尤金 奥尼尔的狂欢式书写风格

合集下载

Eugene_O'Neill作品及写作风格

Eugene_O'Neill作品及写作风格

The late period (1939-1943)
• Period of maturity, return to realism (realism+modernism) • The Iceman Cometh (1946) 《送冰的人来了》
• Long Day’s Journey Into Night (1956) 《进入黑 夜的漫长旅程》, autobiographical


Style and techniques

Experimenting with new styles and forms, borrowing from both traditional and modern theories and techniques
• • • • • Realism Naturalism Symbolism Expressionism Masks, choir, interior monologue, asides
The early period (1913-1919)
• Period of apprenticeship • Bound East for Cardiff (1916)《东航卡迪夫》 his first play, marking the beginning of O’s long and successful dramatic career and ushered in the modern era of the American theatre
Features
These plays are daring forays (袭击) into race relations, class conflicts, sexual bondage, social critiques, and American tragedies on the Greek model. These plays are known for their unusual stage devices and powerful use of symbolism, and The Hairy Ape (1922) is one of O’Neill’s experiments in expressionism.

尤金·奥尼尔戏剧的表现主义特征

尤金·奥尼尔戏剧的表现主义特征

南方论刊·2020年第12期尤金·奥尼尔戏剧的表现主义特征李紫红(广东第二师范学院 广东广州 510303)【摘要】美国戏剧家尤金·奥尼尔的戏剧既遵循表现主义艺术观的总原则,又因为在“戏剧叙事”和“戏剧冲突”这两个维度的不同处理风格而独具特色。

他的戏剧叙事方式乱中有序,场景设置在缺乏逻辑的表面之下自有其艺术规律;另一方面,他强化内在冲突,弱化外在冲突,刻意剥离冲突之间的逻辑关联,形成冲淡之美的同时,在貌似混乱的表象背后仍能清晰表现人的内在本质和生活的实质。

【关键词】尤金·奥尼尔;表现主义特征;戏剧叙事;戏剧冲突文化长廊尤金·奥尼尔(Eugene O’Neill)曾经四度获得普策利戏剧奖,并且至今仍是美国唯一一位获得诺贝尔文学奖的剧作家,为戏剧世界奉献了一系列令人难忘的作品,包括《安娜·克里斯蒂》《琼斯皇》《毛猿》《上帝的儿女都有翅膀》《榆树下的欲望》《奇异的插曲》《悲悼》《送冰的人来了》《进入黑夜的漫长旅程》《休伊》等。

佩尔·哈尔斯特龙在1936年诺贝尔文学奖官方颁奖辞中高度赞扬奥尼尔的创新求变及其作品中蕴含的悲剧精神;同时,他明确指出,奥尼尔在《琼斯王》中“大胆运用表现主义手法处理思想及社会问题”[1]。

奥尼尔在获奖致辞中也毫不掩饰自己对表现主义戏剧大师奥古斯特·斯特林堡的敬仰以及来自他的影响[2]。

从亚里士多德的“悲剧是对一个严肃、完整、有一定长度的行动的模仿”[3]到自然主义作家爱弥尔·左拉从人物塑造角度出发的“文学再现生活”[4],文学对于生活的呈现一直遵循传统法则。

19世纪末20世纪初滥觞于欧洲的表现主义流派视挖掘生活的本质为艺术的主要任务,强调自我,在反传统的艺术形式中努力表现被扭曲的现实生活。

表现主义戏剧弱化戏剧情节和人物性格,重视人物内在情感的外化,着力表现梦幻意识,情节的发展相对缺乏逻辑性[5]。

浅析《送冰的人来了》中的狂欢之维

浅析《送冰的人来了》中的狂欢之维

浅析《送冰的人来了》中的狂欢之维作者:刘志洁来源:《青年文学家》2013年第06期摘要:《送冰的人来了》是美国戏剧之父尤金·奥尼尔晚期的重要代表作,剧中透露着狂欢化文学的特征,如狂欢化广场、狂欢化仪式、狂欢化人物、狂欢化颠覆等因素。

本文试从巴赫金狂欢化理论角度来挖掘该剧中的狂欢化之维。

关键词:《送冰的人来了》;狂欢化广场;加冕和脱冕;人物性格的矛盾和对立;冒渎不敬作者简介:刘志洁(1989.9-),女,河南省林州市,汉族,现为郑州大学英语语言文学专业2011级研究生,研究方向:英美文学。

[中图分类号]:I106 [文献标识码]:A[文章编号]:1002-2139(2013)-6-0-01尤金·奥尼尔是美国著名剧作家,是美国戏剧的奠基人和缔造者。

《送冰的人来了》(The Iceman Cometh)是奥尼尔的后期作品之一,剧中处处体现了狂欢化文学的典型特征,本文试从巴赫金狂欢化理论角度来挖掘该剧中的狂欢之维。

一、狂欢化广场狂欢化空间,即巴赫金认为的在狂欢化文学作品中经常出现重要情节的场所。

在现代的狂欢化作品中,狂欢化广场演变成了房内空间、卧室、餐厅等地方。

这部严肃戏剧虽然是沉重的、充斥着生活失意者白日梦的悲剧,然而又充满了嬉笑怒骂的轻喜剧色彩。

不同背景、形形色色的人物聚在一起,插科打诨、讽刺挖苦,粗俗、冒渎不敬的语言和仿佛闹剧的生日宴会场面使得哈里·霍普的小酒馆活像一个中世纪狂欢节的广场。

这个“倒霉餐厅,下等酒吧,穷途末路的咖啡店,不见天日的啤酒馆”不仅是这些被社会遗弃的酒鬼们逃避残酷现实世界的庇护所,更是他们寻找欢乐、尊严、幻想美好明天的场所,是充满节日气氛的狂欢化广场。

在现实生活中,不同的等级和地位的人们之间有一道不可逾越的鸿沟,而在狂欢式的生活中,由于取消了法令、禁令和限制,人们之间形成自由、平等、坦率和亲密的关系,随便而亲昵地接触。

霍普酒馆里的人们来自社会的不同阶层,鱼龙混杂。

奥尼尔的独幕剧创作

奥尼尔的独幕剧创作

奥尼尔的独幕剧创作作者:梁琼来源:《青年生活》2019年第23期尤金·奥尼尔早期独幕剧时期(1913-1919)主要是以自然主义的创作风格为主,大多还是其剧本习作,奧尼尔在此时期的没有使用过分的夸饰和其他表现主义创作手法,尽量自然地“把对生活的感受写下来,然后,让这些事实用他们自己喜欢的语言跟我的观众讲话”(《语言风格的形成:尤金·奥尼尔戏剧研究》)。

这些事实表现在奥尼尔早期创作中便是他对于青年时期作为海员与淘金经历,而他所描绘的水手形象开创了美国剧团的第一枪。

虽然在一定程度上,奥尼尔着实撼动了美国剧坛,但是不可否认,他的早期创作还是较为稚嫩的,剧作类型较为单一,剧情模式稍显稚嫩,不可避免的带有模式化/简单化的弊端,思想深度也较为浅显。

《东航卡迪夫》中扬克铲锈时不慎踩空处于濒死的边缘;《在交战区》中史密蒂由于宿酗酒选择海上生活来逃离这一处境;《归途迢迢》讲水手奥尔森打算脱离海上回归陆地生活却阴差阳错再次与陆地绝缘;《加勒比群岛之月》中具有东方哲思意味的老汤姆。

这些人物抑或是想离开大海,回归陆地生活;抑或是想继续留在海上,最终都被大海挟持着,背叛大海的水手命运便是死亡,看透大海“诅咒”的水手也只能默默接受大海命运的安排。

无论如何,水手的命运与大海紧紧捆绑在一起。

《东航卡迪夫》中扬克在弥留之际对好朋友德里斯科尔道出心中愿景,“一辈子呆在陆地上,有一个农场,有自己的房子,养些奶牛/猪和小鸡,农场在内地,闻不到海水的味道,自己有个家该多好!”。

他们幻想着离开大海过正常人的生活,有农场/有房子,再也闻不到大海的气息/再也不会看见一艘船/有妻子/孩子,过着普通人的生活,这在他们心中是最圆满的结局,可是天不如人愿,连这小小的心愿都无法实现。

只要有了这想法,大海便开始阻拦,水手们必须自己承担背叛大海的后果。

于是,扬克在弥留之际看见了黑衣女人,奥尔森被贩卖到另一艘货船继续海上漂流,扳机手老汤姆淡然的接受命运的安排,并在此程度上与大海达成一定意义的和解,他无法离开大海,水手们的命运掌握在大海手中。

继承与超越,尤金·奥尼尔戏剧中体现的希腊悲剧特点

继承与超越,尤金·奥尼尔戏剧中体现的希腊悲剧特点

继承与超越,尤金·奥尼尔戏剧中体现的希腊悲剧特点导语:尤金·奥尼尔作为美国现代戏剧的奠基人,他的作品形式不仅影响了美国戏剧的发展,对世界范围内的现代戏剧发展也产生了深远影响。

他的戏剧具有承前启后的意义,因为他不仅继承了莎士比亚戏剧的表现方式,还将古希腊戏剧进行了继承和发扬。

古希腊戏剧的一些特点在尤金奥尼尔的作品中常有出现,尤其是悲剧作品。

尤金·奥尼尔是以一系列戏剧揭开了他的戏剧创作,近二十年后又几乎是以另一部戏剧《休伊》结束了他的文学生涯。

作为美国迄今为止唯一获得过诺贝尔文学奖的剧作家尤金·奥尼尔号称"美国戏剧之父"。

其一生创作了30多部具有国际影响的戏剧,后来的美国剧作家如田纳西威廉斯、阿瑟米勒等多受其影响。

一、尤金·奥尼尔的介绍作为戏剧演员詹姆斯·奥尼尔的小儿子,尤金·奥尼尔自小在舞台边长大,耳濡目染,戏剧创作就成为他的终生追求。

他曾在写给哈佛大学的乔治皮尔斯·贝克的自荐信中写道"除了当艺术家,其它我什么都不当"。

尤金奥尼尔是以一系列戏剧开始了他的创作生涯的多次失败打击后,由《加勒比海之月》、《东航卡第夫》、《归途迢迢》、《在交战区》等四部被统称为《格林凯恩号》的戏剧让尤金奥尼尔初尝成功的喜悦。

尤金.奥尼尔雕塑戏剧让美国观众认识了奥尼尔,他还是在1924年宣布放弃戏剧创作,因为"我,奥尼尔现在对戏剧已经不再感兴趣了。

这种形式不能令人满意,它使人施展不开"。

此后的近二十年,奥尼尔便转向多幕剧创作,真的从未再染指戏剧。

然而令人吃惊的是,在奥尼尔重返舞台的创作成熟期他不仅创作了《长日入夜行》《卖冰的人来了》、《月找不幸人》等世界舞台上不朽的巨著还重拾戏剧这种他早已宣布放弃的戏剧形式,决心创作一系列的戏剧《作为讣告》由于身体原因,最终完成的只有写于1940年的《休伊》,该剧于1958年在瑞典首都斯德哥尔摩首次公演井取得了巨大的成功。

论尤金·奥尼尔《琼斯皇》的狂欢化特征

论尤金·奥尼尔《琼斯皇》的狂欢化特征

斯蒂 》 ( 1 9 2 0 ) 、 《 榆树下 的欲望 》 ( 1 9 2 4 ) 、 《 悲悼 》 ( 1 9 3 1 ) 无 深入 到琼斯 的灵魂 深处 , 揭示 “ 琼斯 逃往 森林之 后 的恐
论在技巧 的成熟还是思想 的深刻上 , 都 大大超越 了习作 惧 、 紧张 、 悔恨 、 内疚等复杂心理 ” 。 阶段 , 达 到了一个新 的高度 ; 另一方面 , 他 开始涉足 大量 2 . 巴 赫金 的 狂 欢 化 理 论
型的探索性戏剧 。 评论 界通常关注的是《 琼斯皇》 中的表 式世界观 。 这种世界 观强调的是如《 琼斯 皇》 中加冕脱冕 更新 的精神和平等对话 的精神 。 巴赫金 的狂欢 现主义特征 ,如刘清 波在 《 论< 琼 斯皇 >的象征手 法》 的交替 、
( 2 0 0 0 )中就指 出象 征手法 的运用在揭示 人物 内在 灵魂 化指 的是 狂欢 式 内容转化 为文学 的语言 表达 , 而狂欢 式
和挖 掘人 的精 神世界 的作 用 ,而 任如 意在 《 背叛 与灭 则指 的狂欢节清点活动 的利益 、 形式等 的总和。
亡— —<琼斯 皇 >中表 现主义戏 剧手 法 的研 究} ( 2 0 1 1 )
深入探析奥 尼尔的作 品《 琼斯 皇》 , 狂 欢化色彩 的纳
中研 究舞 台灯 光 与色彩 、 服装 、 音 响等在 展 现人物 内心 入是显而易见 的。 剧 中的皇帝居住 的宫殿 以及黑暗恐怖
国剧坛又有谁能替代他 ( 奥 尼尔 ) 的地位 ?5 0年前没有 , 即便 5 0年后 的今天 , 也仍然没有 。
1 . 时 间
在《 琼斯 皇》 的剧本设置 中 , 白昼 和黑 夜的交替不 在 1 9 2 0 年奥尼 尔刚出道不久 , 他的《 琼斯皇》 的鼓声很 具有世俗 意义的时间前进 意义 ,而只是 出于场景需要 。 快便传遍全 球几乎每个角落 。 由此可见 , 《 琼斯 皇》 的 问 全剧八幕 , 第 一场是下午 , 第八 场是黎 明 , 其余六幕全 是

论尤金奥尼尔对中国现当代话剧的影响

论尤金奥尼尔对中国现当代话剧的影响

论尤金·奥尼尔对中国现当代话剧的影响
尤金·奥尼尔(Eugene O'Neill)是20世纪最具影响力的话剧家之一,他的作品对世界戏剧产生了深远的影响。

在中国现当代话剧的发展中,尤金·奥尼尔的作品也产生了很大的影响。

首先,尤金·奥尼尔的作品曾经被翻译成中文并在中国上演。

他的作品包括《长日的旅程向夜晚》、《欲望号街车》,这些作品在上世纪50年代就被引入中国。

这些话剧以其深刻的思想、刻画人性的细致和精湛的语言技巧,给当时的中国戏剧界带来了新的启示。

其次,尤金·奥尼尔的作品激发了中国话剧创作者对话剧主题
和戏剧形式的多样化探索。

他的作品不仅着眼于家庭、社会、政治等领域,也关注个体的命运、追寻人生的意义等深层次的话题。

他突破传统的话剧形式,采用单一场景、情节穿插等创新手法,使话剧更加生动、多元化。

最后,尤金·奥尼尔的创作精神和写作方法也对中国话剧创作
产生了深远的影响。

他讲究探索人性与社会现实之间的关系,关注人类普遍的情感和生命况味,这一点与中国文化的价值观有着相通之处。

同时,他崇尚自由、个性,反对传统的限制和束缚,这种写作精神也与当时中国的文化大革命相吻合,为话剧创作者提供了思想上的支持和鼓励。

总之,尤金·奥尼尔对中国现当代话剧的影响是深远而重要的,他的作品推动了中国话剧的多元化发展,同时也为中国话剧创作者提供了启发和借鉴。

现代美国戏剧的缔造者尤金奥尼尔

现代美国戏剧的缔造者尤金奥尼尔

现代美国戏剧的缔造者尤金奥尼尔作为现代美国戏剧的缔造者,尤金·奥尼尔(Eugene O'Neill)在舞台上展现人与社会之间的冲突,以及人类在追求自由和幸福过程中所遇到的困境。

他通过独特的戏剧手法和深刻的社会洞察力,为美国戏剧史上留下了丰富的遗产。

尤金·奥尼尔生于1888年,是爱尔兰移民的儿子。

他曾在普林斯顿大学短暂学习,但很快就离开学校,开始在戏剧圈中摸爬滚打。

他的早期作品受自然主义和表现主义的影响,注重刻画社会底层人物,展现他们在困境中的挣扎和追求自由与幸福的努力。

奥尼尔的戏剧作品中充满了各种冲突,包括个人内心的冲突和社会环境的冲突。

他通过刻画人物内心的矛盾和情感变化,揭示了人性的复杂性和社会现实的残酷性。

同时,他也通过表现社会环境对个人命运的制约,揭示了社会的各种弊病和人类对自由与幸福的追求。

在奥尼尔的戏剧中,舞台形象通常都是充满张力和冲突的。

他运用表现主义的手法,将现实生活中的动作和情境抽象化,以此突出人物的情感冲突和内心矛盾。

同时,他还通过生动的语言描写,刻画了人物性格的复杂性和丰富性,使观众能够深入了解角色的内心世界。

奥尼尔的贡献在于他将美国戏剧推向了一个新的高度,使之成为与欧洲戏剧相媲美的艺术形式。

他的戏剧作品不仅揭示了社会的各种问题,而且通过表现主义和自然主义等手法,为美国戏剧注入了新的生命力。

他对美国戏剧的影响是深远的,他的作品不仅成为了经典,也启发了后来的剧作家和导演,使他们能够更好地探索和表达戏剧艺术的内涵。

尤金·奥尼尔作为现代美国戏剧的缔造者,通过其独特的戏剧手法和深刻的社会洞察力,为美国戏剧史上留下了丰富的遗产。

他的作品不仅揭示了人与社会之间的冲突和矛盾,也展现了人类对自由和幸福的追求。

他的贡献使美国戏剧成为了一种独特的艺术形式,并在世界戏剧舞台上占据了重要的地位。

在历史学的研究中,宏观和微观视角各有其特色和价值。

宏观视角着眼于全局,有利于我们了解历史发展的总体趋势和大规模事件。

论尤金·奥尼尔的戏剧创作艺术

论尤金·奥尼尔的戏剧创作艺术

论尤金奥尼尔的戏剧创作艺术付宁(上海电力学院直属外语系)摘要:尤金奥尼尔是第一位获得诺贝尔文学奖的美国戏剧作家。

在戏剧创作中。

艺术风格独特.表现手法丰富,取得了巨大的戏剧创作成就。

本论文通过研究和分析奥尼尔的人类悲观论及其戏剧创作形式和艺术技巧.探讨研究尤金.奥尼尔的悲剧创作现及其在创作中表现主义技巧的巧妙运用.从而展现他对美国戏剧发展所做的贡献。

关键词:剧作家;现实主义;表现主义;象征主义;神秘力量尤金.奥尼尔(1888—1953)是现代美国戏剧的奠基人.被誉为。

美国戏剧之父”。

奥尼尔的创作开拓了美国文学的戏剧王国。

他卓有成就的戏剧创作使美国民族戏剧走向成熟,并使之赶上了世界水平。

(一)奥尼尔的悲剧创作观尤金.奥尼尔的人生观富有浓厚的悲剧色彩.他一生创作了近50部戏剧,除一部喜剧外,都是悲剧。

他认为人类本身就是悲剧.是已经写成和尚未写成的悲剧中最令人震惊的悲剧。

他的作品以大海、拜金主义和商业价值与艺术价值的冲突为主题。

在奥尼尔的笔下.人生总是导致灾难。

他曾这样说过:。

我总是意识到在命运的后面有种力量.那是上帝.是我们过去的生命……。

我意识到人在其光荣而自毁的斗争中有一种永久的悲剧.人进行这种斗争是为了迫使这种力量去表现自己.而不是像动物传达微不足道的声音。

”他的悲剧意识始终是支配他创作的动机。

奥尼尔认为大多数现代剧作家都关心人与人之同的关系。

而他对此毫无兴趣。

他只关心人与上帝之间的关系.所谓。

人与上帝的关系”在古希腊悲剧中则是。

人与诸神”或者。

人与命运”的关系,这一主题体现了人与自身的生存环境的关系,这也是一切悲剧的永恒主题。

奥尼尔要在美国创造出可以与古希腊悲剧相媲美的悲剧——这是一种宗教悲剧.有香火缭绕的祭坛和身着长袍的祭司。

由此可见.奥尼尔对于。

人与上帝之间关系”的着迷正是他的悲尉意识的体现。

奥尼尔的命运观念的形成与他充满矛盾的思想体系密不可分。

他从十几岁就开始读尼采的书,相信尼采关于。

上帝死了”的观念。

榆树下欲望 剧本分析

榆树下欲望  剧本分析

《榆树下欲望》剧本分析作者介绍:尤金·奥尼尔(1888----1953),美国著名剧作家。

奥尼尔出生于纽约一个演员家庭,父亲是爱尔兰人。

1909年至1911年期间,奥尼尔曾至南美、非洲各地流浪,淘过金,当过水手、小职员、无业游民。

1911年回国后在父亲的剧团里当临时演员。

父亲不满意他的演出,他却不满意剧团的传统剧目。

他学习亨利克·易卜生和奥古斯特·斯特林堡,1914年到哈佛大学选读戏剧技巧方面的课程,并开始创作。

1929年耶鲁大学授予他名誉文学博士学位。

此后他居住在美国佐治亚州一个远离海岸的岛上专心写作。

一生写作45个剧本,题材广泛,戏剧风格多样。

由于他的努力,美国的戏剧事业得以在20世纪20年代发展起来,成为美国文化领域中堪与小说、绘画、音乐作品相提并论的艺术形式。

因而被公认为美国最重要的戏剧作家。

1936年获诺贝尔文学奖。

四次获普利策奖的剧本有《天边外》(1919)、《安娜·克里斯蒂》(1922)、《奇妙的插曲》(1928)和《进入黑夜的漫长旅程》(1967年在他逝世后上演)。

晚年,奥尼尔患上帕金森氏症,并与妻子卡罗塔爆发矛盾。

从30年代起,奥尼尔就想构思一部包括11个剧本的连续剧,描述家庭悲剧的自传式剧本《进入黑夜的漫长旅程》原本是交托给他的独家出版社兰登书屋务必于他死后二十五年才可发表,但奥尼尔逝世后,卡罗塔接手此稿交由耶鲁大学出版社立即出版。

剧本梗概:七十五岁的凯勃特拥有一片田产,和两任前妻生了三个儿子,但对田庄占有的欲望让父子间相互痛恨。

小儿子伊本恨父亲夺了母亲的财产,用计诱使两个同父异母的哥哥偷了父亲的钱离家出走,好独占产业。

而老凯勃特为了再生一个让自己满意的继承人,从城里娶来一个叫爱碧的年轻女人。

爱碧与伊本相互吸引,同时又无法停止争夺财产。

爱碧为了得到继承权,与伊本通奸生子。

老凯勃特大喜过望,宣布婴儿将是田庄的主人。

这让伊本认为爱碧仅仅是为了“借种”而跟自己在一起,而此时已经真正爱上伊本的爱碧,在无法解释的痛苦中,为表真心,竟将两人的孩子杀死。

追逐与幻灭——尤金·奥尼尔戏剧中的悲剧思想与意象表达

追逐与幻灭——尤金·奥尼尔戏剧中的悲剧思想与意象表达

追逐与幻灭——尤金•奥尼尔戏剧中的悲剧思想与意象表达王玉娇1,王 斌2(1.西安外事学院人文艺术学院 陕西 西安 710000;2.西北大学文学院 陕西 西安 710000)【摘 要】尤金•奥尼尔是美国的戏剧大师,他通过自己的戏剧作品表达了对于社会的批判和对于人性的深刻反思,本文对尤金•奥尼尔的戏剧作品进行文本分析,通过对奥尼尔戏剧中的人物、情节、冲突描写的分析来解读尤金•奥尼尔戏剧中的悲剧思想与意象表达两个主题。

【关键词】悲剧;意象;尤金•奥尼尔中图分类号:I106 文献标志码:A 文章编号:11007-0125(2018)32-0021-02作者简介:王玉娇(1993-),女,汉族,山东省日照市人,工作单位:西安外事学院人文艺术学院新闻传播系,学历:研究生,职称:助教,研究方向:影视艺术;王 斌(1991-),男,汉族,山东省枣庄市人,西北大学文学院研究生,研究方向:戏剧影视。

一、尤金•奥尼尔戏剧中的悲剧思想奥尼尔作为一个现实主义剧作家,继承了传统的悲剧思想,利用自己的戏剧作品结合他所处的时代对社会的批判和人性反思,读者通过阅读尤金·奥尼尔的戏剧作品对剧中人物的悲剧遭遇引起了怜悯与恐惧,最终使这种情感得到了净化。

①在尤金·奥尼尔的成名作《天边外》中,人物安朱和罗伯特都有自己的理想,但是由于他们对待人生的消极态度,最终导致了理想的幻灭。

剧中的悲剧人物罗伯特想象中天边外的美好,与现实中农场生活的穷困潦倒形成对比,给人以震撼与怜悯之感,同时,通过对罗伯特的悲剧遭遇怜悯之感也使得读者的情感得到了净化,使读者认识到要以积极的态度去面对人生。

他的另一部作品《毛猿》中,扬克充满仪式感的死亡让读者在欣赏这部作品时产生了对扬克所代表的工人阶级怜悯之情,反映了资本主义社会对于工人阶级的剥削与压迫的时代背景,也体现了奥尼尔作为一个现实主义剧作家面对于社会的不公所发出的时代呐喊。

黑格尔提出:艺术作品的人物只是把精神的理性和真理表达出来。

尤金 奥尼尔写作特色分析 精品

尤金 奥尼尔写作特色分析 精品

Eugene O’Neill’s Writing Trajectory and EvolutionI. A general introduction of his life and his main worksEugene Gladstone O’Neill was born on Oct.16, 1888, in New York City. His father was a well-known actor. As a child O’Neill travelled with his father’s company until he was 7, in which time he was cared for by nanny, hired to help his mother who was not recovering from her addition to morphine. The nanny took young Eugene to see the sights wherever they travelled. At seven he had a wider acquaintance with the natural wonders and oddities of America than most Americans ever acquire. All the while Eugene absorbed the grammar of theatrical artifice, a native language. At seven he went to a private school, a Catholic school, he remained in that kind of school until he was thirteen. In 1906 he entered Princeton but left at the end of his freshman year. O’Neill drifted for several years. He went to Honduras and then worked as a seaman travelling to Africa and to South America. He finally took a job as a reporter for the New London Telegraph in Connecticut. The years of irregular living, combined with heavy drinking, had undermined his health, and in 1912 he entered a tuberculosis sanatorium.During his illness O’Neill read the works of Henrik Ibsen and August Strindberg and decided to try writing plays. In 1914-15 he studied dramatic writing with George Pierce Baker at Harvard. He wrote the one-act plays that were presented by the Provincetown Players in Massachusetts. The company moved to Greenwich Village in New York City, where it formed the Playwrights Theater. It opened in 1916, and the first bill included O’Neill’s Bound East for Cardiff, his New York debut. This play and three others –In the Zone, The Long Voyage Home, and The Moon of the Caribbees, based on O’Neill’s experiences at sea – were produced together in 1924 as S.S.Glencairn. The immediate success of these short plays established O’Neill’s reputation.In 1920 O’Neill’s first full-length play, Beyond the Horizon was produced on Broadway. It won the Pulitzer Prize. In 1922 Anna Christie won another, and in 1928 Strange Interlude won a third. O’Neill journeyed to Paris, where he began MourningBecomes Electra, produced in 1931. In 1936 he was the first American dramatist to win the Nobel Prize for literature. In 1946 his successful The Iceman Cometh was produced. Other works are The Emperor Jones (1920), Desire Under the Elms (1924), and The Great God Brown (1926), Marco Millions (1927) included some humor, but Ah, Wilderness! (1933), a nostalgic view of small-town life, was O’Neill’s only comedy.The last ten years of O’Neill’s life were filled with frustration. After suffering from multiple health problems (including alcoholism) over many years, O’Neill ultimately faced a severe Parkinson’s-like tremor in his hands which made it impossible for him to write (he had tried using dictation but found himself unable to compose in that way) during the last 10 years of his life. While at Tao House, O’Neill had intended to write a cycle of 11 plays chronicling an American family since the 1800s. Only two of these, A Touch of the Poet and More Stately Mansions were ever completed. As his health worsened, O’Neill lost in inspiration for the project and wrote the three large autobiographical plays, The Iceman Cometh, Long Day’s Journey into Night, which won a fourth Pulitzer Prize and A Moon for the Misbegotten. He managed to complete Moon for the Misbegotten in 1943, just before leaving Tao House ad losing his ability to write. Drafts of many other uncompleted plays were destroyed by Carlotta at Eugene’s request.O’Neill died in Room 401 of the Sheraton Hotel on Bay State Road in Boston, on November 27, 1953, at the age of 65. (The building is now the Shelton Hall dormitory at Boston University). There is an urban legend perpetuated by students that O’Neill’s spirit haunts the room and dormitory. A revised analysis of his autopsy report shows that, contrary to the previous diagnosis, he did not have Parkinson’s disease, but a late-onset cerebella cortical atrophy. He was interred in the Forest Hills Cemetery in Jamaica Plain, Massachusetts. O’Neill’s final words were reportedly ―Born in a hotel room, and Goddammit, died in one!‖Although his written instructions had stipulated that it not be made public until 25 years after his death, in 1956 Carlotta arranged for his autobiographical masterpiece Long Day’s Journey into Night to be published, and produced on stage to tremendouscritical acclaim and won the Pulitzer Prize in 1957. This last play is widely considered to be his finest. O’Neill’s home in New London, Monte Cristo Cottage, was made a National Historic Landmark in 1971. His home in Northern California was preserved as the Eugene O’Neill National Historic Site in 1976.O’Neill was the first American dramatist to regard the stage as a literary medium and the only American playwright ever to receive the Nobel Prize for Literature. Through his efforts, the American theatre grew up during the 1920s, developing into a cultural medium that could take its place with the best in American fiction, painting, and music. Until his Beyond the Horizon was produced, in 1920, Broadway theatrical fare, apart from musicals and an occasional European import of quality, had consisted largely of contrived melodrama and farce. O’Neill saw the theatre as a valid forum for the presentation of serious ideas. Imbued with the tragic sense of life, he aimed for a contemporary drama that had its roots in the most powerful of ancient Greek tragedies—a drama that could rise to the emotional heights of Shakespeare. For more than 20 years, both with such masterpieces as Desire under the Elms, Mourning Becomes Electra, and The Iceman Cometh and by his inspiration to other serious dramatists, O’Neill set the pace for the blossoming of the Broadway theatre.II.The three periods of O’Neill’s writing and the main achievement of each phaseO’Neill’s career as a playwright consists of three periods. His early realistic plays utilize his own experiences, especially as a seaman. In the 1920s he rejected realism in an effort to capture on the stage the force behind human life. His expressionistic plays during this period were influenced by the ideas of philosopher Freidrich Nietzsche, psychologists Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung, and Swedish playwright August Strindberg. During his final period O’Neill returned to realism. These later works depend on his life experiences for their story lines and themes.A.From trial to triumph(1913-1924): the early playsIn 1912-1913, while a tuberculosis patient in the Gaylord Sanitarium, Eugene O’Neill decided to become a dramatist after had worked as a gold prospector in Honduras, as a seaman, and had become a regular at New York City’s flophouses and cheap saloons. Eugene O’Neill made profitable use of his three-month hospital stay by reading philosophy, drama, and absorbing the influence of new theatrical movements in Ireland, Franc, Sweden, and Germany.On his release from Gaylord he started to write, using his own life experiences as creative matrix. His devotion to his own personal ―drama of souls‖ never ceased, and hence writing exacted a tremendous physical and psychological toll.Like his father, O’Neill was an autodidact. His Princeton year (1906-07) was essentially one of self-directed study, because he despised his course assignments, being suspended for ―poor scholarship.‖ He learned from wide, undisciplined reading, rather than academic instruction, claiming that the only result of his year in George Pierce Baker’s English 47 Workshop (1914-15) at Harvard was his practice of first writing a scenario and then the dialogue, which he did throughout his productive life.[1]His early experimental plays (1913-24) demonstrate the structural influence of his father’s theatre of melodrama, in his instinctive ability to build a scene or action toward a sometimes explosive conclusion, skillfully varying the pace of a play.The influence of the vaudeville skit is also obvious in his very fast play, A Wife for a Life (1913) written during his post-sanitarium residence in New London, based on O’Neill’s miserable mining experiences in Honduras.“Thirst”and Other One-Act Plays(1914), the first published collection of O’Neill’s plays, are important as indicating his future development. These five plays are important for what they are and what they prefigure. Thirst (1913), portrays a raft as a microcosm, with its three unnamed shipwreck survivors of Dancer, Gentleman, and West Indian Mulatto Sailor. While introducing the theme of woman as whore, along with interracial and class conflict, it also portrays the behavior of individuals pushed to their emotional and physical limits. In Fog (1914) a lifeboat serves as a microcosm, this time with a Poet, a Man of Business, a Polish Peasant Woman andher dead child. Fog is used to evoke mood, and also a sense of supernatural mystery, when a passing steamer turns aside from its course after the sailors hear the cry of the dead child over the noise of their engines. This is O’Neill’s first foray into the eerie world of supernatural fantasy. The three other plays of this group were written in 1917-18. In the Zone is a conventional submarine-warfare potboiler, spiced with some violence, with Smitty as the alcoholic lover, a failure driven to sea by a woman’s rejection, while The Long Voyage Home is a predictable Shanghai-ing drama, including the reappearance of the dream-forever-deferred theme in Olson’s wish to retire to a farm. The greatest advance, however, comes with Moon of the Caribbees (1918) where O’Neill, in addition to developing mood, also experiments with the impact of black culture upon whites, and his first truly multicultural play, foreshadows also his interest in ―total theatre‖.As within several events in the author’s life, there was heavy irony in the occasion. Within a month, James O’Neill suffered a stroke and while he was recovering, intestinal cancer was diagnosed. Until adolescence, Eugene had worshipped his father as a hero –such are his words in a private autobiographical document. Then for many years Eugene seemed nearly as often to hate his father as to love him, although his father supported him in and out of trouble, and tolerated the youth’s contempt.In ordinary circumstances, O’Neill’s mourning for his father would surely have been intense, but it would have run a normal course, and would have resolved itself in three or four years. But O’Neill’s life had never been ordinary, and his grief was to be greatly compounded. A year and a half after James died, Ella O’Neill, thirteen years younger than her husband and seemingly in good health, died suddenly from a brain tumor. Twenty months later, his first son, James Jr., ten years older than Eugene and idolized by him since childhood,succeeded in an oft-declared intent to drink himself to death. Within thirty-nine months, O’Neill lost all the members of his parental family.In 1921 O’Neill finished his significant African-American play, The Emperor Jones, the first full-length play in which O’Neill successfully evoked the starknessand inevitability of Greek tragedy that he felt in his own life. Drawing on Greek themes of incest, infanticide, and fateful retribution, he framed his story in the context of his own family’s conflicts. This story of a lustful father, a weak son, and an adulterous wife who murders her infant son was told with sparseness of its style, the play was acclaimed immediately as a powerful tragedy and has continued to rank among the great American plays of the 20th century.In The Hairy Ape (1921), another foray into expressionism, O’Neill combines a number of themes from his earlier sea plays, and also the symbiotic relationship of the second engineer with his engines in The Personal Equation. He develops further his interest in labor politics, and even more importantly, his commitment to expressionistic total theatre.Desire Under the Elms (1924) established him as a dramatist of true genius and is the culmination of his first period of composition. The modern world is often thought hostile to tragedy, but in this play O’Neill discomfits the naysayers. He manipulates into an astonishingly successful tragic whole such different elements as the conflict between duty and joy, the Apollonian and the Dionysian, the dysfunctional family, and a combination of Greek myth. These disparate ideas are melded together in a thoroughly American New England setting with the mythico-religious tradition of Puritanism, along with the dream of monetary success, the pioneering spirit of breaking new land, and the world of gold in the far West.With this play, initially banned in Boston on moral grounds and refused a public performance in England until 1940, O’Neill reached true international status. This was not merely because of the steamy plot, but the extraordinary transmutation of mythology into modern garb. It also demonstrated one of O’Neill’s greatest strengths – as myth user rather than myth maker. Here and in Mourning Becomes Electra he combined ancient myths with modern psychology to examine American emotional and cultural equivalents.B.Experimental –Expressionism in writing style(1925-1934): Themiddle playsBy the time Desire Under the Elms closed in the fall of 1925, Eugene O’Neill was firmly established as the leading artistic playwright of the American theatre. This combining of ancient and modern, foreign and native, pervades this play foreshadows the works of O’Neill middle decade. O’Neill indulged his imagination, composing the historical extravaganzas Marco Millions (1928) and Lazarus Laughed (1928) and the allegorical The Great God Brown(1926), and sketching out two studies of modern bourgeois America, Strange Interlude (1928), which won him the third Pulitzer Prize, and Dynamo(1929) as well. This phase also includes O’Neill’s Civil War trilogy Mourning Becomes Electra (1931), and the autobiographical dramas Ah, Wilderness!(a domestic comedy)(1933) and Days Without End (1934) (a dogmatic miracle play) (1934).While at Princeton O’Neill was greatly affected by Nietzsche, and over the years an impulse toward what might be called scientific mysticism had become increasingly prominent. As he stopped drinking and tried to accept his father’s death, his plays show him turning increasingly toward a view of the world influenced by Nietzsche, psychoanalysis and the ancient Greeks. Plays like Strange Interlude, Lazarus Laughed, and Dynamo reflected these interests.In The Great God Brown, O’Neill dealt with a major theme that he expressed more effectively in later plays –the conflict between idealism and materialism. Although the play was too metaphysically intricate to be staged successfully in 1926, it was significant for its symbolic use of masks and for the experimentation with expressionistic dialogue and action –devices that since have become commonly accepted both on the stage and in motion pictures. In spite of its confusing structure, the play is rich in symbolism and poetry, as well as in daring technique, and it became a forerunner of avant-garde movements in American theatre.O’Neill’s innovative writing continued with Strange Interlude. This play is about the irresolvable mourning of Nina Leeds and Charlie Marsden for parents who died while Charlie and Nina were children. The irresolvable mourning for lost parents inhibits all their relations with the living, and makes every subsequent loss the more unbearable. The title Strange Interlude arises from a reflection by Nina Leeds that lifeis merely an interlude in the grand electrical display of God the Father. Her meditations lead her to contrast God the Father with God the Mother who evokes the ancient earth god Geia.Having arrived in such a state of mind in 1929, O’Neill began another play about bereavement, Mourning Becomes Electra which he finished in 1931. This play represents his most complete use of Greek forms, themes and characters. For O’Neill, at the end of writing, he was able for the first time since his father died to imagine a character, Lavinia Mannon, who could accept the permanence of her losses and could imagine surviving.Writing Electra effected a change in O’Neill’s state of mind and his writing. Shortly after he finished it, he wrote the nostalgic comedy Ah, Wilderness! which is his only comedy. In an experience few would have predicted, he next attempted a ―return toward Cath[olicism]. [sic] away from the tragic sense of life.‖[2]Ah, Wilderness! was characterized by O’Neill as the ―other side of the coin,‖ meaning that it represented his fantasy of what his own youth might have been, rather than what he believed it to have been (as dramatized later in Long Day’s Journey into Night).The experiment lasted two years and led O’Neill to not only a failed play, Days without End (1934), but to the verge of a breakdown. On doctor’s orders he stopped writing for six months, and turned ―back to the tragic sense of life‖which was apparently healthier for him.These earlier, expressionistic plays from 1925 to 1930 advanced O’Neill’s own literary development, for they indulged – and finally tempered – the obsession with ―big subjects‖that often threatened to turn his dialogue into rhetoric. Along with Electra and Wilderness, those middle plays contributed crucially to the artistic growth of the modern American theatre as well. O’Neill’s earnestness during this phase about theatre’s religious mission, for instance, has immeasurably influenced countless more secular successors, elevating their aims for their dramatic medium. Moreover, O’Neill’s bold and restless imagination whether playing with masks or incorporating novelistic techniques into commercially successful drama, has inspired subsequent generations of American playwrights to experiment without foregoing the hope ofearning a living through their art. Perhaps most important, these plays exposed the large audiences of mainstream American theatre to the concerns and techniques of European dramatists. But the full flowering of O’Neill’s genius lay in the future, when he was borne back ceaselessly into the past.C.Back to realism in writing style(1936-1947): The late playsWhen O’Neill stopped writing after the Days Without End, he was engaged in his most intense exploration of his country and himself. Beset by continual physical illness, troubled by his relations with his children and wife Carlotta, deeply disturbed by the miserable state of the world – with Hitler, the world’s ―iceman‖, on the march – O’Neill, exhausted physically and perhaps spiritually, was at the end of his tortuous journey. He was ready to write the plays of his history Cycle, a vast epic of immigrant Irish life in American that he called ―A Tale of Possessors, Self-Dispossessed,‖ often called the ―Cycle‖. He projected as many as eleven plays in the epic, which would begin in the mid-eighteenth century and carry on to 1931. Struggling with depression and various illnesses, including nearly fatal complications of appendicitis in 1937, O’Neill worked on the Cycle between 1935 and 1939. In November 1936, not long after he began his work, he was awarded the Nobel Prize. The medal had to be brought to his hospital bed. Later O’Neill referred to the episode as a ―crack-up.‖ For six months or so he could work very little. Of the Cycle material, he finished only one play to the point of being performable, A Touch of the Poet, which he drafted in 1935-1936 and revised in 1942. Most other material from the Cycle was destroyed, but a draft of More Stately Mansions survived and has been published.Struggling with the Cycle yielded little in itself, but its real consequence was that it enabled O’Neill to write the four important plays that marked the end of his writing life. On 5 June 1939, O’Neill laid the Cycle aside and wrote out detailed scenarios for two plays that had recently come to him, The Iceman Cometh and Long Day’s Journey into Night. In these plays all the work of self-analysis and mourning would finally be realized.The Iceman Cometh, the most complex and perhaps the finest of the O’Neilltragedies, laced with subtle religious symbolism, the play is a study of man’s need to cling to his hope for a better life, even if he must delude himself to do so.Writing Iceman brought O’Neill to see more clearly than he could have seen before how deeply rooted were the self-destructive impulses that had driven him since 1902. Expressing them now dramatically in the torment of Parritt and Hickey somehow made it possible for O’Neill to go even farther, to write with seeming simplicity and directness about his dead and his relations with them. The result was a work so private and personal that for the remaining thirteen years of his life, he reiterated legal safeguards which he intended to prevent the play from ever being performed and from being published until twenty-five years after his death.Long Day’s Journey into Night is one of O’Neill’s greatest.It is straightforward in style but shattering in its depiction of the agonized relations between father, mother, and two sons. It represents the O’Neill family, called Tyrone in the play, spanning one day in the life of a family, the play strips away layer after layer form each of the four central figures, revealing the mother as a defeated drug addict, the father as a man frustrated in his career and failed as a husband and father, the older son as a bitter alcoholic, and the younger son as a tubercular, disillusioned youth with only the slenderest change for physical and spiritual survival.As before in the past two decades, O’Neill’s subject is mourning, but in both plays, there is hope that one may recover from grief and return to life somehow enlarged and more coherent as a result of the experience. In Hughie, in the space of an hour, O’Neill shows the gambler Erie Smith mourning his friend Hughie and passing beyond mourning and has earned his return to life and his new friend.In A Moon for the Misbegotten (1943) Josie Hogan lets herself fall in love with Jim Tyrone, who has inherited her father’s farm and whose mother has just died. Here O’Neill recapitulates from Jamie’s point of view the whole sordid story of his behavior at the time his mother died and afterwards. By doing so he, like Josie, can learn something about whom Jamie really was. After two decades he lets himself understand at last why Jamie had to betray his brother and drink himself to death. Knowing Jamie at last he can mourn him, both in life, and in the play in the guise ofJosie, as well. He and Josie find that Jim could neither love nor tolerate being loved and so, hating himself, he could stand to live no longer. Josie’s act of knowing and loving Jim, and of being able to mourn her lost image of him, effects a noteworthy change. At the end she is more comfortable with herself than before and his abandoned much of her former dependency on her father. This was to be the last play O’Neill would finish.In these last plays O’Neill fully displays his instinctive knowledge of what works in theatre. Stripped of the theatrical devices of his experimental plays, the late plays are products of a realistic imagination working. These are essentially naked plays offering us ―a drama of souls,‖ [3] appealing to our emotion, with O’Neill’s dramatic art uncannily turning his compassion and understanding to our compassion and understanding. He nevertheless managed in his best work, and certainly in his last plays, to produce works of art that can stand with the very best in modern drama.III.The family plays: autobiography and the dramatic imagination Representative: Long Day’s Journey into NightIn the summer of 1939, at the age of 50, O’Neill began work on what he called ―a play of old sorrow, written in tears and blood,‖finally summoning the courage to write an autobiographical masterpiece that confronted the truth about his own family. Completed in 1941, this is a family drama of scorn and blame, and love stripped naked of all illusions.A.Character description and analysisJames Tyrone, the patriarch and driven matinee idol who sold out for empty success, was borne into Irish-Catholic guilt and a pauperism that turned him into a foolish, cruel miser. The eldest son, Jamie, deadening himself with drink and Broadway whores, is the sneering, failed version of him. He followed in the daunting footsteps of the belittling, famous father for a while on the stage and all but killed his life. Then there’s the younger brother and fledgling writer, Edmund (the stand-in forO’Neill), whom Jamie worships and hates as the favorite son. Mary, the innocent convent girl who fell for the handsome young actor, James Tyrone, is both matriarch and monster. It’s a mistake to imagine her as a sweet, tragic victim. No one in the family puts anyone down as much as she-or, with one flippant remark, is able to induce more crippling guilt in Edmund for being born. Was she ever happily married to Tyrone? She is a woman who’s been robbed of life by her husband’s life. Her disappointment is disguised, yet still palpable. And now she’s pale ghost of herself in fog of drugs and frightening aloneness. Mary is the shadow over the entire play, as the New England fog itself shrouds the Tyrones’ home, but the feared, embittered James Tyrone remains at its center.The play is full of contradictory feelings, which are first apparent in the opening act during a heated exchange between James Tyrone and his elder son, Jamie- as the two prepare to go out and trim the hedge. Disagreement and recrimination are abundant –on subjects ranging from Edmund’s illness, Mary’s possibly revived addiction, James’s stinginess, Jamie’s apparent failure in life –but each character repeatedly counters the recrimination by appeals for sympathy and reassurances like Jamie’s ―almost‖ gentle ―I’ve felt the same way, Papa.‖ And if such reassurances are followed by renewed attacks and counter-attacks, nevertheless, the pauses, appeals for sympathy, and assertions of common feeling are periodically so pronounced as to serve as markers of the undercurrent of mutual trust that exists beneath the turbulence of their relationship. Such early encounters establish the constant counterpoint of feelings that will be heard throughout the play.The long final act, is the all-important one because it shows the men of the family reaching one another as deeply as people ever do, and that final act will receive the lion’s share of this discussion. But the final act (until its very end) leaves out the play’s one major woman character, even though her presence upstairs generates the intensity of feeling the men experience. Therefore, since Mary is both the figure the playwright felt most strongly about in writing the play and the one he seems least able to fully to come to grips with, she must receive her due before any comprehensive understanding of the work can be achieved.Most men have difficulty understanding their mother. In O’Neill’s case that difficulty was exacerbated by his own mother’s addiction, the cause he believed of his life-long pain. The character representing her must be looked at carefully in any analysis of this play. But the scene in which Mary’s role is most affecting –her monologue constituting the largest part of the third act – is one in which she is under the control of her narcotic. And memorable as this episode is, it may contribute more to our understanding of the effects of morphine than to our understanding of the woman. On the other hand, her appearance earlier in the play show her in her ―normal‖ state, a state in which she plays the role of wife and mother, trying to hide the signs of her habit from the men.The episode in which Mary reveals most about herself in her relatively unnarcotized condition is one in which she struggles to deal openly with herself and with Edmund. It is an exchange late in Act 2, just before her men leave her to go downtown; and while Edmund intends this exchange to be a final appeal to his mother to control her addiction, it develops into something quite different.Mary, picking up from an earlier discussion of Edmund’s deteriorating health, begins by being solicitous of him, saying he should not go up town in ―the dirty old trolley‖ on such a hot day. But the motivation for her concern is of a complex nature that sets the tone for the rest of the exchange. A series of intertwined fears constitutes the mood out of which she speaks and in one way or another color everything she says. They include her natural motherly fear concerning Edmund’s health, her fear that he probably has the dreaded consumption, her fear that she is constantly being watched, and her fear of being left along with her drug.Response sets off counter-response. We hear her go into a tirade against Doc Hardy, whom Edmund must visit to be told the truth that he has the illness that killed her father-Hardy, who, she says, can only look ―solemn and preach will power‖in response to her condition. The mention of Hardy then sets off other response: that her husband likes Hardy for only charging a dollar, and a few lines later that the upset caused by Edmund’s illness if the chief cause of her renewed addiction. But then the intensity of her reaction is suddenly broken as she realizes, with a clarity of thought。

论尤金·奥尼尔悲剧作品的艺术表现形式

论尤金·奥尼尔悲剧作品的艺术表现形式

中期创作中表现主义的运用 ( 90 - 3年 ) 12 - 1 8 -9
从 12 年起 ,奥尼 尔的创 作从早期 的 自然主义过渡 到表 90 现主义 。表 现主义兴起 于2 世 纪初 ,关注 对人物心理和潜 意 0 识 的开 发 , 在 戏 剧 内容 上表 现 为情 节 荒诞 不 经 ,缺 乏逻 辑联 系 ,在 具 体 的 表 现 手 法 上 , 运 用 内心 独 白、 幻 想 、梦 境 等 语 言 手 段 以及 面 具 、 灯 光 、 音 响 、 布 景 等 非 语 言 手 段 来 营 造 舞 台效果 。奥尼尔对表现 主义进行 了充分 的发掘和运用 ,可 以 从 象 征 意 象 、视 觉 象 征 和 听 觉 象 征 三 方 面 探 讨 。 象征意象 :奥尼尔的作 品中常出现 以浓雾 、大海 、 陆地作 为象征物 的意 象。例 如在航海题材 的剧作 中,像 《 东 航 加迪夫 》 、 《 娜・ 安 克里斯 蒂娜 》 、 《 毛猿 》等 ,奥尼 尔 多处描 写 了弥漫在 空中的浓雾和一望 无际的大海 ,把它 们看 做神秘 莫测的主宰人类命 运的象征 ,陆地 则代表残酷 的现实 和对人 性的压抑与束缚 。这些意 象有 力地 表现 了人在命 运面 前 的 无 奈 与 彷 徨 。此 外 ,月 亮 意 象在 奥 尼 尔 的 许 多剧 作 中 反 复 出现 , 内涵丰 富。例 如 《 加勒 比海之 月》里的月亮被 认为 是 净 化 灵 魂 的 天 体 。 《 , 荒 野 !》 里 皎 洁 明 亮 的 月亮 为 全 啊 剧增 添了古典浪漫 的色彩,象征着年 轻人纯洁无瑕 的爱情。 《 照 不 幸 人 》 中 ,在 詹 姆 斯 向乔 茜 忏 悔 的 一 幕 中 , 月 亮 始 月 终 高悬 于 天空 ,把清 辉洒 在 姆 斯和 乔茜 身上 。在纯 净 脱 耋 俗 、神秘庄严 的氛 围中,詹姆斯 的忏悔 和乔茜 的宽 恕获 得一 种宗教仪式般 的肃穆,完美地表现了戏剧主题 。而在 《 悲悼》 中,海岛上那温柔甜美 的月光成为指示光,引导莱维尼亚敢于 摘 掉面 具 ,重 新 发现 自己 ,而这 正 是救 赎和 新 生 的前奏 。 二、视觉 意象:面具的运用和 舞台布景的设置 是奥尼尔 善 用 的 表 现 手 段 。 面 具 的运 用 源 远 流 长 。它 来 自于 迷 雾 般 的 古代原始 氏族部落 的生活 ,在 西方 的古希腊 、罗马 、中世纪 戏 剧 中 广 泛 存 在 着 。 之 后 ,面 具 运 用 逐 渐 减 少 ,到 了 现 实 主 义戏剧阶段 ,几乎形成 了以真实 作为唯一审美标准 的局面 , 在真实的生活 中没有人戴面具 ,因此 面具被根本地 摒弃于戏

简析尤金·奥尼尔《毛猿》的悲剧根源及艺术手法

简析尤金·奥尼尔《毛猿》的悲剧根源及艺术手法


的命运 观是分 不开 的, 奥尼尔很 早就开 始欣赏尼 采的作 品 , 人物 内心深 处 的真实 心理 。因此 ,奥尼 尔他 的表 现主义 作 后 来又研 究 叔本 华 以及 希 腊悲 剧 ,逐 渐 的在 其 内心深 处生 品 《 毛猿 》中 ,也采用 了独 自的表现 手法 ,在传 统戏剧 独 成 了痛 苦的 意识 ,加上 奥 尼尔 一生 十分 悲剧 的经历 ,造 就 自的基 础 上进行 了创 新 。他 在剧 中所创 作 的独 白是人物 内 了奥尼 尔充满 矛盾 的思想 体系 ,他始 终觉 得 眼前 的幸福 只 心情感 的表 白, 也表露 出了人物 的思维过程 。 例如, 在《 毛猿 》 是 一种 暂时 的想 象 ,在 现 实生 活中 ,人们 无法 选择 自己想 第 八场 中 ,整场 都是扬 克一 个人 的独 自,剧 中扬 克对毛 猿 要 的生 活方式 ,更不 能掌握 自己的命 运 。 诉 说 衷情 ,整个 倾诉 过程 时而清 醒 ,时而糊 涂 ,表现 出 了 各 种情 绪 ,或悲 哀,或愤 慨 。通过 这种 内心 独 自的表现 手 二、 《 毛猿》中所采用的艺术手法 《 毛猿 》是 奥尼 尔 的表 现 主义代 表作 ,在 作 品中广 泛 法 , 生 动的表现 出 了扬 克内心 的痛苦 和无助 , 纠结和挣 扎 , 采用 了象征手 法 。同时 ,在对 剧 中主 人公 扬克 内心 世界 的 这 也表 现 出 了扬 克在 社会 中寻求 自己地 位 的困难 时的悲 惨 外化 艺 术进 行 展现 时 , 还 利 用 了合 唱 队、面 具 以及独 白等 境 遇 ,极 大的增强 了戏剧 的悲剧效果 。 艺术表 现手法 ,体现 出 了强 烈的表现 主义艺术 风格 。 结语:奥尼尔作为一位优秀的表现主义大师, 通过 《 毛 ( 一 )象征手 法 猿 》这 部作 品将 表现 主义 艺术展 现 的淋漓 尽致 。本文通 过 象征 手法是表 现主义 的主要特 点之 一,在 《 毛猿 》中, 对 《 毛 猿》 悲剧根 源 的分析 以及对 表现 主义 艺术 手法 的探 作者 广泛 采用 了象征手 法 来展 现人物 的 内心世 界 ,将人 物 讨 ,我们 不难看 出, 《 毛 猿》是 一部优秀 的表现主义作 品 , 抽 象的 内心观 点 外化 出来 。例 如, 奥尼尔 在 《 毛猿 》 的前 它借助 象征 、合 唱队 、面具 以及 内心独 自等 艺术 手法 ,为 四幕 中, 选 用大海轮 作为 主场景 , 通过大 海轮来 象征社 会, 我 们创 造 出 了一 个社 会工 业化背 景下 的悲 剧人物 ,为我 们 通 过 船 的布局 来 象征社 会 中的等 级 制度 ,主人 公杨 克就 是 创 造 出 了一个 内心焦虑 沮丧 的悲 剧形 象,加 深 了人 们对 作 轮船 最底 层 的劳动 工人 ,他 们 劳动和 付 出 的最 多 ,但是 也 品中悲剧根 源 以及异 化主题 的理解 。 只是 给船 的上 层人 群欣 赏海 风提 供服 务而 已。作为 船 的最 作者简介:郑垄 ( 1 9 8 9 . 3 - ),女,汉,吉林省 白城人, 底 层 工人 ,他们 的 内心 深处 普遍 对社 会存 在不 满情 绪 ,这 东北师范大学外国语学院研究生在读, 研究方向: 英美文学。

zuozhe

zuozhe

尤金·奥尼尔(Eugene O'Neill)生平简介及作品分析2011-02-03 09:54:39| 分类:我爱英语| 标签:|字号大中小订阅尤金·奥尼尔(Eugene O'Neill,1888年10月16日-1953年11月27日),美国著名剧作家,表现主义文学的代表作家。

主要作品有《琼斯皇》、《毛猿》、《天边外》、《悲悼》等,于1936年获诺贝尔文学奖。

奥尼尔出生于纽约市的一个演员家庭,父亲是爱尔兰人。

1909年至1911年期间,奥尼尔曾至南美、非洲各地流浪,曾任職過淘金、水手、小职员、無業遊民等。

1911年回国后,在父亲的剧团里当临时演员。

父亲不满意他的演出,但他却不满意剧团的传统剧目。

他学习易卜生和斯特林堡,1914年到哈佛大学选读戏剧技巧方面的课程,并开始创作。

晚年,奥尼尔患上帕金森氏症,并与妻子卡罗塔爆发矛盾。

奥尼尔描述家庭悲剧的自传式剧本《进入黑夜的漫长旅程》原本是交付给他的独家出版社兰登书屋,务必于他死后25年才可发表,但奥尼尔逝世后,卡罗塔接手此稿交由耶鲁大学出版社立即出版。

作品一览奥尼尔一生写了45部戏剧,主要有:《渴》Thirst,1914年。

《东航卡迪夫》Bound East for Cardiff,1914年。

有的批评家认为此剧的上演可以看作美国戏剧的诞生。

《鲸油》,1917年《天边外》Beyond the Horizon,1918年。

1920年上演于百老汇,获得普利策奖。

―由于他剧作中所表现的力量、热忱与深挚的感情——它们完全符合悲剧的原始概念‖,1936年奥尼尔凭此作获得诺贝尔文学奖。

《安娜·克里斯蒂》Anna Christie,1920年《琼斯皇》The Emperor Jones,1920年。

把人物精神世界外化为舞台形象,是表现主义戏剧的代表作之一。

《毛猿》The Hairy Ape,1921年《榆树下的欲望》Desire Under the Elms,1924年。

尤金奥尼尔作品中现代悲剧的特点及体现张宪魁

尤金奥尼尔作品中现代悲剧的特点及体现张宪魁

第33卷第7期湖南科技学院学报V ol.33 No.7 2012年7月Journal of Hunan University of Science and Engineering Jul.2012尤金·奥尼尔作品中现代悲剧的特点及体现张宪魁1方立琴2张宪林3(1.合肥工业大学 外国语学院,安徽 合肥 230009;2.安徽农业大学 人文社会科学学院;3.安徽农业大学 理学院,安徽 合肥 230036)摘 要:尤金·奥尼尔因在悲剧创作方面的杰出成就而受到世界剧坛的青睐,考察奥尼尔戏剧写作历程,在其剧作中显著地显示出现代悲剧的特点。

通过探讨现代悲剧的特点及其在奥尼尔作品中的体现,可以发现奥尼尔悲剧与现代社会的联系,彰显奥尼尔及其作品研究的积极作用。

关键词:尤金·奥尼尔;现代悲剧特点;戏剧中图分类号:I106文献标识码:A 文章编号:1673-2219(2012)07-0048-03尤金·奥尼尔是美国现代戏剧的奠基人,也是第一位获得诺贝尔文学奖的美国剧作家,被称为美国戏剧之父,对美 国戏剧做出了卓越的贡献,“奥尼尔深刻影响了在其之后的剧作家们,像威廉姆斯、米勒、阿尔比以及更晚些的山姆·夏普德、大卫·马密和东尼·古素拉;即使远在其他国家—如瑞典和中国的年青一代的剧作家,也都从他身上深受启发”[1]P1。

这些深受奥尼尔影响的剧作家们对其有着很高的评价:“他广泛阅读各种书籍,在古希腊研究上有着与众不同的见解,作为一名出类拔萃的剧作家,他还在德国与中国哲学方面有着独到的见解。

”[2]作为一名著作等身的剧作家,他总共创作了多幕剧与独幕剧等50余部,这些剧作分别为他赢得了1920、1922、1928和1957年的普利策奖及1936年的诺贝尔文学奖。

在其众多的剧作中,悲剧题材的作品占了绝大多数,只有为数不多的如《啊,荒野》等属于喜剧,而奥尼尔在戏剧艺术界地位的确立,源于其悲剧作品所取得的非凡成绩。

论尤金·奥尼尔《琼斯皇》的表现主义手法

论尤金·奥尼尔《琼斯皇》的表现主义手法

论尤金奥尼尔《琼斯皇》的表现主义手法
李顺春
【期刊名称】《江苏技术师范学院学报》
【年(卷),期】2005(011)003
【摘要】尤金·奥尼尔在<琼斯皇>一剧中打破时空观念或扭曲现实来外化人物的内心世界.本文从色、声、光、景和幻觉幻象等几方面,分析和论述奥尼尔在此剧中运用的表现主义手法,及其对于揭示琼斯内心的矛盾冲突、心灵的扭曲变态和从出逃到最后死亡的心路历程的作用.
【总页数】5页(P77-80,86)
【作者】李顺春
【作者单位】江苏技术师范学院,外国语言文学系,江苏,常州,213001
【正文语种】中文
【中图分类】I712.35
【相关文献】
1.评尤金·奥尼尔和他的《琼斯皇》 [J], 王海艳
2.论尤金·奥尼尔塑造女性形象的表现主义手法 [J], 黄颖
3.尤金·奥尼尔戏剧中的表现主义手法研究 [J], 李菁菁
4.论尤金·奥尼尔《琼斯皇》的狂欢化特征 [J], 孟娟
5.迷失与挣扎—琼斯皇的灵魂救赎之路——评尤金·奥尼尔戏剧《琼斯皇》 [J], 张迪
因版权原因,仅展示原文概要,查看原文内容请购买。

叙事学之于奥尼尔戏剧

叙事学之于奥尼尔戏剧

叙事学之于奥尼尔戏剧奥尼尔是20世纪最重要的美国戏剧家之一,他的作品被誉为美国现代戏剧的奠基之作。

他的作品大多受到了叙事学的影响,尤其是对于戏剧结构和叙事手法的运用,使得他的作品充满了戏剧性和叙事张力。

本文将从叙事学的角度分析奥尼尔的戏剧作品,探讨其叙事技巧和戏剧艺术的内涵。

奥尼尔在戏剧中运用了复杂的叙事结构,通过回忆、闪回、意识流等手法,将故事呈现得层层叠叠、错综复杂。

在他的代表作《长日将尽》中,通过多个时间层面的交叉叙述,展现了家庭中的复杂情感纠葛和人物性格的深层次变化,使得观众能够更加深入地理解和感受故事的内在含义。

奥尼尔还善于运用对白和台词来推进故事情节,塑造人物形象,强化戏剧冲突,使得剧情更加引人入胜。

奥尼尔的戏剧作品常常融合了文学史和心理学的叙事元素,使得他的作品既有精致的文学品味,又具有深刻的心理描写。

他擅长将文学中的叙事手法与心理描写相结合,通过人物内心世界的展现来推动故事情节的发展。

在《月光下的夜色》中,奥尼尔通过一对禁忌恋情的描写,展现了人类内心深处的欲望和挣扎,将叙事推向了高潮。

他对于人物命运的描写也非常细腻,通过人物之间的关系和事件的交织,展现了生活中的苦难和挣扎,使得观众在情感上产生共鸣。

奥尼尔的戏剧作品中还经常出现了象征主义的叙事元素,他擅长通过隐喻和象征来传达深刻的内涵。

在《冰与火》中,他巧妙地通过一对反义词“冰”和“火”来象征主人公的复杂心理和人生命运,使得整个故事在象征和叙事的双重力量下显得更加深刻和富有内涵。

奥尼尔还常常通过舞台设置和符号的运用来加强叙事的表现力,比如通过舞台上的装饰和道具来强化人物的内心世界和戏剧的意义,使得观众在审美上获得更加丰富的体验。

奥尼尔的戏剧作品在叙事学的影响下,呈现出了极高的艺术价值和情感张力。

他运用复杂的叙事结构、精致的文学描写、象征主义的隐喻等叙事手法,使得他的作品成为了戏剧史上的经典之作。

他的作品不仅在艺术上具有重要价值,也在文学史和心理学领域产生了深远的影响。

  1. 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性,平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
  2. 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
  3. 3、如文档侵犯您的权益,请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间:9:00-18:30)。

尤金奥尼尔的狂欢式书写风格
尤金&CenterDot;奥尼尔的狂欢式书写风格
一、尤金·奥尼尔及其作品尤金·奥尼尔创作的戏剧享有世界性意义。

在他的一
生创作生涯中,曾获得了四次的“普利策奖”,并且以他在创作中表现出来的真挚情感和
奋发的精神力量,终于在1936年获得了“诺贝尔文学奖”,为美国文坛带来了深远的影响。

奥尼尔是一位多产作家,共创作了50多部剧作,其中广为人知的有《天边》《毛猿》等。

不仅如此,他还不停地进行探索,并尝试着以多种写作形式进行创作,例如现代主义、古希腊悲剧等形式都融合在他的剧本中。

另外,奥尼尔的剧作纷纷在世界各国演出,
并受到许多文学爱好者的青睐。

为此,在许多国家内都陆续地成立了奥尼尔学会,几乎每
年都会开办一个以奥尼尔为中心的文学研究。

来自于各国的批评论者都倾向于将奥尼尔与
其他的文学作家进行分析、对比,与奥尼尔进行相互比较的有易卜生、契诃夫等。

在1986年发表的文学作品《契诃夫与奥尼尔》就是一部具有代表意义的作品,作者的写作角度集
中于把奥尼尔和契诃夫的戏剧进行对比。

其次,还有在1993年发表的《奥尼尔剧中的莎
士比亚》也是具有鲜明的比较意义的著作,成为了人们探析奥尼尔剧作的有效途径。

奥尼尔在中国也受到了普遍的关注。

自从20世纪20年代起,随着奥尼尔的名字首次传入
到我国,许多相关学界的人员纷纷对奥尼尔及其作品进行深入地了解,于1985年以奥尼
尔为中心的研究院终于落成了。

在90年代后的10年内,全国范围内对奥尼尔的学术研究
就有八次,而且出版了有关奥尼尔剧作的摘选,在我国的社会中掀起了一股奥尼尔的剧作
热潮。

二、尤金·奥尼尔作品的狂欢式书写在巴赫金的观点中认为,狂欢式就是
指在节庆中进行一系列狂欢式庆贺、仪式等活动的综合。

在这些形式中包含了许多多样化
的形式,但由于时代的递进、民族特点及其庆祝方式的不同而展现出更多形式的文化特点。

在庆典中,通常会派生出各种各样的狂欢仪式,并在各个不同的喜庆日子里由大众一起推
选出不同的狂欢国王,然后这些狂欢国王还要通过人们给他的加冕,人们还要抬着他在大
街上游行,好像他就是最高的统治人物一样,但是紧接着就是要承受人们的嘲弄与打骂。

人们正是通过这种形式来表达心中的疯狂意识和行为。

这种狂欢仪式过渡到文学创作中,
就是为了体现个人遭遇了突变,几乎在一瞬间就形成了天堂与地狱的巨大反差,并形成一
种狂欢化的氛围,主要目的就是反映人、事、物都是相对的,具有双重特性。

(一)
狂欢式之“对话”的质疑巴赫金在进行研究创作中还特别提出了一个“对话”的概念。

在新型化的小说探析中,他深刻地意识到个人独白的逻辑语言是多么的苍白无力,于是他
进行了深入地研究,终于提出了与之相对的“对话”模式的理论表达形式。

并且“对话”
是一个人产生思想并学习新思想的一种形式,因为只有与他们进行对话后,才会进行自我
的不断进化与发展,从而就获得了一种新的思想观念。

似乎从这一点出发,对话的理论基
础已经不仅限于诗学上的层次,而是提升到哲学的有关角度,而这种对话意义上的哲学与
其他形式的哲学不同,它是以思想价值为根本观点而进行的哲学研究。

戏剧是否能体
现对话关系呢?对于这一问题,巴赫金对戏剧的对话性进行了考究,因为对话的产生就会
发展对立层面的人物关系,那么这种对立的情景也会随着剧情的发展而逐渐瓦解。

而相关
的著作也对这一问题提出了正面的回答:戏剧中是存在对话关系的。

对此,我们可以来辩
证巴赫金的观点。

巴赫金认为戏剧不会产生对话就是因为受到剧情发展的限制,并且如果
对话具有多元结构就会给剧情带来冲突,对话会随着剧情的发展而不能调节其中的对立关系。

并且,对话产生的根本原因就是人物之间进行思想意识的交流,他们是平等的,但却
是相互对立的。

其中人物的关系也具有主次之分,所以就要在戏剧人物的安排上突出主次
的区别,这是戏剧对话性的主要形成原因。

而戏剧中人物关系的主体问题也可以得到很好
地印证,例如在黑格尔的思想认识中就可以证实,因为剧情中的人物本身就不是相互分离的,而是通过众多人来形成性格及其关系的发展,而正是这一点组成了戏剧情节的发展,
也就使整个剧作更加统一和完整。

作为主体的人物关系本身就具有一些不易显现的内涵特征,无论是积极的还是消极的,这是个体自身的事情。

从黑格尔的观点中肯定人物的主体
地位可以得知,无论是从戏剧自身的目的还是形式方式上,都是由于人物的精神领域中具
有不同的情感因素使对话可以在戏剧中体现。

所以作为杰出的戏剧作家奥尼尔在进行戏剧
创作中是可以积极地引用“对话”形式来突出戏剧中的人物主体关系和情节的变化发展。

(二)狂欢式之微观对话众所周知,巴赫金擅长从心理的角度来创作戏剧,所以他把
人物的对话分为两大类:其一是大型的对话;其二是微观对话。

其中微观对话是指在人们
的内心思想中,会存在两种相互对立的意识观点。

在奥尼尔的戏剧作品中就体现了微观对
话的写作风格。

例如在《上帝的儿女都有翅膀》中,展现了鲜明的微观对话,其中以第二
幕中埃拉的个人思想独白来分析。

在埃拉心中寄予的对吉姆的希望中,她很鲜明地表明,
她要吉姆去参加律师考试,并且很期望他能成功,希望他成为美国社会中最优秀的律师,
要让他向所有人证明,特别是做给那些在私底下嚼舌根的人看看,吉姆是一个优秀的男人,并要向全世界宣告,吉姆,是世界上最白的白人。

埃拉想通过吉姆的不懈努力去迈上更高
的一层,并紧紧地踩在那些人的身上,面对着他们阴险的脸,狠狠地踩下去。

埃拉还强烈
地表现了她对吉姆的爱恋,并且在她的意识里,她只希望吉姆是唯一的白人,而其他人都
是黑人,心理世界也是黑得透彻的。

从埃拉对吉姆寄予的希望和他们的爱情中,可以看出
埃拉热切地希望吉姆能顺利地通过律师考试,并跻身到贵族社会阶层中。

其中也可以看出
在种族歧视的迫害下,跨越种族的婚姻给埃拉带来了沉重的心理影响。

埃拉的心理上也承
受了很多的种族压力,她不想吉姆被其他的人禁锢住,也不能从此使她失去了幸福的权力。

吉姆是白人,而且是历史上最白的白人,但是埃拉自身是黑人,那个黑就像是肮脏的泥土
一样,把埃拉的全身都染黑了,她讨厌这样的黑,更是恨!从埃拉的内心思想中,呈现的
是一个在被社会和种族的强迫压力下而导致的内心情绪的烦躁和无限的内心折磨,这就是
微观对话。

在美国社会上,白人与黑人存在深刻的差距,当吉姆有可能脱离黑人被压迫的
生活,而拥有机会去抵达白人的世界时,这种白人优越感的思想意识让埃拉感到异常痛苦
和烦恼,在她内心深处,早已经隐藏了对黑人的种种不满和怨恨,此时,她只想把所有的
愤怒都宣泄出来,而对待吉姆,也显示出她又自尊又自卑的思想意识。

相关文档
最新文档