請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/45287完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 紀蔚然(Wei-jan Chi) | |
| dc.contributor.author | Tzu-chieh Huang | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 黃資絜 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-15T04:12:30Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2015-02-04 | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2010-02-04 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2010 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2010-01-25 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 一、中文部分：
于貝斯菲爾德（Anna Ubersfeld）著，宮寶榮譯。《戲劇符號學》。1981。北京：中國戲劇出版社，2004。 巴特勒（Judith Butler）著，林郁庭譯。《性�別惑亂──女性主義與身分顛覆》（Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity）。台北：桂冠出版社，2008。 巴赫金（Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin）著。〈史詩與小說〉。《巴赫金全集》。錢中文主編。第三卷。河北：河北教育出版社，1998。505-545。 布思（Wayne C. Booth）。〈隱含作者的復活：為何要操心？〉。《當代敘事理論指南》。詹姆斯•費倫（James Phelan）、彼得•J•拉比諾維茨（Peter J. Rabinowitz）編。北京：北京大學出版社，2007。63-80。 布萊希特（Bertolt Brecht）著，丁揚忠等譯。《布萊希特論戲劇》。北京：中國戲劇出版社，1989。 弗盧德尼克（Monika Fludernik）著，馬海良譯。〈敘事理論的歷史（下）〉。《當代敘事理論指南》。詹姆斯•費倫（James Phelan）、彼得•J•拉比諾維茨（Peter J. Rabinowitz）編。北京：北京大學出版社，2007。22-47。 申丹。〈何為「不可靠敘述」？〉。《外國文學評論》，No.4， 2006。133-143。 石黑一雄（Kazuo Ishiguro）著，于而彥譯。《長日將盡》。1989。台北：皇冠出版社，1993。 亞里士多德著，苗力田主編。《亞里士多德全集》。北京：中國人民大學出版社，1997。 柯里（Mark Currie）著，寧一中譯。《後現代敘事理論》。北京：北京大學出版社，2003。 柏拉圖著，候健譯。《柏拉圖理想國》。台北：聯經出版社，1980。 紀蔚然。《現代戲劇敘事觀──建構與解構》。台北：書林出版社，2007修訂版。 紐寧（Ansgar Nünning）著，馬海良譯。〈重構「不可靠敘述」概念：認知方法與修辭方法的綜合〉。《當代敘事理論指南》。詹姆斯•費倫（James Phelan）、彼得•J•拉比諾維茨（Peter J. Rabinowitz）編。北京：北京大學出版社，2007。81-101。 張小虹。〈女同志理論〉。《女性主義理論與流派》。顧燕翎主編。台北：女書文化，1996。243-268。 ──。〈東方服飾──《蝴蝶君》中的文化�性慾�劇場含混〉。《性別越界》。台北：聯經出版社，1993。138-160。 傅柯（Michel Foucault）著，尚衡譯。《性意識史──第一卷：導論》。1978。台北：桂冠出版社，1990。 ──，劉北成、楊遠嬰譯。《規訓與懲罰》。1975。北京：三聯書店，1999。 喬伊斯（James Joyce）著，蕭乾、文潔若譯。《尤利西斯》。台北：貓頭鷹出版社，1999。 斯托帕（Tom Stoppard）著，楊晉等譯。《戲謔──湯姆•斯托帕戲劇選》。上海：南海出版社，2005。 渥厄（Patricia Waugh）著，錢競、劉雁濱譯。《後設小說──自我意識小說的理論與實踐》（Metafiction: the theory and practice of self-conscious fiction），1987。台北縣：駱駝出版社，1995。 費倫（James Phelan）著，陳永國譯。《作為修辭的敘事》。北京：北京大學出版社，2002。 費倫與瑪汀（James Phelan & Patricia Mary Martin）著，馬海良譯。〈威茅斯經驗：同故事敘述、不可靠性、倫理與《人約黃昏時》〉。《新敘事學》。戴衛•赫爾曼（David Herman）主編。北京：北京大學出版社，2002。35-57。 赫爾曼（David Herman）著，馬海良譯。引言。《新敘事學》。戴衛•赫爾曼（David Herman）主編。北京：北京大學出版社，2002。1-26。 ──。〈敘事理論的歷史（上）〉。《當代敘事理論指南》。詹姆斯•費倫（James Phelan）、彼得•J•拉比諾維茨（Peter J. Rabinowitz）編。北京：北京大學出版社，2007。3-21。 趙毅衡。〈「敘事」還是「敘述」？──一個不能再「權宜」下去的術語混亂〉。《外國文學評論》。第二期，2009。228-232。 熱奈特（Gérard Genette）著，廖素珊、楊恩祖譯。〈敘事的論述──關於方法的討論〉。《辭格III》。台北：時報出版社，2003。71-315。譯自Figures III, 1972。 薩依德（Edward W. Said）著，王志弘等譯。《東方主義》。1978。台北：立緒出版社，1999。 蘇國榮。《戲曲美學》。北京：文化藝術出版社，1999。 二、英文部分： Abel, Lionel. Metatheatre: A New View of Dramatic Form. New York: Hill and Wang public, 1963. Aristotle. “De Poetica.” The Basic Work of Aristotle. ed. Richard Mckeon. 三重市: 大興圖書, 1971. 1455-1487. Barthes, Roland. Image, Music, Text. 1977. trans. Stephen Heath. New York: Noonday Press, 1993. Bigsby, C.W.E.. “Seeking a Balance between Art and History.” Tom Stoppard: Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, Jumpers & Travesties. ed. T. Bareham. London: Macmillan Education Ltd, 1990. 206-210. Bigsby, Chistopher. “Paula Vogel.” Contemporary American Playwrights. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999. 289-329. Booth, C. Wayne. The Rhetoric of Fiction. 1961. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968. ──. The Rhetoric of Irony. Chicago: The Universtiy of Chicago Press, 1974. Brassell, Tim. “The Importance of Being Carr.” Tom Stoppard: an Assessment. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1985. 136-162. ──. “Concern with the Concepts of Art and Revolution.” Tom Stoppard: Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, Jumpers & Travesties. ed. T. Bareham. London: Macmillan Education Ltd, 1990.202-206. Brecht, Bertolt. Brecht on Theatre: The Development of an Aesthetic. 1964. ed. and trans. John Willett. 14th print. London: Methuen, 1979. Brook, Peter. “Key Words in Brecht’s Theory and Practice.” The Cambridge Companion to Brecht. ed. Peter Thomson & Glendyr Sacks. New York: University of Cambridge Press, 1994. 185-200. Chatman, Seymour. Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1978. Chiu, Chin-jung（邱錦榮）. Metadrama: Shakespeare and Stoppard. Taipei: Bookman Books Ltd., 2000. Chow, Rey. “The Dream of a Butterfly.” Human, All Too Human. ed. Diana Fuss. New York: Routledge, 1995. 61-92. Claycomb, Ryan. “Staging Psychic Excess: Parodic Narrative and Transgressive Performance.” Journal of Narrative Theory 37.1, winter 2007. 104-127. Currie, Mark. Introduction. Metafiction. ed. Mark Currie. London and New York : Longman Group, 1995. 1-18. ──. “True Lies: Unreliable Identities in Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde.” Postmodern Narrative Theory. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1998. 117-134. ──. “Temporality and Self-Distance.” About Time: Narrative, Fiction and the Philosophy of Time. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2007. 51-72. Delaney, Paul. “Mortal Flesh in a Moral Matrix of Words: The Temporal and the Timeless in Travesties.” Tom Stoppard - The Moral Vision of the Major Plays. Hampshire: Macmillan, 1990. 58-104. Demetz, Peter. Introduction. Brecht: A Collection of Critical Essays. ed. Peter Demetz. NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1962. 1-15. Ditor, Rachel & Selman, Jan. “M. Butterfly: Staging Choices and Their Meanings.” A Vision of the Orient: texts, intertexts, and contexts of Madame Butterfly. ed. Jonathan Wisenthal et al. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006. 227-237. Elam, Keir. The Semiotics of Theatre and Drama. London: Methuen, 1980. Fludernik, Monika. “Narrative and Drama.” Theorizing Narrativity. ed. John Pier, García Landa,and José Ángel. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2008. 355-383. Frieze, James W.. The Interpretation of Difference: Staging Identity in the United States (1986-92). Diss. University of Wisconsin, 2002. Garber, Marjorie. “The Occidental Tourist: M. Butterfly and the Scandal of Transvestism.” Nationalisms and Sexualities. ed. Andrew Parker et al. New York: Routledge, 1992. 121-146; rpt. “Phanroms of the Opera: Actor, Diplomat, Transvestite, Spy.” Vested Interests: Cross-Dressing and Cultural Anxiety. New York: Routledge, 1992. 234-266. Garner, Stanton B., Jr. The Absent Voice: Narrative Comprehension in the Theater. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1989. Genette, Gérard. Narrative Discourse. trans. Jane E. Lewin. 1972. Oxford: Blackwell, 1980. Gold, Margaret. “A New Chapter in the History of the Comedy of Ideas.” Tom Stoppard: Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, Jumpers & Travesties. ed. T. Bareham. London: Macmillan Education Ltd, 1990. 184-189. Grace, Sherrill. “Playing Butterfly with David Henry Hwang and Robert Lepage.” A Vision of the Orient: texts, intertexts, and contexts of Madame Butterfly. ed. Jonathan Wisenthal et al. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006. 136-151. Green, Amy S.. “Whose Voices Are These? : The Arts of Language in the Plays of Suzan-Lori Parks, Paula Vogel, and Diana Son.” Women Writing Plays: Three Decades of the Susan Smith Blackburn Prize. ed. Alexis Greene. Austin : University of Texas Press, 2006. 143-157. Grist, Leighton. “ ‘It’s Only a Piece of Meat’ : Gender Ambiguity, Sexuality, and Politics in The Crying Game and M. Butterfly.” Cinema Journal 42, no.4, summer 2003. 3-28. Holthusenn, Hans Egon. “Brecht's Dramatic Theory.” Brecht: A Collection of Critical Essays. ed. Peter Demetz. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1962. 106-116. Hornby, Richard. “M. Butterfly, Macbeth, Joe Turner’s Come and Gone.” Hudson Review, 41:3, Autumn 1988. 512-514. Hwang, David Henry. M. Butterfly. New York: Plume, 1989. Jenkins, Anthony. The Theatre of Tom Stoppard. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1987. Kehde, Suzanne. “Engendering the Imperial Subject: The (De)construction of (Western) Masculinity in David Henry Hwang’s M. Butterfly and Graham Greene’s The Quite American.” Fictions of Masculinity: Crossing Cultures, Crossing Sexualities. ed. Peter Murphy. New York: New York University Press, 1994. 241-254. Krasner, David. “The Body in Pain: American Drama, 1990-2000.” American Drama 1945-2000: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Pub., 2006. 147-182. Kronik, John. “Invasions from Outer Spaces: Narration and the Dramatic Art in Spanish America.” Latin American Theatre Review, 26, 1993. 25-47. Lauretis, de Teresa. “Popular Culture, Public and Private Fantasies: Femininity and Fetishism in David Cronenberg's M. Butterfly.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, vol. 24, no. 2, 1999. 303-334. Lye, Colleen. “M. Butterfly and the Rhetoric of Antiessentialism: Minority Discourse in an International Frame.” The Ethnic Canon: Histories, Institutions, and Interventions. ed. David Palumbo-Liu. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1995. 260-289. Martin, Wallace. Recent Theories of Narrative. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2004. Mcinturff, Kate. “That Old Familiar Song: The Theatre of Culture in David Henry Hwang’s M. Butterfly.” A Vision of the Orient: texts, intertexts, and contexts of Madame Butterfly. ed. Jonathan Wisenthal et al. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006. 72-88. Morrison, Kristin. Canters and Chronicles: The Use of Narrative in the Plays of Samuel Beckett and Harold Pinter. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1983. Moy, James S.. “David Henry Hwang’s M. Butterfly and Philip Kan Gotanda's Yankee Dawg You Die: Repositioning Chinese American Marginality in the American Stage.” Theatre Journal 42.1, 1990. 48-56. Nolan, Paul T.. “Two Memory Plays: The Glass Menagerie and After the Fall.” Originally published in The McNeese Review 17, 1966. 27-38. Tennessee Williams's The Glass Menagerie. ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House, 1988. 74-77. Nünning, Ansgar & Sommer, Roy. “Diegetic and Mimetic Narrativity: Some further Steps towards a Narratology of Drama.” Theorizing Narrativity. ed. John Pier, García Landa,and José Ángel. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2008. 331-354. Nünning, Ansgar. “Unreliable, Compared to What? : Towards a Cognitive Theory of Unreliable Narration: Prolegomena and Hypotheses.” Transcending Boundaries: Narratology in Context. ed. Walter Grunzweig and Andreas Solbach, Tubingen: Gunther Narr Verlag, 1999. 53-73. Olson, Greta. “Reconsidering Unreliability: Fallible and Untrustworthy Narrators.” Narrative, vol. 11, no. 1, January 2003. 93-109. Pellegrini, Ann. “Repercussions and Remainders in the Plays of Paula Vogel: An Essay in Five Moments.” A Companion to Twentieth-Century American Drama. ed. David Krasner. Oxford: Blackwell Pub., 2005. 473-485. Pfister, Manfred. The Theory and Analysis of Drama. trans. John Halliday. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988. Plato. “Rupublic.” The Collected Dialogues of Plato. trans. Paul Shorey. ed. Edith Hamilton & Huntington Cairns. 台北市: 虹橋書店, 1971. 575-844. Reinelt, Janelle. After Brecht: British Epic Theater. Michigan: University Press of Michigan, 1996. Richardson, Brian.“Point of View in Drama: Diegetic Monologue, Unreliable Narrators, and the Author's Voice on Stage.”Comparative Drama, 22:3, Fall 1988. 193-214. ──. “ Voice and Narration in Postmodern Drama.” New Literary History, 32, 2001. 681-694. ──. “Unnatural Narration in Contemporary Drama.” Unnatural Voices: Extreme Narration in Modern and Contemporary Fiction. Ohio: Ohio University Press, 2006. 106-113. Robinson, Gabriele Scott. “Plays Without Plot: The Theatre of Tom Stoppard. Educational Theatre Journal, vol. 29, no. 2, March 1977. 37-48. Rod, David K.. “The Importance of Carr.” Tom Stoppard: Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, Jumpers & Travesties. ed. T. Bareham. London: Macmillan Education Ltd, 1990. 177-184. Rusinko, Susan. “Travesties: Caviar to the General Public.” Tom Stoppard. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1986. 46-60. Savran, David. “Paula Vogel as Male Impersonator.” A Queer Sort of Materialism: Recontextualizing American Theater, 2003. 187-204. Shin, Andrew.“Projected Bodies in David Henry Hwang’s M. Butterfly and Golden Gate.” Melus, vol. 27, no. 1, Spring 2002. 177-197. Sokel, Walter H.. “Brecht's Split Characters and His Sense of the Tragic.” Brecht: A Collection of Critical Essays. ed. Peter Demetz. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1962. 127-137. Stanley, N.J.. “Screamingly Funny and Terrifyingly Shocking: Paula Vogel as Domestic Detective.” Staging a Cultural Paradigm: The Political and the Personal in American Drama. ed. Barbara Ozieblo and Miriam Lopez-Rodriguez. New York : P.I.E.-P. Lang., 2002. 357-372. Stoppard, Tom. Travesties. New York: Grove Press Inc., 1975. Tan, K. W. Peter. A Stylistics of Drama: With Special Focus on Stoppard’s Travesties. Singapore: Singapore University Press, 1993. Vogel, Paula. The Baltimore Waltz and Other Plays. New York : Theatre Communications Group, 1996. ──. Interview with David Savran. The Playwright's Voice: American Dramatists on Memory, Writing and the Politic of Culture. ed. David Savran. New York: Theatre Communication Group, 1999. 263-288. ──. Interview with Ann Linden. “Seducing the Audience: Politics in the Play of Paula Vogel.” The Playwright's Muse. New York: Routledge, 2002. 231-252. ──. Interview with Jonathan Kalb. “American Playwrights on Beckett.” Performing Arts Journal, 29.1, 2007. 1-20. Wall, Kathleen. “The Remains of the Day and Its Challenges to Theories of Unreliable Narration.” Journal of Narrative Technique, 24.1, 1994. 18-42. Whitaker, Thomas R.. “The Prism of Travesty.” Tom Stoppard: Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, Jumpers & Travesties. ed. T. Bareham. London: Macmillan Education Ltd, 1990. 194-201 Yacobi, Tamar. “Interart Narrative: (Un) Reliability and Ekphrasis.” Poetics Today, 21, 2000. 708-747. ──. “Authorial Rhetoric, Narratorial (Un) Reliability, Divergent Readings, Tolstoy's Kreutzer Sonata.” A Companion to Narrative Theory. ed. James Phelan, Peter J. Rabinowitz. Malden: Blackwell, 2005. 108-123. Zerweck, Bruno. “Historicizing Unreliable Narration: Unreliability and Cultural Discourse in Narrative Fiction.” Style, vol.35, no.1, Spring 2001. 151-178. Zinman, Toby. “Travesties, Night and Day, The Real Thing.” The Cambridge Companion to Tom Stoppard. ed. Katherine E. Kelly. New York: University of Cambridge Press, 2001. 120-135. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/45287 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 「不可靠敘述者」的概念來自敘述學，原本是由小說研究中歸納而來的修辭手法，用以描述小說中「敘述者不可盡信」的現象。運用不可靠敘述能使小說的敘述方式更為多樣或產生反諷效果。該手法也和寫實主義傳統互為對立。本論文希望指出不可靠敘述手法不僅存在於小說中，亦存在於戲劇裡。接著運用敘述學方法分析三齣回憶劇──《蝴蝶君》、《巴爾第摩華爾滋》與《戲謔》，希望證明不可靠敘述者在三劇中的效果和小說相同，能夠打破寫實主義的慣例與常規。
在運用不可靠敘述者的回憶劇中，觀眾會先陷入敘述者製造的「假象」中，誤以為故事已被他們掌握，隨後又從假象脫離並得知故事的「真相」，進而意識到敘述的建構性。以《蝴蝶君》而言，雖然它的劇情發展因果緊密，仍遵循寫實主義的邏輯，但劇作家採用不可靠敘述已讓單一聲音獨斷的傳統敘述手法遭遇挑戰。在《巴爾第摩華爾滋》裡，敘述者的不可靠使被敘內容猶如敘述者的意識流，虛實難辨，也讓被敘內容得以打破傳統的線性結構，以單元的方式呈現。這種單元式的跳躍結構符合布萊希特疏離劇場的標準，使得本劇得以成為反寫實劇。《戲謔》一劇的結構同樣是非線性。由於年邁敘述者的記憶錯亂，被敘內容反反覆覆，不時還得倒帶重來。不可靠敘述讓斯托帕得以大開回憶劇的玩笑，以錯記、誤記和倒帶等手法戲仿回憶劇這個形式，也使《戲謔》成為一齣後設的非寫實劇。上述三齣回憶劇的不可靠敘述手法，都產生了破壞甚至顛覆寫實主義的功用。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T04:12:30Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-99-R95129004-1.pdf: 1181032 bytes, checksum: 6ca54f607ab789552db2e31bd9b7c247 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 中文摘要 i
目錄 ii 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究動機與宗旨 1 第二節 文獻回顧 3 第三節 研究範圍及方法 8 第二章 不可靠敘述理論與戲劇敘述研究 12 第一節 不可靠敘述理論 12 一、修辭方法與不可靠敘述的界定 12 二、建構（認知）方法與不可靠敘述史 17 三、綜觀修辭與建構 20 第二節 戲劇敘述研究 20 一、模仿與敘述之論爭 20 二、戲劇中的敘述成分 23 第三節 戲劇中的敘述類型 27 一、開場白、收場白、離題歌隊（prologues, epilogues, discursive chorus）： 28 二、生產型敘述者（generative narrators）： 29 三、獨白（monologue）： 29 四、內在型敘述者（internal narrators）： 30 小結 30 第三章 與謊言追逐──《蝴蝶君》中敘述者的自我意識分裂 32 第一節 揭示自我「真相」的自白技藝 33 第二節 劇情概要 36 第三節 敘述者的意識分裂 37 第四節 觀看與言說 45 第五節 劇本的自我分裂 50 小結 54 第四章 在「真實」與虛構間起舞──《巴爾第摩華爾滋》裡不可靠敘述的疏離效果 55 第一節 疏離效果與戲仿顛覆 56 第二節 劇情概要 60 第三節 「不可靠」的語言教學課程 62 第四節 界線與分裂扮演 66 第五節 餘論 73 小結 74 第五章 戲仿回憶劇──《戲謔》的不可靠敘述與後設手法 76 第一節 後設文本 77 第二節 劇情概要 81 第三節 回憶敘述的人為性質 82 第四節 雙層框架與多敘法 87 第五節 過度「認真」的風險 91 小結 96 第六章 結論 97 參考文獻 101 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.title | 跨越寫實藩籬——回憶劇中不可靠的敘述者 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Crossing the Barriers of Realism: The Unreliable Narrator in Memory Plays | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 98-1 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 姜翠芬(Tsui-fen Jiang),高維泓(Wei-Hung Kao) | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 戲劇敘述者,回憶劇,不可靠敘述者,《蝴蝶君》,《巴爾第摩華爾滋》,《戲謔》, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | drama narrator,memory play,unreliable narrator,M. Butterfly,The Baltimore Waltz,Travesties, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 111 | |
| dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2010-01-25 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 文學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 戲劇學研究所 | zh_TW |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 戲劇學系 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-99-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 1.15 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件，除了特別指名其著作權條款之外，均受到著作權保護，並且保留所有的權利。