The Romantic Sublime and Shelley's Search for the "Unseen Power"

CCUR > College of International Studies and Foreign Languages > Department of English Language and Literature > journal articles > Item 987654321/32446

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://irlib.pccu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/32446

Title:	The Romantic Sublime and Shelley's Search for the "Unseen Power" 雄渾美學與雪萊的浪漫詩
Authors:	張禮文
Contributors:	英文系
Keywords:	雄渾柏克康德維思克雪萊浪漫派雄渾未知力量 Burke Kant Weiskel Shelley The Romantic sublime Unseen power
Date:	2005-03
Issue Date:	2016-03-29 13:05:26 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	本篇論文旨在探討雄渾美學觀的進展，並試圖以維思克的理論，分析在雪萊浪漫詩中主體與客體之間擦爆出來的火花。盛行於十八與十九世紀的雄渾美學觀，從柏克的分析中抬頭，於康德的理論中生花，而其所歷經的轉變，正可反應不同時代對於雄偉的自然景象所做的詮釋。柏克的雄渾觀是一種對人類想像力的積極肯定，但康德的則是人類理性對不可知的事物所做的消極妥協。維思克以此二位大師的理論與基礎，結合心理學與符號學的概念，完成了他對浪漫詩及浪漫詩人的研究。根據維克思的看法，客體與主體之間乃意指與所指的關係。當所指保有堅定的信仰時，即可跨越符號的限制，以文字征服意指的雄渾。因此渥資華斯得以成功克服伊迪帕思情結，積極肯定詩人的崇高地位。相反地，雪萊在其詩中所透露出的懷疑與掙扎，就維思克看來，只是所指薄弱的信仰之下所造成的結果。然而，維思克忽略了在意指與所指之間，存在著詩人對於創造力與信之間的認定問題，其複雜度絕不亞於佛洛伊德的伊迪帕思情結。本文嘗試藉由討論兩首雪萊的自然詩，挑戰維思克的理念，並檢視詩人在客體與主體之間產生的矛盾與掙扎。 This paper aims to discuss theories about the sublime on esthetics during both the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries and to study Shelley’s romantic search for the “unseen Power” behind the natural sublime. I will start from the differences and similarities between Burke’s and Kant’s beliefs, hoping to exemplify the factors that sever Burke’s positive sublime form Kant’s negative sublime as well as the subtle transition of aesthetic focus that shifts from external objects to internal feelings fo the subjects. a close reader of both Burke and Kant, Weiskel in the 1970s lined the traditional study of the sublime with psychological and semiotic criticism in The Romantic Sublime, shedding a new light on the discussion of the aesthetics in the Romantic period. The second part of this paper focuses on the theme of the Romantic sublime through reading Shelley’s two poems. On of the purposes of this study is to understand the significance in the poet’s struggle of accepting the presence of the “unseen Power,” and his reluctance in naming and recognizing the sublime as a representation of “God.” Lacking Weiskel’s egoistic faith in the Diety, Shelley in essence displays neither negative nor positive sublime; rather, he underscores an more harmonic relationship between the viewed object and the judging subject, a more flexible link between the signifier and the signified.
Relation:	淡江人文社會學刊 22 民94.03 頁57-72
Appears in Collections:	[Department of English Language and Literature ] journal articles

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
index.html		0Kb	HTML	276	View/Open

View Licence

Loading...