Since its earliest appearance (in, let's say, 1900, with Freud's Interpretation of Dreams), psychoanalytic theory has undrgone constant change in both its status as a science (with its correlative applications in a clinical senses), and in its definition as a hermeneutical strategy. The fortune (and misfortune) of psychoanalysis has also had a direct bearing on its "uses" in literary theory. My aim in this paper is to try and outline some of these variations, as they have been formulated within the realm of Shakespearean Studies. I will focus on recent contributions that have, in my opinion, either already responded to, or that have at least voiced, an awareness of the limitations of "classical" psychoanalytic studies of literature. I wish to show that psychoanalytical criticism find its raison d'etre today in its capacity to interrogate crucial aspects of literature and culture, including their relationship, their linguistic and rhetorical dimention, and the textual paradoxes and double-binds that repeatedly surface in close and informed contemporary acts of reading. Besides the taditional Freudian approach, I can trace at least three important contexts of psychoanalytical criticism: "object relation theory", Lacanian "rhetorical-semiotic interpretations", and "post -structuralist readings". For each one of these approaches I will discuss different and significant interpretations of Shakespeare's Hamlet and The Taming of the Shrew. I also wish to show the fundamentally interdisciplinary nature of the latest developments in psychoanalytic literary theory.
抄録全体を表示