تحول تازه درفرم تک گویی نمایشی
Robert Browning possessed a very powerful dramatic sensibility, but his interest was in depicting the internal conflicts of a character—what he called “Action in character, rather than Character in Action”. Unfortunately internal conflict is not suitable for the stage, and Browning’s plays failed b...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | fas |
| Published: |
Shahid Beheshti University
2013-12-01
|
| Series: | Naqd-i Zabān va Adabīyyāt-i Khārijī |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://clls.sbu.ac.ir/article/view/1258 |
| Summary: | Robert Browning possessed a very powerful dramatic sensibility, but his interest was in depicting the internal conflicts of a character—what he called “Action in character, rather than Character in Action”. Unfortunately internal conflict is not suitable for the stage, and Browning’s plays failed because of too many speeches and not enough action. He found his ideal form in the dramatic monologue which allowed him to create powerful and intricate character studies. After having created the best dramatic monologues in literature, he improved on the psychological and dramatic characteristics of the form by devising a monologue in which the speaker is not in a real situation, as in previous dramatic monologues, but imagines himself in a situation in which he is speaking. Whereas previously character revealment depended on the spontaneous reactions of the speaker to a real interlocutor, now the reader has the added advantages of analysis and judgment based on the speaker’s words when alone, speaking real thoughts, as in a soliloquy; the speaker’s choices of setting, “dialogue”, and interlocutor for his imaginary situation; and the arguments presented within the framework of that imaginary situation. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2008-7330 2588-7068 |