Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Shakespeare’s remarkable ability to detect and express important new currents and moods in his culture often led him to dramatise human interactions in terms of the presence or absence of tolerance. Differences of religion, gender, nationality, and what is now called ‘race’ are important in most of Shakespeare’s plays, and varied ways of bridging these differences by means of sympathy and understanding are often depicted. The full development of a tolerant society is still incomplete, and this study demonstrates how the perception Shakespeare showed in relation to its earlier development are still instructive and valuable today. Many recent studies of Shakespeare’s work have focused on reflections of the oppression or containment of minority, deviant, or non-dominant groups or outlooks. This book reverses that trend and examines Shakespeare’s fascination with the desires that underlie tolerance, including in relation to religion, race, and sexuality, through close analysis of many Shakespearian plays, passages, and themes."

"Latar belakang penulis memilih judul tersebut adalah keingintahuan penulis atas kegagalan tokoh utama sebagai individu usia tua. Kegagalan bagi individu usia tua bagi kebanyakan manusia sering dikaitkan dengan kebijaksanaan. Dalam skripsi ini penulis ingin mencari tahu penyebab kegagalan tokoh utama selain faktor tersebut. Untuk mencari tahu kegagalan tersebut, penulis mengambil teori psikososial Erik. H. Erickson. Di dalam Teori Perkembangan Psikososial Manusia, Erik . H. Erickson mengatakan bahwa manusia mempunyai delapan tahap perkembangan yang harus dilalui dalam hidupnya. Kedelapan tahapan tersebut adalah tahap infant atau bayi, tahap anal muscular, tahap genital locomotor atau bermain, tahap latency atau sekolah, tahap remaja, tahap dewasa awal, tahap dewasa pertengahan, dan tahap dewasa akhir atau masa tua. Di setiap tahapnya, manusia mempunyai tugas yang harus dilaksanakan. Jika tugas tersebut tidak dilaksanakan, maka individu tersebut telah gagal melewati suatu tahap. Misalnya, individu usia tua mempunyai tugas mencapai integritas ego dalam tahap masa tua. Jika individu usia tua tidak mencapai integritas ego, maka dia akan dikatakan sebagai individu usia tua yang gagal. Oleh karena itu, penulis juga mencari tahu integritas ego dari tokoh utama yang berkaitan dengan faktor-faktor kegagalannya. Untuk mengetahui Raja Lear termasuk ke dalam kategori individu usia tua yang gagal atau berhasil, penulis menggunakan acuan Teori Perkembangan Manusia Hamachek. Teori Hamachek adalah teori psikososial perpanjangan dari teori Erik. H Erickson. Dalam teori tersebut, Hamachek membuat faktor-faktor yang menyebabkan seorang individu dikatakan gagal atau berhasil di satu tahap. Di tahap masa tua, Hamachek mengatakan keberhasilan individu usia tua ditentukan dengan adanya kualitas ego negatif, sikap bertanggungjawab, penerimaan kenyataan, penerimaan kematian, tidak mudah tertekan, beapresiasi terhadap kehidupan, optimistis, penyatuan dengan kehidupan dan kebijaksanaan. Penulis menganalisis bahwa penyebab kegagalan Raja Lear sebagai individu usia tua adalah adanya kualitas ego negatif seperti ketidakpercayaan, kebingungan identitas, rasa malu, rasa bersalah, dan inferioritas di dalam diri Raja Lear. Selanjutnya, pandangan Raja Lear terhadap kehidupan dan kematian juga negatif. Kematian bagi Raja Lear dianggap sebagai suatu beban yang berat. Sedangkan, sikap emosional Raja Lear menyebabkan dia mudah stress, putus asa, dan kecewa dalam tahap masa tuanya. Sikap kecewa tersebut menyebabkan Raja Lear berada dalam fase menyalahkan yang membuatnya bersikap tidak bijaksana. Analisis keseluruhan terhadap Raja Lear tersebut menunjukkan bahwa Raja Lear adalah individu usia tua yang telah gagal dalam tahap masa tuanya.Konsep"

"This is the first collaborative volume to place Shakespeare’s works within the landscape of early modern political thought. Until recently, literary scholars have not generally treated Shakespeare as a participant in the political thought of his time, unlike his contemporaries Ben Jonson, Edmund Spenser and Philip Sidney. At the same time, historians of political thought have rarely turned their attention to major works of poetry and drama. A distinguished international and interdisciplinary team of contributors examines the full range of Shakespeare’s writings in order to challenge conventional interpretations of plays central to the canon, such as Hamlet ; open up novel perspectives on works rarely considered to be political, such as the Sonnets ; and focus on those that have been largely neglected, such as The Merry Wives of Windsor. The result is a coherent and challenging portrait of Shakespeare’s distinctive engagement with the characteristic questions of early modern political thought : among them, corruption and citizenship, education and persuasion, the hazards of the court and the demands of the commonwealth."

"Shakespeare and Social Dialogue opens up a new approach to Shakespeare's language and the rhetoric of Elizabethan letters. Moving beyond claims about the language of individual Shakespearean characters, Magnusson develops a rhetoric of social exchange to analyze dialogue, conversation, sonnets, and particularly letters of the period, which are normally read as historical documents. The verbal negotiation of social and power relations such as service or friendship is explored in texts as diverse as Sidney family letters and Shakespeare's sonnets, merchant correspondence and Timon of Athens, Burghley's state letters and Henry IV Part . The book draws on ideas from discourse analysis and linguistic pragmatics, especially "politeness theory", relating these to key ideas in epistolary handbooks of the period, includingthose by Erasmus and Angel Day. Chapters on Henry VIII, King Lear, Much Ado About Nothing, and Othello demonstrate that Shakespeare's dialogic art is deeply rooted in the everyday language of Elizabethan culture. Magnusson creates a way of reading both literary texts and historical documents which bridges the gap between the methods of new historicism and linguistic criticism."