‘De Vorst is om ’t gemeen; ’t gemeen niet om de Vorst.’*

Q3 Arts and Humanities
Tom Laureys
{"title":"‘De Vorst is om ’t gemeen; ’t gemeen niet om de Vorst.’*","authors":"Tom Laureys","doi":"10.5117/NEDLET2019.1.003.LAUR","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n ‘The Monarch is there for the common; the common not for the Monarch.’ Governmental reflections in three Dutch revenge tragedies (1638-1645)\n \n \n Although early modern Dutch revenge tragedies have for a long time been studied in the light of the idea that passions need to be restrained, there is an inseparable political dimension connected to such plays. In the three revenge tragedies discussed in this contribution (1638-1645), the royal sovereignty of the political rulers degenerates into tyranny. The sovereign paradigm, however, rouses dismay among several dramatis personae. Frequently, we hear critical and dissenting voices, which explicitly oppose the conception of sovereignty as it is advocated by the potentates. In this article, I consider the question whether in the criticism of the old, sovereign conception of power (souveraineté) an apology for a new, alternative policy is articulated, which Foucault termed gouvernementalité. Moreover, I argue that the revenge plays participate in the discursive context of Frederick Henry’s potential expansion of power in the period around 1640.","PeriodicalId":39266,"journal":{"name":"Nederlandse Letterkunde","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nederlandse Letterkunde","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5117/NEDLET2019.1.003.LAUR","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

‘The Monarch is there for the common; the common not for the Monarch.’ Governmental reflections in three Dutch revenge tragedies (1638-1645) Although early modern Dutch revenge tragedies have for a long time been studied in the light of the idea that passions need to be restrained, there is an inseparable political dimension connected to such plays. In the three revenge tragedies discussed in this contribution (1638-1645), the royal sovereignty of the political rulers degenerates into tyranny. The sovereign paradigm, however, rouses dismay among several dramatis personae. Frequently, we hear critical and dissenting voices, which explicitly oppose the conception of sovereignty as it is advocated by the potentates. In this article, I consider the question whether in the criticism of the old, sovereign conception of power (souveraineté) an apology for a new, alternative policy is articulated, which Foucault termed gouvernementalité. Moreover, I argue that the revenge plays participate in the discursive context of Frederick Henry’s potential expansion of power in the period around 1640.
“王子很卑鄙;我不喜欢霜冻。
“君主是为平民而存在的;平民而不是君主。虽然早期现代荷兰复仇悲剧长期以来都是根据激情需要被抑制的观点来研究的,但这些戏剧有一个不可分割的政治维度。在本文讨论的三个复仇悲剧(1638-1645)中,政治统治者的王权堕落为暴政。然而,主权范式在一些戏剧人物中引起了沮丧。我们经常听到批评和反对的声音,这些声音明确反对当权者所提倡的主权概念。在这篇文章中,我考虑的问题是,在对旧的、主权的权力概念(souverainet)的批评中,是否为一种新的、可供选择的政策(福柯称之为政府主义(governmentalit))进行了辩护。此外,我认为复仇剧参与了1640年前后腓特烈·亨利潜在权力扩张的话语背景。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Nederlandse Letterkunde
Nederlandse Letterkunde Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信