论文部分内容阅读
Erich Auerbach(1892-1957) tries a rare literary history in his Mimesis(1946) at the windy peak of high modernism.According to him,literary modernism is a triumph of random everyday realities but,at the same time,their decadence.He regards with regret the tragic sublime of high and orderly culture as something of the long lost past.In this sense his Shakespeare represents the Herculean dilemma of choice on the crossroad to high modernity as both the liberation of humanity and the anomic chaos of collective leveling.As for the decorum of class boundaries and social hierarchies,Shakespeare is still conservative and reactionary to the force of “social revolutionary import,” but his strict decorum makes possible his tragic world,wherein he considers it disastrous and treasonous to make any attempt to overhaul the given social and political orders.Shakespeare does not fit into Auerbach’s conception of the mingling of styles and all leveling modernity.Shakespeare is still resistant,remaining as an erratic and sporadic modernist in the style of expression and as a rigorous pre-modern in his class consciousness.
Erich Auerbach (1892-1957) tries a rare literary history in his Mimesis (1946) at the windy peak of high modernism. According to him, literary modernism is a triumph of random everyday real but but at the same time, their decadence. He regards with regret the tragic sublime of high and orderly culture as something of the long lost past. In this sense his Shakespeare represents the Herculean dilemma of choice on the crossroad to high modernity as both the liberation of humanity and the anomic chaos of collective leveling. As for the decorum of class boundaries and social hierarchies, Shakespeare is still conservative and reactionary to the force of “social revolutionary import, ” but his strict decorum makes possible his tragic world where he takes it disastrous and treasonous to make any attempt to overhaul the given social and political orders. Shakespeare does not fit into Auerbach’s conception of the mingling of styles and all leveling modernity. Shakespeare is still resistant, remainin g as an erratic and sporadic modernist in the style of expression and as a rigorous pre-modern in his class consciousness.