Semiotic and chora : Virginia Woolf’s Mrs. Dalloway

機構典藏 > College of Foreign Languages and Literature > Graduate Institute & Department of English > Thesis > Item 987654321/53917

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://tkuir.lib.tku.edu.tw/dspace/handle/987654321/53917

Title:	Semiotic and chora : Virginia Woolf’s Mrs. Dalloway
Other Titles:	符號界與宮籟: 維吉尼亞‧吳爾芙之《戴洛維夫人》
Authors:	施卉姍;Shih, Hui-shan
Contributors:	淡江大學英文學系碩士班黃逸民;Huang, I-min
Keywords:	茱莉亞．克莉絲蒂娃;符號界;象徵界;賤斥;棄卻物;異倫理;Kristeva;semiotic;Symbolic;abjection;abject;herethics
Date:	2011
Issue Date:	2011-06-16 10:44:40 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	本文主旨透過朱莉亞‧克莉斯多娃(Julia Kristeva)的符號論來分析符號界和象徵界的交互作用進而形成主體的形成。根據克氏觀點，主體的形成只是一種變動的過程,意即主體是在象徵界和符號界不斷來回和更新的過程中形成。第一章採用茱莉亞．克莉絲蒂娃 (Julia Kristeva) 主體形成的過程來探討克萊莉莎不斷徘徊在符號界 (semiotic) 和象徵界 (symbolic) 的地帶。第二章我利用茱莉亞．克莉絲蒂娃的賤斥理論來討論棄卻的過程與昇華。當克萊莉莎嫁給丈夫李察成了戴洛維夫人,她仍然感到內心的匱乏與寂寞, 因為受到大英帝國和父權社會影響, 她必須壓抑及犧牲部分的自我才得以保護她的上層地位的象徵。此壓抑的部分就成為棄卻物 (abject)。在克氏理論中, 棄卻物是被象徵界所排斥的,而所被排斥的部分因而被壓抑在符號界中 (semiotic), 也就是人類的潛意識中。但是, 棄卻物並非完全可以被壓制在符號界中 (semiotic), 假如主體自身並未面對自身的棄卻物, 那麼它還是會不斷地侵略及壓垮一個人的主體性,而克氏稱此為符號界的宮籟,意即宮籟的回返。而克萊莉莎也將透過想像來昇華她的棄卻物。第三章進一步探討莉亞．克莉絲蒂娃如何利異倫理 (herethics) 解構傳統聖母的刻板印象。藉由本小說的探討,我們將會明白茱莉亞．克莉絲蒂娃(Julia Kristeva)所提倡的符號界的功能 (semiotic)及主體並非一成不變,反之,主體的形成只是一種過程 (subject-in-procress)。 Abstract: This thesis centers on the studies on the semiotic and the symbolic. In Kristeva’s point of view, subject is a process and through it, one can get a complete subjectivity. The first chapter will emphasize Clarissa’s construction of her subjectivity by applying Julia Kristeva’s semiotic discourse. Julia Kristeva’s theory on the subject-in-process is clearly shown by Clarissa to represent how Clarissa develops her oscillated self and this is to show that her oscillation between the semiotic and the symbolic is a state of signifying process. To Kristeva, the semiotic is the onset of meaning and this revises Lacan’s views on subjectivity. In the second chapter, I turn to a discussion of Clarissa’s abjection and sublimation. Although repressed by the paternal society, the symbolic world, Clarissa still has the physical symptoms in the process of abjection to protect herself from the object within the semiotic space. In Kristeva’s discourse, the abject, excluded by the symbolic, exists in the semiotic space. However, the abject within the semiotic never stops its invasion into Clarissa’s symbolic identity and this is also the experience of the abjection. In the process of the abjection, Clarissa has some physical symptoms; therefore, in order to control these emotional effects caused by the abjection, Clarissa identifies with “the object” reflecting in the imaginary space and with the help of this identification with the object reflecting in the imaginary space, Clarissa receives the semiotic power from the imaginary space and she again enters the symbolic so as to control her emotional effects. In the third chapter, I further use the idea of Kristeva’s “herethics” to analyze the relationship between Clarissa and three characters: Sally, Septimus, and Richard Dalloway. Using the three characters as representative is to reverse the dualism of the symbolic in this chapter. We can understand Kristeva’s perspective on identity by analyzing the novel Mrs. Dalloway. Subject-in-process is her ideas of identity; however, she doesn’t deject the function of the symbolic but supports the correlation of the semiotic and the symbolic.
Appears in Collections:	[Graduate Institute & Department of English] Thesis

Files in This Item:

File	Size	Format
index.html	0Kb	HTML	357	View/Open

Loading...