy Dorrit by using the historical and epic style, and such are real praises. Especially in the case of Amy the lyric style is often used, which can be called a parody in that her life isn''t like that of William Wordsworth''s heroine Lucy parodied in this novel. In most cases Dickens''s narration is upside-down, that is to say carnivalesque. In other words his humor can be carnivalesque. In sum Dickens creates his novel as a carnival world through the hierarchical reversion in the images of his characters and his style. His novel''s time and space are recreated as the ones that all people can liberate themselves from the ruling social ideologies, revive their good personalities, and have desirable relationships with others. Also his language reveals the structure stratified by plenty of heteroglossia, mainly through his parodic method, and filled with, as Bakhtin discusses, socio-ideological belief systems. These heteroglossia utilized to refract the author''s intentions are unmasked and destroyed as something false, hypocritical, greedy, limited, narrowly rationalistic, and inadequate to reality.
This thesis aims to approach Dickens''s novels in the carnivalesque point of view of M. M. Bakhtin, who was a famous Russian theorist. So far Dickens''s novels have been known as comic ones, including lots of socially critical meanings. But it is true that we didn''t make sure of the clear reasons why they are so interesting and critical alike. But the articles dealing with the comicality are not as many as are supposed to be. Some articles are on the basis of Henri Bergson''s laughter theory, such as James R. Kincaid''s Dickens and the Rhetoric of Laughter and Bank Sylvia Manning''s Dickens a Satirist, and others including Northrop Frye''s ideas. As such ideas are composed through approaching comedy, both Bergson''s and Frye''s essentially appear to have aspects which are not suitable for the novel genre. These theories show the discord between the character''s actions and words, which makes readers laugh. For example, when a character''s property is replaced by an animal''s, readers laugh. But in most cases of Dickens''s when the former and the latter are reversed it seems to cause laughter. As a matter of fact, almost everything tends to be reversed in Dickens''s novels, especially in The Posthumous Papers of Pickwick Club. This is the reason why Dickens''s humor should be called a carnivalesque one. Because most of the reversed images of characters are reflected by the values of classes, Dickens''s humor carries extremely radical social criticism. Bakhtin thinks what we all are always oppressed by ― social ideologies, and, otherwise, even by psychological self-checks ― prevents us from our having desirable relationships and, as a result, causes us to alienate one another, forces our society to be separated, and social antipathy spread. He also thinks laughter is what liberates us from the bad influences of such ideologies, and makes us recover our good relationships and integrates our society in a sensible way. In this point of view Bakhtin studied the laughter in the carnival of the Middle Ages and how its properties had a great influence on Rabelais''s novels. At last he holds that the carnival-laughter in Rabelais''s novels appears to have an authentic power of liberation. As Bakhtin argues, there are clowns, rogues, and fools in the carnival of the Middle Ages, who led the carnival-amusements, such as putting out others'' candles, crowning and decrowning their czar, and burning the dummy of their czar with vital and joyful laughter. And Rabelais modelled after them and created his characters. As time has passed, the clowns, rogues, and fools in the carnival have effected all literary genres and cultures. The influence on public genres is the most outstanding. Dickens, who liked public amusements and plays, created his characters, Pickwick and Sam, the Micawbers and so on by using such carnival-characters. Furthermore, Dickens criticized his social ideologies, such as Victorianism, reason-centered thought, the Christian view of death, mammonism, commercialism, industrialism, social system etc. through comic happenings similar to public and carnivalesque amusments. He makes his readers laugh and know what are the ideological absurdities of his society, showing such social dominant ideologies by decrowning the authority of his characters like Pickwick and on the other hand, crowning the strengths of his ones like Sam, the Micawbers, Mr Dick, etc.. As Bakhtin argues in the study of Rabelais''s novels, droll behaviors are to show and destroy the wrong links of object-idea. That is true in many of Dickens''s novels. First of all, it goes without saying that most of his characters'' comic behaviors contain Dickens''s critical comments. Dickens can accomplish both laughter and social criticism in The Posthumous Papers of Pickwick Club and David Copperfield. He materializes the established links of object-idea as ridiculously as possible through his comic characters'' droll behaviors, and shows the links are distorted by social ideologies because all object-idea links are combined according to the logic of object. Like Bakhtin and Rabelais, he seems to believe that when we all realize such unnatural links we can liberate ourselves from the oppression of social ideologies, have desirable relationships between us, and solve social problems positively. Besides, Dickens represents his social criticism through the relevant heteroglossia, with which his language has an inclination to be hybridized with many real meanings in the social and historical contexts at that time. In Bakhtin''s standpoint Dickens''s novel can be said to have as many viewpoints as the heteroglossia hybridized there. By means of such hybridization Dickens can maintain the proper distance in his narration and, as Bakhtin indicated, avoid not only its pathos-charged expression, but also its Sentimental one. So his novel becomes a field through which many social problems in those days are able to be discussed. Moreover Dickens makes his narrator extol his criticized characters, and such false praises look like those of many other people by hybridizing different voices, for instance public opinion in the case of Little Dorrit. As a result their false praises come to reaccentuate the author''s socio-critical meanings by making them objective. For this reason Bakhtin calls the public opinion hybridized in that novel an example of pseudo-objective motivation. There are many examples making the narrator''s praises objective but eventually ridiculous, such as the Biblical style, epic style and so forth, especially in the narration of the Merdles and the Barnacles. That is why it is called a parody. However Dickens'' narrator praises some overpowered characters like Amy Dorrit by using the historical and epic style, and such are real praises. Especially in the case of Amy the lyric style is often used, which can be called a parody in that her life isn''t like that of William Wordsworth''s heroine Lucy parodied in this novel. In most cases Dickens''s narration is upside-down, that is to say carnivalesque. In other words his humor can be carnivalesque. In sum Dickens creates his novel as a carnival world through the hierarchical reversion in the images of his characters and his style. His novel''s time and space are recreated as the ones that all people can liberate themselves from the ruling social ideologies, revive their good personalities, and have desirable relationships with others. Also his language reveals the structure stratified by plenty of heteroglossia, mainly through his parodic method, and filled with, as Bakhtin discusses, socio-ideological belief systems. These heteroglossia utilized to refract the author''s intentions are unmasked and destroyed as something false, hypocritical, greedy, limited, narrowly rationalistic, and inadequate to reality.
AI-Helper
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.