阐释爱情故事内涵的语言巨匠：莎士比亚《爱的徒劳》、《仲夏夜之梦》、《罗密欧与朱丽叶》研究
|
摘要
济慈在其诗作《希腊古瓮颂》里说：“美即真，真即美”。人类对于美的追求和表达常常诉诸于音乐、舞蹈、美术、文学等各种艺术形式，而这些艺术形式所力求的情趣各异的美的外现之下又总是有共通、相融的内涵与实质。换句话说，伟大的艺术作品，基于其艺术形式，会作用于人的相应感官，但是在感官刺激享受之后往往会给人带来涤荡心灵、滋养灵魂的感悟和启迪，而这种感悟和启迪正是源于作品蕴含的“美”之中闪烁的真理。如果某个艺术领域的作品不断成为其他艺术领域创作者的灵感来源，那么这个作品中所蕴含的“美”就不仅仅是一种光彩璀璨、慑人心魄的表象的美，而是一种于无数细微处折射出真理的、永恒的“美”。这种美与真理的交织是艺术家们倾尽毕生所追求的状态，也是一种超脱出具体艺术形式局限的神圣的感召力。
从这一点来讲，莎士比亚的戏剧是具备无穷魅力的艺术作品。对于普通读者，他的作品不仅可以带来源于认同的愉悦，而且具备启迪心智、解放灵魂的功效；对于各个领域的艺术创作者，则是无数音乐、舞蹈、表演等伟大艺术作品的母体。而这其中，最引人瞩目的是莎士比亚的《罗密欧与朱丽叶》。仅在音乐领域，它便引燃了柏辽兹、普罗柯菲耶夫、柴可夫斯基等音乐巨匠的创作激情，催生出诸篇不朽的音乐作品，类似于这种文学作品对于音乐产生的宏大影响力应该是绝无仅有的。同时，作为最活跃于舞台的莎剧作品之一，它是舞蹈、表演等领域的宠儿，被巴黎国家歌剧院颂赞为“舞蹈家的梦想”。正是《罗密欧与朱丽叶》的这种熊熊燃烧于音乐、舞蹈、表演等领域的旺盛不息的生命力，引发了我对这部经典的爱情剧进行细读、欣赏和分析的热情。
但是，正像诗人艾略特所言，若想对莎士比亚的某一部作品有一个全面、到位的认识和把握，就得熟悉他前前后后的其余作品。换句话说，必须在了解莎士比亚的所有作品之后，才可能真正了解他其中的某一部作品。这当然是理想的状态，但对我的启迪是，我应该把他同时期的、相近题材的戏剧放在一起进行参照性分析和研究，这样才可能在更深的层次挖掘出莎士比亚笔下爱情故事的“美”之所在，感受、领悟这位人类最伟大的剧作家如何将爱情故事“讲”到极致，以期进而探讨作品所折射出的一些爱情“真理”。因此，本论文最终选定了莎士比亚在1590至1600年间创作的三部以爱情为主题的戏剧作为研究对象，分别是：《爱的徒劳》，《仲夏夜之梦》和《罗密欧与朱丽叶》。在对这三部剧的分析过程中，会引入莎翁《十四行诗》和其他一些戏剧作为对比、参照和例证。
经典的音乐作品，总是博得一代又一代表演大师们的青睐，他们不甘心止于前人的伟大努力、也不慑于他人的精彩表演，而是通过让作品与具备特质的自我进行美妙结合产生的独特魅力，在音乐表演史上留下自己或深或浅的印痕。在文学批评领域，情形亦然。数百年来，对于莎翁的作品，文学评论家们从不同的视角、采用不同的批评手法已经进行了深入的探索和演绎，其中包括文学新批评主义、结构主义、解构主义、心理分析、女性主义等等解读，各门各类的专家、学者为全世界文学爱好、研究者提供了浩如烟海的作品评论。对于我而言，文学新批评主义之于莎士比亚作品解读，就像德奥派的演奏风格之于巴赫或贝多芬的音乐，它是起源和根本，是为最大程度地忠实还原作品风貌、挖掘作品精神而做的努力。而文学作品的语言不仅是情绪、思想的外现，也是实现作者创作意图的最基本的媒介。因此，文学新批评主义是本论文中占主导地位的批评理论指导，论文通过对这三部戏剧的语言的细读和分析来解读莎士比亚对于爱情故事的阐释。
本论文由五部分组成。第一部分是引言。在引言中介绍了选择这三部戏剧的缘由和依据，对这三部作品的现有研究成果进行了梳理和概括，并提出本论文主要采用的文学批评理论。论文主体部分有三个章节，逐一分析了《爱的徒劳》、《仲夏夜之梦》和《罗密欧和朱丽叶》三部戏剧。在对每部戏剧的分析和诠释中，均以语言为切入点，从“主要语言特点”、“语言与人物刻画”以及“语言与主题”三个角度对戏剧进行了比较细致、深入的分析。论文的结尾部分对全文进行了回顾，并结合三个章节对戏剧的分析，提炼出三部作品交汇、互映之处，从美学的角度阐述作品折射出的永久魅力。
在第一章中，对《爱的徒劳》的两个主要语言特点进行了深入、细致的分析：词汇的极致丰富和并列句的豪华排场。《爱的徒劳》是三部作品中，或者是在莎士比亚的所有作品当中，最炫技语言的戏剧。所谓的“炫技”，从更准确地意义上说，是指剧中人物的刻意的自我展示，而非剧作者本人的语言操练。几乎作品中的每个人物，从国王到奴仆都无可救药地感染了炫耀自己语言才能的习性，他们像孔雀展屏般、不失时机地伸展自己五彩丰满的语言的羽毛。只可惜，在自然界里，羽毛越漂亮就越可以吸引异性，可是在人的世界里，漂亮的语言外表下一定要有能足够打动人心的内容，才能博得爱人的认可和倾慕。从这个角度讲，《爱的徒劳》便是语言的徒劳。同时，论文通过对主要人物的语言进行分析，阐明该剧中男、女两组人物的团体共同特质大于个体差异，即四位男性和四位女性其实是各作为一个整体来被刻画的，他们看似相异的语言和表达并没有凸显各自的迥异性格，而是强化了其所属的整体的特点。而这种整体的人物刻画非常有效地实现了对其主题的表达，即爱情产生于第一眼、爱情无往不胜、以及爱情需要考验。
在第二章中，也是首先从词汇和句法的角度分析了《仲夏夜之梦》的语言特点。从某种意义上说，《仲夏夜之梦》从另一个侧面印证了《爱的徒劳》中的观点：即语言的过度奢华只会彰显心灵深处的“真实”的匮乏。莱散特和第米屈律斯在“爱嬾花”的作用下，自以为爱上了别人时，求爱的语言里溢满了“丝绸般的词汇”，极尽赞美之能事，可是这在读者或者他们倾诉的对象听来，是那么的夸张和不真实。同时，论文对语言的节奏感和音乐感也进行了探讨。在人物刻画方面，该戏剧与《爱的徒劳》的相通之处在于两对年轻的男、女主角都是可以角色对换的，即两位男性和两位女性分别在出身、性格、对于爱情的态度等方面表现出极大的互通性，而正是这种互通性从根本上实现和表达了该剧的一个主题：爱情的不确定性和不稳定性。另外，论文对该剧的另一个主题进行了分析和诠释，即婚姻是爱情的最终指向。
在第三章中，首先从词汇、交互对白、意象三个方面分析了《罗密欧与朱丽叶》的语言特点，进而分析了戏剧的人物刻画和主题。与前面两部戏剧不同的是，《罗密欧和朱丽叶》语言的震慑力在很大程度上源于反差和对比，这包括多对反义词贯穿全剧的使用和一系列意象的嵌入。论文对罗密欧的语言表达也进行了分析。他在遇到朱丽叶之前，苦苦地陷在一厢情愿的爱情的沼泽中无法自拔，但是他对所谓爱情的哀鸣更大程度上是词藻的堆砌、句法的铺张，是看似深厚的肤浅，这恰恰反映了他的自恋和不成熟。而当他无意中涉入真爱的欲河中时，他的表达顿时变得清新流畅、纯朴优美，直白却不乏智慧，缱绻而饱含真情。在人物刻画方面，本论文认为，与其语言特点相同，这部戏剧的人物塑造也是通过对比和反差来实现的。罗密欧和朱丽叶迥然于周遭的男男女女，凸显了两人之恋情的清纯、热烈和高洁。手段服务于目的，不同的人物手法有效地烘托了不同的写作意图、传递了不同的情绪、讲述了不同的爱情故事、阐释了不同的爱情主题。在我看来，《爱的徒劳》和《仲夏夜之梦》有一个共同点，即它们更多的是侧重于表达、强调某一个爱情观点或对爱情某一个侧面进行的探索，而非记述某一朵爱情玫瑰从含苞到怒放的珍奇过程，因而它们对于人物刻画采用的手法有别于《罗密欧和朱丽叶》。前者用的是人物的“同类”并置，后者用的是人物的“另类”独处；前者以“规模排场”制胜，后者靠“对比反差”出奇。撇开三部作品各自具备的独特艺术感染力，就爱情故事本身而言，罗密欧与朱丽叶的爱情独独具有极为强大的震撼力，它创造了一个不可逾越的高度，并永远在制高点上散发迷人的光彩。而这在很大程度上，是通过人物的强烈反差直接和间接取得的效果。在对爱情主题的探讨方面，本论文依循爱情发展的自然过程，总结出该剧的主要的观点和主题，其中包括“爱情产生于第一眼”、“爱情的力量压倒一切”、“爱情的路途从不坦顺”、“爱情通过婚姻变得圣洁”和“爱情在欲与灵的结合中实现”等。
爱情是复杂而微妙的，更何况是莎士比亚笔下的爱情故事。该论文通过对这三部弥漫着截然不同的情绪、展现了迥异的爱情状态、结束于或悲、或喜、或悬而未决的爱情可能性的作品进行互相关联、互相参照性的研究，解读莎士比亚如何对“爱情”这一主题进行思考以及如何在其戏剧作品中通过各种层面、角度及创作技巧将他对爱情的理解和诠释进行了试验、探讨和实现。本文作者希冀通过对这三部戏剧的语言、人物刻画以及爱情主题的探讨，在可能的范围内更近一步靠向莎士比亚这位伟大的语言巨匠那深不可测的内心。毕竟，那里是“美”和“真理”共同繁荣的圣地，是无数莎剧爱好者和莎翁崇拜者最渴望到达的朝拜地，虽然它永远都是越靠近却发现越遥远的目的地。
“Beauty is truth, truth beauty,” Keats observes in his “Ode on a Grecian Urn”. Humanity’spursuit of beauty throughout history invariably finds expression in divergent species of art,among which are music, dancing, arts, literature and what not. While each form of artblesses man with exquisite sensual experiences, the immense aesthetic worth of any and allreal artistic works resides in a core area where the currents of effects upon the “five portsof knowledge” converge and conflate. That core area is where truth dwells. In otherwords, beneath the multifarious facades of beauty lies subtle and scintillating truth.Insofar as beauty is a sure consequence of truth, the disparate raiment each species of artresorts to is largely a matter of choice. Whatever the choice, however, they all share adose of truthfulness. Then, if a specific work of art is worshipped as a constant source ofinspiration for other forms of art, this work boasts a bountiful supply of truth.
The paramount enduring worth of a work stemming from the happy concurrence of innatetruth and outward fairness is what creative artists have been painstakingly seeking after.Among the huge tribe of artists, Shakespeare deserves a leading place in the forefront.For the average reader, Shakespeare’s works serve a purpose at once entertaining andenlightening. For artists, his stunning output of dramas is of seminal significances. Hisplay Romeo and Juliet is a most eloquent case in point. In the world of music alone, ithas instilled inspiration into such maestros as Louis-Hector Berlioz, Sergey Prokofiev andPyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky, not to mention in other realms of art. It’s the overwhelminginfluence of this play upon various artistic creations that urges me in the first place toperuse this play in a pilgrim-like spirit so as to acquire insight into the infinite charm of thework.
Nevertheless, as Eliot puts it, a comprehensive and in-depth understanding of a play byShakespeare cannot be obtained until one has acquainted himself with the entire body ofhis works. This is admittedly an ideal situation hard to come by. Where Eliot’s remarkis relevant to me in terms of this dissertation, I deem it as a judicious consideration to study Romeo and Juliet in a certain context. What I finally settle on as regards the “context” isthe incorporation into the study of two other plays composed around the same period oftime by Shakespeare, namely between1590and1600, and revolving around the sametheme, i.e., love. The two plays I eventually decide on are Love’s Labour’s Lost and AMidsummer Night’s Dream. In other words, my destination for this dissertation is the“core area” of truth which accounts for the beauty of the play Romeo and Juliet. And tofind my way to that destination, I am in need of a chart, which comes in the form of anintricate pattern composed by the three plays. In the course of conducting a critical studyof the three plays with a linguistic approach, I will invoke Shakespeare’s sonnets, anothermonumental work centered on the theme of love, as well as his other plays.
This dissertation consists of five parts. The first part is Introduction, in which a furtherexplanation for the choice of the three plays is given, an overview of the literary criticismsconcerning relevant themes and the three plays is made, and a statement of the majorcritical approaches to be adopted in this dissertation is put forth. What ensues is the bodyof the dissertation. It is divided into three chapters, each of which deals with a play fromthree perspectives, namely “the basic linguistic features”,“the relationship between thelanguage and the characterization”, and “the relationship between the language and thethemes”. Chapter One is devoted to the analysis of Love’s Labour’s Lost, Chapter Two AMidsummer Night’s Dream, Chapter Three Romeo and Juliet. The final part of thedissertation is Conclusion, in which a summary of the entire study is given with the aim ofdiscerning, in an aesthetic sense, where the three plays echo and correlate with each otherand how Shakespeare’s conceptions and assumptions about love, especially in the light ofliterary endeavors, is sprinkled over the three plays and crystallized in Romeo and Juliet inparticular.
Chapter One deals first with the two prominent linguistic features of Love’s Labour’s Lost:exuberant diction and parallel syntax. Nearly all characters in the play are obsessed withthe inclination to display their linguistic facility. And it is by means of exhausting thepool of diction and parading parallel sentences that they gratify what they subconsciously desire. However, in their ceaseless pursuit of linguistic exuberance, the wooers fatallyfail in their courtships. That language in too grand a form proves futile in the matter oflove is one of the major themes of Love’s Laboour’s Lost. In terms of characterization,this dissertation holds that the four lords and the four ladies are group types, which meansthat they are identical to each other due to their shared attributes. This kind ofcharacterization helps to enlighten the other major themes of the play, i.e., love at firstsight, love prevails and love tries.
In the analysis of A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Chapter Two is concerned with the sametwo linguistic features: copious diction and parallel syntax. This chapter finds sharedfeatures in terms of diction and syntax between this play and Love’s Labour’s Lost. Bothplays demonstrate a considerable measure of linguistic exuberance. However, theabundance of diction and parallel sentences in Love’s Labour’s Lost and that in AMidsummer Night’s Dream are distinct from each other on one front: the former beingsystematic, the latter being quite selective. Such a distinction stems from the disparatepurposes of linguistic devices in the two dramas. In Love’s Labour’s Lost, language isone of the themes, i.e., the futility of fancy language in courtship; in A Midsummer Night’sDream, linguistic devices are applied to highlight a certain theme of the drama. Forexample, the verbal variations of the word “gifts” in Egeus’ accusation of Lysander hint atthe lack of substantial bond between the two young lovers; the string of eulogizing wordsthat flows out of people under the effect of love-in-idleness bespeaks the unaccountabilityand unreliability of passionate love. In like manner, parallel sentences in A MidsummerNight’s Dream augment the force of delivery for its various themes, among which arewhere love gets engendered, the irrationality and unpredictability of love, love’s trajectory,and marriage as the destination of love.
Chapter Three discerns a marked difference between Romeo and Juliet and the other twoplays. In lieu of linguistic abundance, an intense aesthetic feel is derived from sharpcontrasts that permeate this play. In terms of language, this play teems with antonymsand features repeated uses of certain words that evoke striking images in the reader’s mind.In terms of characterization, Romeo and Juliet are respectively distinct from people surrounding them. Love’s Labour’s Lost and A Midsummer Night’s Dream are analogousto each other in that the heroes and heroines are type characters. In other words, they canexchange their roles among themselves without making any huge difference to the play.It is an effective device to have characters identical to each other when the play at issue ismore focused on delivering certain themes than presenting a full-bodied love story.Romeo and Juliet is an exception, where charting the trajectory of Romeo and Juliet’s loveis the major concern. That the depiction of the hero and the heroine as distinguished fromother people helps bring out the unique qualities of them and augments pathos to beruminated over by the reader. In the analysis of the major themes of the play, thisdissertation is focused on two aspects, namely, the potency of love as reflected in hatebeing eventually conquered, as well as the consummation of love through the combinationof sex and spirit. Of course, there is a certain overlapping of themes between this playand the other two plays. For instance,“love at first sight” and “love’s course is neversmooth” are present in all three plays. I deal with them as an integral part of the “potency”of love.
Aphrodite, the embodiment of love, means “born from the spume”. Bearing such a name,Love holds twofold implication for us: love, like waves, invariably catches us off guardand swamps our reasoning power; on the other hand, love is as insubstantial as foams, themore we attempt to grasp it, the less we find left in our palms. Therefore to harp ondramas that revolve around the theme of love is frequently frustrating. Dealing withplays with love as the subject matter, I have learnt to come to terms with the subtlety andelusiveness of love.
从这一点来讲，莎士比亚的戏剧是具备无穷魅力的艺术作品。对于普通读者，他的作品不仅可以带来源于认同的愉悦，而且具备启迪心智、解放灵魂的功效；对于各个领域的艺术创作者，则是无数音乐、舞蹈、表演等伟大艺术作品的母体。而这其中，最引人瞩目的是莎士比亚的《罗密欧与朱丽叶》。仅在音乐领域，它便引燃了柏辽兹、普罗柯菲耶夫、柴可夫斯基等音乐巨匠的创作激情，催生出诸篇不朽的音乐作品，类似于这种文学作品对于音乐产生的宏大影响力应该是绝无仅有的。同时，作为最活跃于舞台的莎剧作品之一，它是舞蹈、表演等领域的宠儿，被巴黎国家歌剧院颂赞为“舞蹈家的梦想”。正是《罗密欧与朱丽叶》的这种熊熊燃烧于音乐、舞蹈、表演等领域的旺盛不息的生命力，引发了我对这部经典的爱情剧进行细读、欣赏和分析的热情。
但是，正像诗人艾略特所言，若想对莎士比亚的某一部作品有一个全面、到位的认识和把握，就得熟悉他前前后后的其余作品。换句话说，必须在了解莎士比亚的所有作品之后，才可能真正了解他其中的某一部作品。这当然是理想的状态，但对我的启迪是，我应该把他同时期的、相近题材的戏剧放在一起进行参照性分析和研究，这样才可能在更深的层次挖掘出莎士比亚笔下爱情故事的“美”之所在，感受、领悟这位人类最伟大的剧作家如何将爱情故事“讲”到极致，以期进而探讨作品所折射出的一些爱情“真理”。因此，本论文最终选定了莎士比亚在1590至1600年间创作的三部以爱情为主题的戏剧作为研究对象，分别是：《爱的徒劳》，《仲夏夜之梦》和《罗密欧与朱丽叶》。在对这三部剧的分析过程中，会引入莎翁《十四行诗》和其他一些戏剧作为对比、参照和例证。
经典的音乐作品，总是博得一代又一代表演大师们的青睐，他们不甘心止于前人的伟大努力、也不慑于他人的精彩表演，而是通过让作品与具备特质的自我进行美妙结合产生的独特魅力，在音乐表演史上留下自己或深或浅的印痕。在文学批评领域，情形亦然。数百年来，对于莎翁的作品，文学评论家们从不同的视角、采用不同的批评手法已经进行了深入的探索和演绎，其中包括文学新批评主义、结构主义、解构主义、心理分析、女性主义等等解读，各门各类的专家、学者为全世界文学爱好、研究者提供了浩如烟海的作品评论。对于我而言，文学新批评主义之于莎士比亚作品解读，就像德奥派的演奏风格之于巴赫或贝多芬的音乐，它是起源和根本，是为最大程度地忠实还原作品风貌、挖掘作品精神而做的努力。而文学作品的语言不仅是情绪、思想的外现，也是实现作者创作意图的最基本的媒介。因此，文学新批评主义是本论文中占主导地位的批评理论指导，论文通过对这三部戏剧的语言的细读和分析来解读莎士比亚对于爱情故事的阐释。
本论文由五部分组成。第一部分是引言。在引言中介绍了选择这三部戏剧的缘由和依据，对这三部作品的现有研究成果进行了梳理和概括，并提出本论文主要采用的文学批评理论。论文主体部分有三个章节，逐一分析了《爱的徒劳》、《仲夏夜之梦》和《罗密欧和朱丽叶》三部戏剧。在对每部戏剧的分析和诠释中，均以语言为切入点，从“主要语言特点”、“语言与人物刻画”以及“语言与主题”三个角度对戏剧进行了比较细致、深入的分析。论文的结尾部分对全文进行了回顾，并结合三个章节对戏剧的分析，提炼出三部作品交汇、互映之处，从美学的角度阐述作品折射出的永久魅力。
在第一章中，对《爱的徒劳》的两个主要语言特点进行了深入、细致的分析：词汇的极致丰富和并列句的豪华排场。《爱的徒劳》是三部作品中，或者是在莎士比亚的所有作品当中，最炫技语言的戏剧。所谓的“炫技”，从更准确地意义上说，是指剧中人物的刻意的自我展示，而非剧作者本人的语言操练。几乎作品中的每个人物，从国王到奴仆都无可救药地感染了炫耀自己语言才能的习性，他们像孔雀展屏般、不失时机地伸展自己五彩丰满的语言的羽毛。只可惜，在自然界里，羽毛越漂亮就越可以吸引异性，可是在人的世界里，漂亮的语言外表下一定要有能足够打动人心的内容，才能博得爱人的认可和倾慕。从这个角度讲，《爱的徒劳》便是语言的徒劳。同时，论文通过对主要人物的语言进行分析，阐明该剧中男、女两组人物的团体共同特质大于个体差异，即四位男性和四位女性其实是各作为一个整体来被刻画的，他们看似相异的语言和表达并没有凸显各自的迥异性格，而是强化了其所属的整体的特点。而这种整体的人物刻画非常有效地实现了对其主题的表达，即爱情产生于第一眼、爱情无往不胜、以及爱情需要考验。
在第二章中，也是首先从词汇和句法的角度分析了《仲夏夜之梦》的语言特点。从某种意义上说，《仲夏夜之梦》从另一个侧面印证了《爱的徒劳》中的观点：即语言的过度奢华只会彰显心灵深处的“真实”的匮乏。莱散特和第米屈律斯在“爱嬾花”的作用下，自以为爱上了别人时，求爱的语言里溢满了“丝绸般的词汇”，极尽赞美之能事，可是这在读者或者他们倾诉的对象听来，是那么的夸张和不真实。同时，论文对语言的节奏感和音乐感也进行了探讨。在人物刻画方面，该戏剧与《爱的徒劳》的相通之处在于两对年轻的男、女主角都是可以角色对换的，即两位男性和两位女性分别在出身、性格、对于爱情的态度等方面表现出极大的互通性，而正是这种互通性从根本上实现和表达了该剧的一个主题：爱情的不确定性和不稳定性。另外，论文对该剧的另一个主题进行了分析和诠释，即婚姻是爱情的最终指向。
在第三章中，首先从词汇、交互对白、意象三个方面分析了《罗密欧与朱丽叶》的语言特点，进而分析了戏剧的人物刻画和主题。与前面两部戏剧不同的是，《罗密欧和朱丽叶》语言的震慑力在很大程度上源于反差和对比，这包括多对反义词贯穿全剧的使用和一系列意象的嵌入。论文对罗密欧的语言表达也进行了分析。他在遇到朱丽叶之前，苦苦地陷在一厢情愿的爱情的沼泽中无法自拔，但是他对所谓爱情的哀鸣更大程度上是词藻的堆砌、句法的铺张，是看似深厚的肤浅，这恰恰反映了他的自恋和不成熟。而当他无意中涉入真爱的欲河中时，他的表达顿时变得清新流畅、纯朴优美，直白却不乏智慧，缱绻而饱含真情。在人物刻画方面，本论文认为，与其语言特点相同，这部戏剧的人物塑造也是通过对比和反差来实现的。罗密欧和朱丽叶迥然于周遭的男男女女，凸显了两人之恋情的清纯、热烈和高洁。手段服务于目的，不同的人物手法有效地烘托了不同的写作意图、传递了不同的情绪、讲述了不同的爱情故事、阐释了不同的爱情主题。在我看来，《爱的徒劳》和《仲夏夜之梦》有一个共同点，即它们更多的是侧重于表达、强调某一个爱情观点或对爱情某一个侧面进行的探索，而非记述某一朵爱情玫瑰从含苞到怒放的珍奇过程，因而它们对于人物刻画采用的手法有别于《罗密欧和朱丽叶》。前者用的是人物的“同类”并置，后者用的是人物的“另类”独处；前者以“规模排场”制胜，后者靠“对比反差”出奇。撇开三部作品各自具备的独特艺术感染力，就爱情故事本身而言，罗密欧与朱丽叶的爱情独独具有极为强大的震撼力，它创造了一个不可逾越的高度，并永远在制高点上散发迷人的光彩。而这在很大程度上，是通过人物的强烈反差直接和间接取得的效果。在对爱情主题的探讨方面，本论文依循爱情发展的自然过程，总结出该剧的主要的观点和主题，其中包括“爱情产生于第一眼”、“爱情的力量压倒一切”、“爱情的路途从不坦顺”、“爱情通过婚姻变得圣洁”和“爱情在欲与灵的结合中实现”等。
爱情是复杂而微妙的，更何况是莎士比亚笔下的爱情故事。该论文通过对这三部弥漫着截然不同的情绪、展现了迥异的爱情状态、结束于或悲、或喜、或悬而未决的爱情可能性的作品进行互相关联、互相参照性的研究，解读莎士比亚如何对“爱情”这一主题进行思考以及如何在其戏剧作品中通过各种层面、角度及创作技巧将他对爱情的理解和诠释进行了试验、探讨和实现。本文作者希冀通过对这三部戏剧的语言、人物刻画以及爱情主题的探讨，在可能的范围内更近一步靠向莎士比亚这位伟大的语言巨匠那深不可测的内心。毕竟，那里是“美”和“真理”共同繁荣的圣地，是无数莎剧爱好者和莎翁崇拜者最渴望到达的朝拜地，虽然它永远都是越靠近却发现越遥远的目的地。
“Beauty is truth, truth beauty,” Keats observes in his “Ode on a Grecian Urn”. Humanity’spursuit of beauty throughout history invariably finds expression in divergent species of art,among which are music, dancing, arts, literature and what not. While each form of artblesses man with exquisite sensual experiences, the immense aesthetic worth of any and allreal artistic works resides in a core area where the currents of effects upon the “five portsof knowledge” converge and conflate. That core area is where truth dwells. In otherwords, beneath the multifarious facades of beauty lies subtle and scintillating truth.Insofar as beauty is a sure consequence of truth, the disparate raiment each species of artresorts to is largely a matter of choice. Whatever the choice, however, they all share adose of truthfulness. Then, if a specific work of art is worshipped as a constant source ofinspiration for other forms of art, this work boasts a bountiful supply of truth.
The paramount enduring worth of a work stemming from the happy concurrence of innatetruth and outward fairness is what creative artists have been painstakingly seeking after.Among the huge tribe of artists, Shakespeare deserves a leading place in the forefront.For the average reader, Shakespeare’s works serve a purpose at once entertaining andenlightening. For artists, his stunning output of dramas is of seminal significances. Hisplay Romeo and Juliet is a most eloquent case in point. In the world of music alone, ithas instilled inspiration into such maestros as Louis-Hector Berlioz, Sergey Prokofiev andPyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky, not to mention in other realms of art. It’s the overwhelminginfluence of this play upon various artistic creations that urges me in the first place toperuse this play in a pilgrim-like spirit so as to acquire insight into the infinite charm of thework.
Nevertheless, as Eliot puts it, a comprehensive and in-depth understanding of a play byShakespeare cannot be obtained until one has acquainted himself with the entire body ofhis works. This is admittedly an ideal situation hard to come by. Where Eliot’s remarkis relevant to me in terms of this dissertation, I deem it as a judicious consideration to study Romeo and Juliet in a certain context. What I finally settle on as regards the “context” isthe incorporation into the study of two other plays composed around the same period oftime by Shakespeare, namely between1590and1600, and revolving around the sametheme, i.e., love. The two plays I eventually decide on are Love’s Labour’s Lost and AMidsummer Night’s Dream. In other words, my destination for this dissertation is the“core area” of truth which accounts for the beauty of the play Romeo and Juliet. And tofind my way to that destination, I am in need of a chart, which comes in the form of anintricate pattern composed by the three plays. In the course of conducting a critical studyof the three plays with a linguistic approach, I will invoke Shakespeare’s sonnets, anothermonumental work centered on the theme of love, as well as his other plays.
This dissertation consists of five parts. The first part is Introduction, in which a furtherexplanation for the choice of the three plays is given, an overview of the literary criticismsconcerning relevant themes and the three plays is made, and a statement of the majorcritical approaches to be adopted in this dissertation is put forth. What ensues is the bodyof the dissertation. It is divided into three chapters, each of which deals with a play fromthree perspectives, namely “the basic linguistic features”,“the relationship between thelanguage and the characterization”, and “the relationship between the language and thethemes”. Chapter One is devoted to the analysis of Love’s Labour’s Lost, Chapter Two AMidsummer Night’s Dream, Chapter Three Romeo and Juliet. The final part of thedissertation is Conclusion, in which a summary of the entire study is given with the aim ofdiscerning, in an aesthetic sense, where the three plays echo and correlate with each otherand how Shakespeare’s conceptions and assumptions about love, especially in the light ofliterary endeavors, is sprinkled over the three plays and crystallized in Romeo and Juliet inparticular.
Chapter One deals first with the two prominent linguistic features of Love’s Labour’s Lost:exuberant diction and parallel syntax. Nearly all characters in the play are obsessed withthe inclination to display their linguistic facility. And it is by means of exhausting thepool of diction and parading parallel sentences that they gratify what they subconsciously desire. However, in their ceaseless pursuit of linguistic exuberance, the wooers fatallyfail in their courtships. That language in too grand a form proves futile in the matter oflove is one of the major themes of Love’s Laboour’s Lost. In terms of characterization,this dissertation holds that the four lords and the four ladies are group types, which meansthat they are identical to each other due to their shared attributes. This kind ofcharacterization helps to enlighten the other major themes of the play, i.e., love at firstsight, love prevails and love tries.
In the analysis of A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Chapter Two is concerned with the sametwo linguistic features: copious diction and parallel syntax. This chapter finds sharedfeatures in terms of diction and syntax between this play and Love’s Labour’s Lost. Bothplays demonstrate a considerable measure of linguistic exuberance. However, theabundance of diction and parallel sentences in Love’s Labour’s Lost and that in AMidsummer Night’s Dream are distinct from each other on one front: the former beingsystematic, the latter being quite selective. Such a distinction stems from the disparatepurposes of linguistic devices in the two dramas. In Love’s Labour’s Lost, language isone of the themes, i.e., the futility of fancy language in courtship; in A Midsummer Night’sDream, linguistic devices are applied to highlight a certain theme of the drama. Forexample, the verbal variations of the word “gifts” in Egeus’ accusation of Lysander hint atthe lack of substantial bond between the two young lovers; the string of eulogizing wordsthat flows out of people under the effect of love-in-idleness bespeaks the unaccountabilityand unreliability of passionate love. In like manner, parallel sentences in A MidsummerNight’s Dream augment the force of delivery for its various themes, among which arewhere love gets engendered, the irrationality and unpredictability of love, love’s trajectory,and marriage as the destination of love.
Chapter Three discerns a marked difference between Romeo and Juliet and the other twoplays. In lieu of linguistic abundance, an intense aesthetic feel is derived from sharpcontrasts that permeate this play. In terms of language, this play teems with antonymsand features repeated uses of certain words that evoke striking images in the reader’s mind.In terms of characterization, Romeo and Juliet are respectively distinct from people surrounding them. Love’s Labour’s Lost and A Midsummer Night’s Dream are analogousto each other in that the heroes and heroines are type characters. In other words, they canexchange their roles among themselves without making any huge difference to the play.It is an effective device to have characters identical to each other when the play at issue ismore focused on delivering certain themes than presenting a full-bodied love story.Romeo and Juliet is an exception, where charting the trajectory of Romeo and Juliet’s loveis the major concern. That the depiction of the hero and the heroine as distinguished fromother people helps bring out the unique qualities of them and augments pathos to beruminated over by the reader. In the analysis of the major themes of the play, thisdissertation is focused on two aspects, namely, the potency of love as reflected in hatebeing eventually conquered, as well as the consummation of love through the combinationof sex and spirit. Of course, there is a certain overlapping of themes between this playand the other two plays. For instance,“love at first sight” and “love’s course is neversmooth” are present in all three plays. I deal with them as an integral part of the “potency”of love.
Aphrodite, the embodiment of love, means “born from the spume”. Bearing such a name,Love holds twofold implication for us: love, like waves, invariably catches us off guardand swamps our reasoning power; on the other hand, love is as insubstantial as foams, themore we attempt to grasp it, the less we find left in our palms. Therefore to harp ondramas that revolve around the theme of love is frequently frustrating. Dealing withplays with love as the subject matter, I have learnt to come to terms with the subtlety andelusiveness of love.
引文
Arthos, John. Love’s Labour’s Lost New York: Penguin Group,2004.
Bacon, Francis.《培根论说文集》北京：外语教学与研究出版社，1999.
Belsey, Catherine.“The Name of the Rose in ‘Romeo and Juliet’.” The Yearbook ofEnglish Studies, Vol.23, Early Shakespeare Special Number (1993), pp.126—142.
Bevington, David and Kastan, David Scott. Romeo and Juliet New York: BantamDell A Division of Random House, Inc.,2004．
Black, James.“The Visual Artistry of Romeo and Juliet.” Studies in English Literature,1500-1900, Vol.15, No.2, Elizabethan and Jacobean Drama, pp.245—256.
Bloom, Harold. Shakespeare: the Invention of The Human New York: Penguin Group,1999．
Bloom, Harold (Ed.&Introd.). William Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream–New Edition. NY: Infobase Publishing,2010.
Bloom, Harold (Ed. with Introd.). William Shakespeare: Comedies and Romances. NY:Chelsea House Publishers.1986.
Bonnard, George A.“Romeo and Juliet: A Possible Significance?” The Review ofEnglish Studies, New Series, Vol.2, No.8, pp.319—327.
Bowling, Lawrence Edward.“The Thematic Framework of Romeo and Juliet.” PMLA,Vol.64, No.1, pp.2008—220.
Bradbrook, M.C. A History of Elizabethan Drama (Volume4) Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,1979
Brooks, Harold F. Ed.《仲夏夜之梦》北京：中国人民大学出版社，2008．
Callaghan, Dympna. Romeo and Juliet: Texts and Contexts Boston: Bedford/St.Martin’s,2003．
Cohen, Lauren W.“‘Romeo and Juliet’: Living is Being Relevant.” The EnglishJournal, Vol.59, No.9, pp.1263--1265+1269
Corcoran, Neil. Shakespeare and the Modern Poet Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress,2010．
Durant, Will. The Story of Philosophy New York: Pocket Books, A Division of Simon$Schuster, Inc.,2006
Evans, G. Blakemore. The Sonnets Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1996．
Gibbons, Brian. Ed.《罗密欧与朱丽叶》北京：中国人民大学出版社，2008．
Gelb, Michael J. Think like Da Vinci London: Harper Element, An Imprint ofHarperCollinsPublishers,2009．
Gilbert, Miriam. Love’s Labour’s Lost Manchester: Manchester University Press,
1993．
Honigmann, E.A.J. Shakespeare’s Impact on His Contemporaries. London: MacMillanPress,1982.
Kottman, Paul A. Philosophers on Shakespeare California: Stanford University Press,2009．
Lerner, Laurence. Love and Marriage: Literature and Its Social Context New York: St.Martin’s Press,1979．
Levin, Harry.“Form and Formality in Romeo and Juliet.” Shakespeare Quarterly,Vol.11, No.1, pp.3-11.
MacCary, W. Thomas. Friends and Lovers: The Phenomenology of Desire inShakespearean Comedy New York: Columbia University Press,1985.
Margreta de Grazia and Wells, Stanley. Ed. The Cambridge Companions to ShakespeareCambridge: Cambridge Press,2001.
Muir, Kenneth and Schoenbaum, S. Ed. A New Companion to Shakespeare Studies.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1971.
Nevo, Ruth.“Tragic form in Romeo and Juliet.” Studies in English Literature,1500-1900, Vol.9, No.2, Elizabethan and Jacobean Drama, pp.241-258.
Novy, Marianne. Love’s Argument: Gender Relations in Shakespeare London: TheUniversity of North Carolina Press,1984.
Onions, C.T. A Shakespeare Glossary (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press,1919.
Parker, G. F. Johnson’s Shakespeare Oxford: Clarendon Press,1984.
Plato. Symposium and The Death of Socrates Translated by Tome GriffithHertfordshire: Wordsworth Editions Limited,1997．
Price, Martin. Ed. The Rape of the Lock and Other Poems New York: Penguin Group,2003．
Quinney, Laura. William Blake on Self and Soul Harvard: Harvard University Press,2011.
Russell, Bertrand. The History of Western Philosophy New York: Simon&Schuster,1972.
Salmon, Vivian.‘Some functions of Shakespearian word-formation’. Shakespeare andLanguage. Ed. Catherine Alexander. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2004
Shaughnessyd, Robert. The Routledge Guide to Willian Shakespeare Abingdon:Routledge,2011．
Short, Mick. Exploring the Language of Poems, Plays and Prose London and NewYork: Longman,1996
Slights, Camille Wells. Shakespeare’s Comic Commonwealths London: University ofToronto Press,1993．
Solomon, Maynard. Beethoven New York: Schirmer Trade Books,2001
Summers, Joseph H. Dreams of Love and Power Oxford: Clarendon Press,1984.
Vickers, Brian.‘Shakespeare’s use of rhetoric’. A New Companion to ShakespeareStudies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1971.
Williams, Phillip.“The Rosemary Theme in Romeo and Juliet.” Modern LanguageNotes, Vol.68, No.6, pp.400—403.
杰曼·格里尔.《思想家莎士比亚》.毛亮译.北京：外语教学与研究出版社,2007.
陆谷孙.《莎士比亚研究十讲》.上海：复旦大学出版社,2005.
莎士比亚.《莎士比亚全集》朱生豪等译.北京：人民文学出版社,1994.
史志康、吴刚.“走出文论研究中的误区”.外国文学1999年第5期，55-57页.
张泗洋徐斌张晓阳.《莎士比亚引论（上、下》.北京：中国戏剧出版社，
张冲.《莎士比亚专题研究》.上海：上海外语教育出版社，2004.
Bacon, Francis.《培根论说文集》北京：外语教学与研究出版社，1999.
Belsey, Catherine.“The Name of the Rose in ‘Romeo and Juliet’.” The Yearbook ofEnglish Studies, Vol.23, Early Shakespeare Special Number (1993), pp.126—142.
Bevington, David and Kastan, David Scott. Romeo and Juliet New York: BantamDell A Division of Random House, Inc.,2004．
Black, James.“The Visual Artistry of Romeo and Juliet.” Studies in English Literature,1500-1900, Vol.15, No.2, Elizabethan and Jacobean Drama, pp.245—256.
Bloom, Harold. Shakespeare: the Invention of The Human New York: Penguin Group,1999．
Bloom, Harold (Ed.&Introd.). William Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream–New Edition. NY: Infobase Publishing,2010.
Bloom, Harold (Ed. with Introd.). William Shakespeare: Comedies and Romances. NY:Chelsea House Publishers.1986.
Bonnard, George A.“Romeo and Juliet: A Possible Significance?” The Review ofEnglish Studies, New Series, Vol.2, No.8, pp.319—327.
Bowling, Lawrence Edward.“The Thematic Framework of Romeo and Juliet.” PMLA,Vol.64, No.1, pp.2008—220.
Bradbrook, M.C. A History of Elizabethan Drama (Volume4) Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,1979
Brooks, Harold F. Ed.《仲夏夜之梦》北京：中国人民大学出版社，2008．
Callaghan, Dympna. Romeo and Juliet: Texts and Contexts Boston: Bedford/St.Martin’s,2003．
Cohen, Lauren W.“‘Romeo and Juliet’: Living is Being Relevant.” The EnglishJournal, Vol.59, No.9, pp.1263--1265+1269
Corcoran, Neil. Shakespeare and the Modern Poet Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress,2010．
Durant, Will. The Story of Philosophy New York: Pocket Books, A Division of Simon$Schuster, Inc.,2006
Evans, G. Blakemore. The Sonnets Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1996．
Gibbons, Brian. Ed.《罗密欧与朱丽叶》北京：中国人民大学出版社，2008．
Gelb, Michael J. Think like Da Vinci London: Harper Element, An Imprint ofHarperCollinsPublishers,2009．
Gilbert, Miriam. Love’s Labour’s Lost Manchester: Manchester University Press,
1993．
Honigmann, E.A.J. Shakespeare’s Impact on His Contemporaries. London: MacMillanPress,1982.
Kottman, Paul A. Philosophers on Shakespeare California: Stanford University Press,2009．
Lerner, Laurence. Love and Marriage: Literature and Its Social Context New York: St.Martin’s Press,1979．
Levin, Harry.“Form and Formality in Romeo and Juliet.” Shakespeare Quarterly,Vol.11, No.1, pp.3-11.
MacCary, W. Thomas. Friends and Lovers: The Phenomenology of Desire inShakespearean Comedy New York: Columbia University Press,1985.
Margreta de Grazia and Wells, Stanley. Ed. The Cambridge Companions to ShakespeareCambridge: Cambridge Press,2001.
Muir, Kenneth and Schoenbaum, S. Ed. A New Companion to Shakespeare Studies.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1971.
Nevo, Ruth.“Tragic form in Romeo and Juliet.” Studies in English Literature,1500-1900, Vol.9, No.2, Elizabethan and Jacobean Drama, pp.241-258.
Novy, Marianne. Love’s Argument: Gender Relations in Shakespeare London: TheUniversity of North Carolina Press,1984.
Onions, C.T. A Shakespeare Glossary (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press,1919.
Parker, G. F. Johnson’s Shakespeare Oxford: Clarendon Press,1984.
Plato. Symposium and The Death of Socrates Translated by Tome GriffithHertfordshire: Wordsworth Editions Limited,1997．
Price, Martin. Ed. The Rape of the Lock and Other Poems New York: Penguin Group,2003．
Quinney, Laura. William Blake on Self and Soul Harvard: Harvard University Press,2011.
Russell, Bertrand. The History of Western Philosophy New York: Simon&Schuster,1972.
Salmon, Vivian.‘Some functions of Shakespearian word-formation’. Shakespeare andLanguage. Ed. Catherine Alexander. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2004
Shaughnessyd, Robert. The Routledge Guide to Willian Shakespeare Abingdon:Routledge,2011．
Short, Mick. Exploring the Language of Poems, Plays and Prose London and NewYork: Longman,1996
Slights, Camille Wells. Shakespeare’s Comic Commonwealths London: University ofToronto Press,1993．
Solomon, Maynard. Beethoven New York: Schirmer Trade Books,2001
Summers, Joseph H. Dreams of Love and Power Oxford: Clarendon Press,1984.
Vickers, Brian.‘Shakespeare’s use of rhetoric’. A New Companion to ShakespeareStudies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1971.
Williams, Phillip.“The Rosemary Theme in Romeo and Juliet.” Modern LanguageNotes, Vol.68, No.6, pp.400—403.
杰曼·格里尔.《思想家莎士比亚》.毛亮译.北京：外语教学与研究出版社,2007.
陆谷孙.《莎士比亚研究十讲》.上海：复旦大学出版社,2005.
莎士比亚.《莎士比亚全集》朱生豪等译.北京：人民文学出版社,1994.
史志康、吴刚.“走出文论研究中的误区”.外国文学1999年第5期，55-57页.
张泗洋徐斌张晓阳.《莎士比亚引论（上、下》.北京：中国戏剧出版社，
张冲.《莎士比亚专题研究》.上海：上海外语教育出版社，2004.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |