Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/33328


Title: 遊戲尚未結束:喬叟《坎特伯里故事集》中的遊戲元素
The Game Is Not Over: The Elements of Play in Geoffrey Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales
Authors: 吳哲硯
Wu, Che-yen
Contributors: 王心玲
Wang, Hsin-ling
吳哲硯
Wu, Che-yen
Keywords: 喬叟
遊戲

惠欽格
凱洛斯
伽達默
巴赫汀
高夫曼
競爭
機會
模仿
暈眩
Chaucer
game
play
Huizinga
Caillois
Gadamer
Bakhtin
Goffman
agon
alea
mimicry
ilinx
Date: 2003
Issue Date: 2009-09-17 16:16:45 (UTC+8)
Abstract: 在《坎特伯里故事集》中,喬叟曾多次直接指出或間接暗示旅程中的故事競賽為一遊戲。然而,對此文本的研究文獻,卻鮮少從遊戲觀點切入分析。即便有,也多是從語言角度,來處理文本中各角色間的口語遊戲,或喬叟本人的文字遊戲,離真正的遊戲本身,似還有一段距離。有鑑於此,我試著以惠欽格及凱洛斯對遊戲的論述,做為理論框架,來分析《坎特伯里故事集》中的遊戲元素。我首先將找出證據,來證明整個朝聖之旅符合遊戲的定義,然後以其中三個故事為例,來分析四種遊戲範疇。本論文將分為五章,在第一章,我先說明遊戲長期以來被人忽視的地位,接著我將引入惠辛格及凱洛斯的論述。惠辛格提出遊戲的概念、定義,及功能;凱洛斯作為惠辛格在遊戲論述領域中的繼承人,則將惠辛格的成就,加以推展及補充,並將遊戲定義為四個範疇:競爭、機會、模仿、暈眩。所有的遊戲都可被歸納為這四類。在第一章的後半部,我將逐一從文本中,找出證據,來證明《坎特伯里故事集》在在都符合遊戲的定義。在第二章,我將討論<騎士的故事>中競爭與機會之運作。在第三章中,我將從模仿的層面來分析<赦罪修士的故事>。在第四章中,我將從暈眩的角度來看<修女院教士的故事>。在第五章中,我將總結前四章的要點,然後探討文學作為遊戲的可能性。最末,從遊戲的往復特性來看,我將主張《坎特伯里》遊戲尚未結束,它是遊戲昇華為藝術的最佳範本。
In many places of The Canterbury Tales, Geoffrey Chaucer points out that this story-telling contest would be a game. However, researches on this text have scarcely been done from the perspective of game. In view of this, I try to apply Jonah Huizinga and Roger Caillois’ concepts of game as the main theoretical framework to The Canterbury Tales. In this thesis, I justify the pilgrimage as a big game first and then discuss the elements of play in three tales respectively. The thesis is divided into five chapters. In chapter one, I recount the subordinate position of game first and then introduce Huizinga and Caillois’ discourses. Huizinga comes up with the concept, definition, and function of game; Caillois modifies Huizinga’s notions and then categorizes games into four kinds: agon, alea, mimicry, and ilinx. In the following part of chapter one, I prove that The Canterbury Tales as a whole matches the notion of a game. In chapter two, I discuss the exercises of agon and alea in The Knight’s Tale. In chapter three, I analyze The Pardoner’s Tale from the aspect of mimicry. In chapter four, I see The Nun’s Priest’s Tale from the perspective of ilinx. In chapter five, I summarize the previous chapters first, and then explore the possibility of literature as the game. I argue that the game of The Canterbury Tales is not over and that it is the sublimation form of game into art.
Reference: Bakhtin, Mikhail. Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. Trans. and Ed. Caryl Emerson. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1984.
---. Rabelais and His World. Trans. Helene Iswolsky. Cambridge, MA: MIT P, 1968.
Baldwin, Ralph. “The Unity of The Canterbury Tales.” Chaucer Criticism: An Anthology. Ed. Richard J. Schoeck and Jerome Taylor. Notre Dame, IN: U of Notre Dame P, 1960.
Benjamin, Walter. Illuminations. Ed. Hannah Arendt. Trans. Harry Zohn. New York: Shocken, 1968.
Bhabha, Homi K. The Location of Culture. New York: Routledge, 1994.
Blaine, David. Mysterious Stranger: A Book of Magic. New York: Villard, 2002.
Bradbury, Nancy Mason. “Popular-Festive Forms and Beliefs in Robert Mannyng’s Handlyng Synne.” Farrell. 158-79.
Brody, Saul Nathaniel. “Truth and Fiction in the Nun’s Priest’s Tale.” Modern Critical Views: Geoffrey Chaucer. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea, 1985.
Caillois, Roger. Man, Play, and Games. Trans. Meyer Barash. New York: Free P of Glencoe, 1961.
Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Canterbury Tales. Trans. David Wright. New York: Oxford UP, 1985.
---. The Riverside Chaucer. Ed. Larry D. Benson. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1987.
Chekhov, Anton Pavlovich. Four Plays. Trans. David Magarshack. London: Hill and Wang, 1969.
Farrell, Thomas J. “Introduction: Bakhtin, Liminality, and Medieval Literature.”Farrell. 1-14.
---, ed. Bakhtin and Medieval Voices. Gainesville: UP of Florida, 1995.
Fine, Alan Gary. Shared Fantasy: Role-Playing Games as Social Worlds. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1983.
Frasca, Gonzalo. “Chapter II: Games and Videogames.” Videogames of the Oppressed: Videogames as a Means for Critical Thinking and Debate. Thesis. Georgia Institute of Technology, 2001. 2 February 2004 <http://www.ludology.org/articles/thesis/>.
Freud, Sigmund. “Beyond The Pleasure Principle.” The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. Ed. James Strachey, Anna Freud, and Carrie Lee Rothgeb. London: Institute of Psychoanalysis, 1959.
Frost, Joe L. Play and Playscapes. New York: Delmar, 1992.
Gadamer, Hans-Georg. Truth and Method. Trans. Joel Weinsheimer and Donald G. Marshall. New York: Crossroad, 1989.
Ganim, John M. Chaucerian Theatricality. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1990.
Goffman, Erving. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. New York: Pantheon, 1982.
---. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday, 1959.
Gredler, Margaret. Designing and Evaluating Games & Simulations: A Process Approach. London: Gulf, 1994.
Huizinga, Johan. Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-element in Culture. Boston: Beacon, 1955.
Huppe, Bernard Felix. A Reading of the Canterbury Tales. New York: State U of New York P, 1964.
Hussey, S. S. Chaucer: An Introduction. New York: Methuen, 1981.
Knapp, Peggy Ann. Chaucer and the Social Contest. New York: Routledge, 1990.
Kole, Andre, and Jerry MacGregor. Mind Games. Phoenix, AZ: ACW P, 2002.
Kolve, V. A. Chaucer and the Imagery of Narrative: The First Five Canterbury Tales.London: Arnold, 1984.
Lindahl, Carl. Earnest Games: Folkloric Patterns in The Canterbury Tales. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1987.
Lyotard, Jean-Francois, and Jean-Loup Thebaud. Just Gaming. Trans. Wlad Godzich.Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1985.
McGerr, Rosemarie Potz. Chaucer’s Open Books: Resistance to Closure in Medieval Discourse. Gainesville: UP of Florida UP, 1998.
McLuhan, Marshall. Understanding Media. New York: Routledge, 2001.
Muscatine, Charles. “Order and Disorder.” Geoffrey Chaucer’s the Knight’s Tale. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea, 1988.
Olson, Glending. “Chaucer’s Idea of a Canterbury Game.” The Idea of Medieval Literature: New Essays on Chaucer and Medieval Culture in Honor of Donald R. Howard. Ed. James M. Dean and Christian K. Zacher. Newark: U of Delaware P, 1992.
Park, Robert Ezra. Race and Culture. Glencoe, IL: Free, 1950.
Pelen, Marc M. “The Escape of Chaucer’s Chauntecleer: A Brief Revaluation.” The Chaucer Review 36.4 (2002): 329-35.
Perfetti, Lisa. “Taking Laughter Seriously: The Comic and Didactic Functions of Helmbrecht.” Farrell 38-60.
Richmond, Velma Bourgeois. Geoffrey Chaucer. New York: Continuum, 1992.
Schick, Lawrence. Heroic Worlds: A History and Guide to Role-Playing Games. New York: Prometheus, 1991.
Strindberg, August. Six Plays of Strindberg. Trans. Elizabeth Sprigge. New York: Anchor, 1955.
Taylor, Andrew. “Bakhtin and the Smithfield Decretals.” Farrell 17-37.
Traversi, Derek Antona. The Canterbury Tales: A Reading. Newark: U of Delaware P, 1983.
Wilson, R. Rawdon. In Palamedes’ Shadow: Explorations in Play, Game, & Narrative Theory. Boston: Northeastern UP, 1990.
Wood, Chauncey. Chaucer and the Country of the Stars: Poetic Uses of Astrological Imagery. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1970.
Description: 碩士
國立政治大學
英國語文學研究所
90551007
92
Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0090551007
Data Type: thesis
Appears in Collections:[英國語文學系] 學位論文

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
55100701.pdf18KbAdobe PDF880View/Open
55100702.pdf17KbAdobe PDF722View/Open
55100703.pdf28KbAdobe PDF811View/Open
55100704.pdf16KbAdobe PDF893View/Open
55100705.pdf17KbAdobe PDF760View/Open
55100706.pdf18KbAdobe PDF680View/Open
55100707.pdf76KbAdobe PDF1019View/Open
55100708.pdf84KbAdobe PDF1115View/Open
55100709.pdf75KbAdobe PDF1130View/Open
55100710.pdf68KbAdobe PDF1299View/Open
55100711.pdf60KbAdobe PDF924View/Open
55100712.pdf37KbAdobe PDF1071View/Open


All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


社群 sharing