東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Eros and eikos mythos: Love and plau...

Zervos, Petros.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Eros and eikos mythos: Love and plausibility in Shakespeare's "Sonnets".

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,印刷品 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Eros and eikos mythos: Love and plausibility in Shakespeare's "Sonnets"./
作者:	Zervos, Petros.
面頁冊數:	311 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 74-11(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International74-11A(E).
標題:	Literature, General. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3587510
ISBN:	9781303247859

Eros and eikos mythos: Love and plausibility in Shakespeare's "Sonnets".
Zervos, Petros.

Eros and eikos mythos: Love and plausibility in Shakespeare's "Sonnets". - 311 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 74-11(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Indiana University, 2013.

The purpose of my dissertation is two-fold: to propose a mode of reading pre-Romantic lyric by reference to the narrative of the origin of lyric, the Homeric Hymn to Hermes, and to read Shakespeare's Sonnets through the lens of the Platonic dialogues that focus on Eros (love/desire), mimesis (imitation/representation), eikos mythos (plausibility/likely story), and poiesis (poetry, in the general sense of "making"). I do not think, and I do not try to prove, that Shakespeare was a Platonist in the sense of what the Renaissance/Early Modern Period understood by the term. If anything, I try to disprove it, by dismantling two misconceptions about Plato's philosophy: firstly, I argue that his idea of mimesis is much more unstable and much more flexible than the oversimplified interpretation "slavish and/or naturalistic adherence to the original." Secondly, I argue that Platonic Eros is anything but love without sex. Still, my main interest does not lie in proving or disproving Plato's influence on Shakespeare. I am only interested in discussing significant matches and mismatches between my lens and my object. I should also confess that I do not consider myself much of a Platonist in most senses of the word. There are quite a few aspects of Plato's thought that I find not very convincing philosophically. (Of course, this might be, at least in part, the result of the limitations that my own historicity and facticity impose upon me as a reader.) I do, however, find the literary art of the Dialogues not only convincing but nigh irresistible, maybe as irresistible as Shakespeare's art. In a way, this realization has been my starting point. I believe that a proper understanding of the aforementioned notions of Plato is not only useful but also necessary to discussing the intricacies of the ongoing dialectics between desire and representation, as well as rhetorical performance and plausibility in the Sonnets.

ISBN: 9781303247859Subjects--Topical Terms:

1018152
Literature, General.

Eros and eikos mythos: Love and plausibility in Shakespeare's "Sonnets".
LDR:02843nam a2200301 4500 001 1960055
005 20140528124309.5
008 150210s2013 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781303247859
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI3587510
035 $a AAI3587510
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Zervos, Petros. $3 2095633
245 1 0 $a Eros and eikos mythos: Love and plausibility in Shakespeare's "Sonnets".
300 $a 311 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 74-11(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: Judith H. Anderson.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Indiana University, 2013.
520 $a The purpose of my dissertation is two-fold: to propose a mode of reading pre-Romantic lyric by reference to the narrative of the origin of lyric, the Homeric Hymn to Hermes, and to read Shakespeare's Sonnets through the lens of the Platonic dialogues that focus on Eros (love/desire), mimesis (imitation/representation), eikos mythos (plausibility/likely story), and poiesis (poetry, in the general sense of "making"). I do not think, and I do not try to prove, that Shakespeare was a Platonist in the sense of what the Renaissance/Early Modern Period understood by the term. If anything, I try to disprove it, by dismantling two misconceptions about Plato's philosophy: firstly, I argue that his idea of mimesis is much more unstable and much more flexible than the oversimplified interpretation "slavish and/or naturalistic adherence to the original." Secondly, I argue that Platonic Eros is anything but love without sex. Still, my main interest does not lie in proving or disproving Plato's influence on Shakespeare. I am only interested in discussing significant matches and mismatches between my lens and my object. I should also confess that I do not consider myself much of a Platonist in most senses of the word. There are quite a few aspects of Plato's thought that I find not very convincing philosophically. (Of course, this might be, at least in part, the result of the limitations that my own historicity and facticity impose upon me as a reader.) I do, however, find the literary art of the Dialogues not only convincing but nigh irresistible, maybe as irresistible as Shakespeare's art. In a way, this realization has been my starting point. I believe that a proper understanding of the aforementioned notions of Plato is not only useful but also necessary to discussing the intricacies of the ongoing dialectics between desire and representation, as well as rhetorical performance and plausibility in the Sonnets.
590 $a School code: 0093.
650 4 $a Literature, General. $3 1018152
650 4 $a Language, Rhetoric and Composition. $3 1019205
650 4 $a Philosophy. $3 516511
650 4 $a Literature, English. $3 1017709
690 $a 0401
690 $a 0681
690 $a 0422
690 $a 0593
710 2 $a Indiana University. $b English. $3 1022024
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 74-11A(E).
790 $a 0093
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2013
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3587510