莎士比亚随笔:从《哈姆雷特》到《暴风雨》的蒙田样本(彼得·普拉特)

IF 0.1 3区 艺术学 0 THEATER
Alan Farmer
{"title":"莎士比亚随笔:从《哈姆雷特》到《暴风雨》的蒙田样本(彼得·普拉特)","authors":"Alan Farmer","doi":"10.1353/cdr.2023.a913247","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Shakespeare's Essays: Sampling Montaigne from Hamlet to The Tempest</em> by Peter Platt <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Alan Farmer (bio) </li> </ul> Peter Platt. <em>Shakespeare's Essays: Sampling Montaigne from Hamlet to The Tempest</em>. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2020. Pp. x + 198. $110.00 cloth, $24.95 paper, $110.00 eBook. <p>Peter Platt's compelling new book, <em>Shakespeare's Essays: Sampling Montaigne from</em> Hamlet <em>to</em> The Tempest, is the culmination of over two decades of research on Shakespeare's thinking and his later plays. Platt's first book, <em>Reason Diminished: Shakespeare and the Marvelous</em> (University of Nebraska, 1997), focused on Shakespeare's late plays and the concept of wonder, while his next book, <em>Shakespeare and the Culture of Paradox</em> (Routledge, 2009), looked at the way logical opposites could be juxtaposed in order to question such concepts as justice, love, knowledge, and truth, a pervasive intellectual maneuver in the works of both Montaigne and Shakespeare. Most recently, Platt co-edited with Stephen Greenblatt an edition of John Florio's 1603 translation of Montaigne's <em>Essays</em> (New York Review of Books, 2014). One motivation for Platt's writing <em>Shakespeare's Essays</em> can perhaps be found in Greenblatt's introduction to this edition. In it, Greenblatt claims that, apart from some \"passages in <em>King Lear</em> and <em>The Tempest</em>, the attempts to establish the direct influence of Montaigne on Shakespeare have never seemed fully and decisively convincing\"(xxxi). After all, there is uncertainty about when Shakespeare may have read the <em>Essays</em>, either in French or in Florio's translation, and therefore about when Montaigne's influence can first be detected. But there is also the \"more intractable problem\" of Shakespeare and Montaigne sharing the same \"historical moment,\" which could have led to \"a shared grappling with pressing questions of faith, consciousness, and identity\"(xxxii). Why assume Shakespeare was influenced by Montaigne rather than their both being shaped by the same currents of thoughts circulating in Europe and England in the late 16th and early 17th centuries? <em>Shakespeare's Essays</em> can arguably be seen as Platt's extended reply to his co-editor.</p> <p>Platt opens the book with an important question: \"Why do critics and audiences feel that there is something 'different' about the plays that Shakespeare wrote after 1603?\" (1). According to Platt, stylistic and thematic features that mark Shakespeare's later plays—\"the darkness of their comedy\" and \"the general pessimism of the largely tragic period that followed,\" their exploration of \"doubt, contingency, uncertainty, and mutability\" along with \"instabilities of self, knowledge, and form\" (1)—can be traced back to Shakespeare's reading of Florio's translation of the <em>Essays</em>. Understanding Shakespeare's plays after 1603 thus means understanding the influence Montaigne had on Shakespeare. And there <strong>[End Page 274]</strong> is no doubt that Shakespeare read Florio's translation. As the late 18th century Shakespeare editors Edward Capell and Edmund Malone demonstrated, at least one speech by Gonzalo in <em>The Tempest</em> was closely patterned on a passage in Florio's translation of Montaigne's essay \"Of the Caniballes.\" Subsequent scholars built upon this initial observation, so much so that, by 1876, Friedrich Nietzsche could confidently proclaim that Shakespeare was Montaigne's \"best reader\" (2). One of the most important scholars for Platt is George Coffin Taylor, who in <em>Shakspere's Debt to Montaigne</em> (1925) catalogued verbal echoes of Montaigne that can be found in Shakespeare's plays. This kind of linguistic evidence allows Platt to pursue more ambitious questions about \"larger thematic and structural parallels\" between Montaigne and Shakespeare, about \"connections and resonances that swirl throughout the essays and plays, especially those concerning the problems of knowing and being\" (12). Although \"resonances\" and \"thematic and structural parallels\" may not show a \"direct influence,\" they can also be seen as the likely result of Shakespeare's close engagement with Montaigne. Verbal echoes show that Shakespeare repeatedly turned to Florio's translation when he was writing plays after 1603, so it would be surprising if the playwright's thinking somehow remained unaffected by the ideas he found in Montaigne's <em>Essays</em>. It is this intriguing, if perhaps ineffable, type of influence that Platt details in <em>Shakespeare's Essays</em>.</p> <p>According to Platt, after reading the <em>Essays</em> Shakespeare came to adopt...</p> </p>","PeriodicalId":39600,"journal":{"name":"COMPARATIVE DRAMA","volume":"90 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shakespeare's Essays: Sampling Montaigne from Hamlet to The Tempest by Peter Platt (review)\",\"authors\":\"Alan Farmer\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/cdr.2023.a913247\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Shakespeare's Essays: Sampling Montaigne from Hamlet to The Tempest</em> by Peter Platt <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Alan Farmer (bio) </li> </ul> Peter Platt. <em>Shakespeare's Essays: Sampling Montaigne from Hamlet to The Tempest</em>. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2020. Pp. x + 198. $110.00 cloth, $24.95 paper, $110.00 eBook. <p>Peter Platt's compelling new book, <em>Shakespeare's Essays: Sampling Montaigne from</em> Hamlet <em>to</em> The Tempest, is the culmination of over two decades of research on Shakespeare's thinking and his later plays. Platt's first book, <em>Reason Diminished: Shakespeare and the Marvelous</em> (University of Nebraska, 1997), focused on Shakespeare's late plays and the concept of wonder, while his next book, <em>Shakespeare and the Culture of Paradox</em> (Routledge, 2009), looked at the way logical opposites could be juxtaposed in order to question such concepts as justice, love, knowledge, and truth, a pervasive intellectual maneuver in the works of both Montaigne and Shakespeare. Most recently, Platt co-edited with Stephen Greenblatt an edition of John Florio's 1603 translation of Montaigne's <em>Essays</em> (New York Review of Books, 2014). One motivation for Platt's writing <em>Shakespeare's Essays</em> can perhaps be found in Greenblatt's introduction to this edition. In it, Greenblatt claims that, apart from some \\\"passages in <em>King Lear</em> and <em>The Tempest</em>, the attempts to establish the direct influence of Montaigne on Shakespeare have never seemed fully and decisively convincing\\\"(xxxi). After all, there is uncertainty about when Shakespeare may have read the <em>Essays</em>, either in French or in Florio's translation, and therefore about when Montaigne's influence can first be detected. But there is also the \\\"more intractable problem\\\" of Shakespeare and Montaigne sharing the same \\\"historical moment,\\\" which could have led to \\\"a shared grappling with pressing questions of faith, consciousness, and identity\\\"(xxxii). Why assume Shakespeare was influenced by Montaigne rather than their both being shaped by the same currents of thoughts circulating in Europe and England in the late 16th and early 17th centuries? <em>Shakespeare's Essays</em> can arguably be seen as Platt's extended reply to his co-editor.</p> <p>Platt opens the book with an important question: \\\"Why do critics and audiences feel that there is something 'different' about the plays that Shakespeare wrote after 1603?\\\" (1). According to Platt, stylistic and thematic features that mark Shakespeare's later plays—\\\"the darkness of their comedy\\\" and \\\"the general pessimism of the largely tragic period that followed,\\\" their exploration of \\\"doubt, contingency, uncertainty, and mutability\\\" along with \\\"instabilities of self, knowledge, and form\\\" (1)—can be traced back to Shakespeare's reading of Florio's translation of the <em>Essays</em>. Understanding Shakespeare's plays after 1603 thus means understanding the influence Montaigne had on Shakespeare. And there <strong>[End Page 274]</strong> is no doubt that Shakespeare read Florio's translation. As the late 18th century Shakespeare editors Edward Capell and Edmund Malone demonstrated, at least one speech by Gonzalo in <em>The Tempest</em> was closely patterned on a passage in Florio's translation of Montaigne's essay \\\"Of the Caniballes.\\\" Subsequent scholars built upon this initial observation, so much so that, by 1876, Friedrich Nietzsche could confidently proclaim that Shakespeare was Montaigne's \\\"best reader\\\" (2). One of the most important scholars for Platt is George Coffin Taylor, who in <em>Shakspere's Debt to Montaigne</em> (1925) catalogued verbal echoes of Montaigne that can be found in Shakespeare's plays. This kind of linguistic evidence allows Platt to pursue more ambitious questions about \\\"larger thematic and structural parallels\\\" between Montaigne and Shakespeare, about \\\"connections and resonances that swirl throughout the essays and plays, especially those concerning the problems of knowing and being\\\" (12). Although \\\"resonances\\\" and \\\"thematic and structural parallels\\\" may not show a \\\"direct influence,\\\" they can also be seen as the likely result of Shakespeare's close engagement with Montaigne. Verbal echoes show that Shakespeare repeatedly turned to Florio's translation when he was writing plays after 1603, so it would be surprising if the playwright's thinking somehow remained unaffected by the ideas he found in Montaigne's <em>Essays</em>. It is this intriguing, if perhaps ineffable, type of influence that Platt details in <em>Shakespeare's Essays</em>.</p> <p>According to Platt, after reading the <em>Essays</em> Shakespeare came to adopt...</p> </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39600,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"COMPARATIVE DRAMA\",\"volume\":\"90 10\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"COMPARATIVE DRAMA\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/cdr.2023.a913247\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"艺术学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"THEATER\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COMPARATIVE DRAMA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/cdr.2023.a913247","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"THEATER","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这里是内容的一个简短摘录,而不是摘要:书评:莎士比亚的散文:从哈姆雷特到暴风雨的蒙田抽样,作者:彼得·普拉特莎士比亚随笔:从《哈姆雷特》到《暴风雨》,以蒙田为例。爱丁堡:爱丁堡大学出版社,2020。Pp. x + 198。布$110.00,纸$24.95,电子书$110.00彼得·普拉特引人入胜的新书《莎士比亚随笔:从《哈姆雷特》到《暴风雨》的蒙田样本》是他对莎士比亚思想及其后期戏剧研究20多年的成果。普拉特的第一本书,《理性消失:莎士比亚与奇迹》(内布拉斯加州大学,1997年),专注于莎士比亚的晚期戏剧和奇迹的概念,而他的下一本书,《莎士比亚与悖论文化》(劳特利奇,2009年),研究了逻辑对立可以被并列的方式,以质疑正义、爱、知识和真理等概念,这是蒙田和莎士比亚作品中普遍存在的智力操作。最近,普拉特与斯蒂芬·格林布拉特(Stephen Greenblatt)合编了约翰·弗洛里奥(John Florio) 1603年翻译的蒙田随笔(纽约书评,2014年)。普拉特写《莎士比亚随笔》的动机之一,或许可以在格林布拉特对这一版本的介绍中找到。在这篇文章中,格林布拉特声称,除了“《李尔王》和《暴风雨》中的一些段落外,试图确立蒙田对莎士比亚的直接影响的尝试似乎从来没有完全和决定性地令人信服”(xxxi)。毕竟,关于莎士比亚何时读过《随笔》,无论是法语版本还是弗洛里奥的译本,都是不确定的,因此也不确定蒙田的影响最早是何时被发现的。但还有一个“更棘手的问题”,即莎士比亚和蒙田处于同一“历史时刻”,这可能会导致“对信仰、意识和身份等紧迫问题的共同努力”(xxxii)。为什么认为莎士比亚受到蒙田的影响,而不是他们都受到16世纪末和17世纪初欧洲和英国流行的同一思潮的影响?《莎士比亚随笔》可以说是普拉特对他的共同编辑的长篇回复。普拉特在书的开头提出了一个重要的问题:“为什么评论家和观众会觉得莎士比亚1603年以后写的戏剧有些‘不同’?”根据普拉特的说法,莎士比亚后期戏剧的风格和主题特征——“喜剧的黑暗”和“随后大部分悲剧时期的普遍悲观主义”,他们对“怀疑、偶然性、不确定性和可变性”以及“自我、知识和形式的不稳定性”的探索(1)——可以追溯到莎士比亚阅读弗洛里奥翻译的《随笔集》。因此,理解1603年以后的莎士比亚戏剧就意味着理解蒙田对莎士比亚的影响。毫无疑问,莎士比亚读过弗洛里奥的译本。正如18世纪后期的莎士比亚编辑爱德华·卡佩尔和埃德蒙·马龙所证明的那样,冈萨洛在《暴风雨》中至少有一段话与弗洛里奥翻译的蒙田散文《论吃人》中的一段话如出一辙。后来的学者们以这一最初的观察为基础,以至于到了1876年,弗里德里希·尼采可以自信地宣称莎士比亚是蒙田“最好的读者”(2)。对普拉特最重要的学者之一是乔治·科芬·泰勒,他在莎士比亚的《欠蒙田的情》(1925年)中列出了莎士比亚戏剧中与蒙田的口头呼应。这种语言学上的证据使普拉特能够追求关于蒙田和莎士比亚之间“更大的主题和结构上的相似之处”的更有野心的问题,关于“贯穿散文和戏剧的联系和共鸣,特别是那些关于认识和存在的问题”(12)。虽然“共鸣”和“主题和结构上的相似”可能不会显示出“直接影响”,但它们也可以被视为莎士比亚与蒙田密切接触的可能结果。口头上的呼应表明,1603年以后,莎士比亚在创作剧本时,多次参考弗洛里奥的译本,因此,如果这位剧作家的思想在某种程度上没有受到蒙田《随笔》中思想的影响,那将是令人惊讶的。普拉特在《莎士比亚随笔》中详细描述了这种有趣的、或许难以言喻的影响。根据普拉特的说法,在阅读了《杂文》之后,莎士比亚开始接受……
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Shakespeare's Essays: Sampling Montaigne from Hamlet to The Tempest by Peter Platt (review)
In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:

  • Shakespeare's Essays: Sampling Montaigne from Hamlet to The Tempest by Peter Platt
  • Alan Farmer (bio)
Peter Platt. Shakespeare's Essays: Sampling Montaigne from Hamlet to The Tempest. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2020. Pp. x + 198. $110.00 cloth, $24.95 paper, $110.00 eBook.

Peter Platt's compelling new book, Shakespeare's Essays: Sampling Montaigne from Hamlet to The Tempest, is the culmination of over two decades of research on Shakespeare's thinking and his later plays. Platt's first book, Reason Diminished: Shakespeare and the Marvelous (University of Nebraska, 1997), focused on Shakespeare's late plays and the concept of wonder, while his next book, Shakespeare and the Culture of Paradox (Routledge, 2009), looked at the way logical opposites could be juxtaposed in order to question such concepts as justice, love, knowledge, and truth, a pervasive intellectual maneuver in the works of both Montaigne and Shakespeare. Most recently, Platt co-edited with Stephen Greenblatt an edition of John Florio's 1603 translation of Montaigne's Essays (New York Review of Books, 2014). One motivation for Platt's writing Shakespeare's Essays can perhaps be found in Greenblatt's introduction to this edition. In it, Greenblatt claims that, apart from some "passages in King Lear and The Tempest, the attempts to establish the direct influence of Montaigne on Shakespeare have never seemed fully and decisively convincing"(xxxi). After all, there is uncertainty about when Shakespeare may have read the Essays, either in French or in Florio's translation, and therefore about when Montaigne's influence can first be detected. But there is also the "more intractable problem" of Shakespeare and Montaigne sharing the same "historical moment," which could have led to "a shared grappling with pressing questions of faith, consciousness, and identity"(xxxii). Why assume Shakespeare was influenced by Montaigne rather than their both being shaped by the same currents of thoughts circulating in Europe and England in the late 16th and early 17th centuries? Shakespeare's Essays can arguably be seen as Platt's extended reply to his co-editor.

Platt opens the book with an important question: "Why do critics and audiences feel that there is something 'different' about the plays that Shakespeare wrote after 1603?" (1). According to Platt, stylistic and thematic features that mark Shakespeare's later plays—"the darkness of their comedy" and "the general pessimism of the largely tragic period that followed," their exploration of "doubt, contingency, uncertainty, and mutability" along with "instabilities of self, knowledge, and form" (1)—can be traced back to Shakespeare's reading of Florio's translation of the Essays. Understanding Shakespeare's plays after 1603 thus means understanding the influence Montaigne had on Shakespeare. And there [End Page 274] is no doubt that Shakespeare read Florio's translation. As the late 18th century Shakespeare editors Edward Capell and Edmund Malone demonstrated, at least one speech by Gonzalo in The Tempest was closely patterned on a passage in Florio's translation of Montaigne's essay "Of the Caniballes." Subsequent scholars built upon this initial observation, so much so that, by 1876, Friedrich Nietzsche could confidently proclaim that Shakespeare was Montaigne's "best reader" (2). One of the most important scholars for Platt is George Coffin Taylor, who in Shakspere's Debt to Montaigne (1925) catalogued verbal echoes of Montaigne that can be found in Shakespeare's plays. This kind of linguistic evidence allows Platt to pursue more ambitious questions about "larger thematic and structural parallels" between Montaigne and Shakespeare, about "connections and resonances that swirl throughout the essays and plays, especially those concerning the problems of knowing and being" (12). Although "resonances" and "thematic and structural parallels" may not show a "direct influence," they can also be seen as the likely result of Shakespeare's close engagement with Montaigne. Verbal echoes show that Shakespeare repeatedly turned to Florio's translation when he was writing plays after 1603, so it would be surprising if the playwright's thinking somehow remained unaffected by the ideas he found in Montaigne's Essays. It is this intriguing, if perhaps ineffable, type of influence that Platt details in Shakespeare's Essays.

According to Platt, after reading the Essays Shakespeare came to adopt...

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
COMPARATIVE DRAMA
COMPARATIVE DRAMA Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Comparative Drama (ISSN 0010-4078) is a scholarly journal devoted to studies international in spirit and interdisciplinary in scope; it is published quarterly (Spring, Summer, Fall, and Winter) at Western Michigan University
×
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