莎士比亚悲剧的生态解读
|
摘要
意蕴丰富、影响深远的莎士比亚四大悲剧是世界文坛上的闪亮明珠。在不同的历史时期不同评论家的评论下,它们发出不同的光彩。在当今文艺理论的显学——绿色生态批评的指引下,本文探讨莎士比亚四大悲剧里反映的自然与女性、自然与人、自然与文明的关系,意在发现文艺复兴时期人们如何看待自然以及自然与人的关系,发掘剧作中的生态思想。这不仅可以使莎剧作焕发出新的光彩,同时也是对生态批评理论的一种建构。一方面,这有利于我们反思当今生态危机的文化根源;另一方面,这也给当代社会提供了一些生态智慧。
论文分为五个部分。
第一章为引言。主要介绍论文课题来源、国内外研究莎士比亚四大悲剧的现状和水平,尤其总结分析了从生态批评角度分析莎剧的前人研究成果,由此引出本论文的研究切入点和创新点。接着,简单介绍作为新理论生态批评的起源、发展和现状,主要呈现它的定义、核心观点以及论文中涉及的理论要点。最后是本论文的结构。
第二章讨论自然与女性。在莎士比亚悲剧里,自然与女性的联系十分紧密。这首先表现在和女性出场的自然意象有着特别的内涵,《哈姆莱特》里的欧菲莉亚就是一例,她的出现总是伴随着各种不同的花、树、水以及泥土的意象,而这些自然意象有着超越它们本身的意义。其次,大自然的两种不同形象,慈善、宁静犹如慈母,或是疯狂、不可控制犹如女巫也分别表现在不同类型的女性人物身上,如《李尔王》的考第莉亚和《麦克白》的女巫们。这其实反映了过渡型社会不同阶级对自然的不同看法。
第三章分析自然与人,主要体现在自然和人之间的类比、人在自然世界的位置。一方面,在西方宇宙观中,自然是大宇宙,人是小宇宙,自然与人是相互对应的关系。宇宙中象征着最高和谐的天体音乐也对应着人内心的音乐,即心灵的和谐,这在《哈姆莱特》和《奥赛罗》里面均有反映。另一方面,文艺复兴时期的人们过分推崇“人本主义”,以致把“人”推向万物之上,有人类中心主义之傲慢与偏见,哈姆雷特的著名独白之一就是例证。而这种过分的人类中心主义,其实就是生态危机的文化根源。与此同时,哈姆雷特又不得不承认,人是食物链上的一环,必须依靠别的生物生存,并不能因为理性而凌驾于万物之上。人应该是自然世界的守护者而非统治者。
第四章探究自然与文明。它们的关系在《李尔王》中有着集中的反映,经历了从对立到融合的过程。在一定程度上,经过暴风雨洗礼的李尔和被树干挽救生命的埃德加在荒原上流浪,代表着自然;而居住在城堡、享受着财富和文化的刚乃绮、里根两姐妹以及艾德蒙则代表着文明。自然与文明两阵营的对立体现在地理位置与生活方式、财产和所处状态的对立。但是,与自然对立的文明是异化的文明、不健康的文明,文明要健康的发展,终归要自然的参与与融合。刚乃绮、里根两姐妹和艾德蒙的死去,李尔和埃德加最后回到文明社会并被授予管理国家的权利,代表了自然和文明的融合,体现了莎士比亚的人文理想,亦是一种健康的生态智慧。
第五章为结论。莎士比亚悲剧不仅揭露了人们对自然以及自然与人的看法,真实而生动地反映了文艺复兴时期的文化和思想;而且也蕴含着丰富的生态智慧,对于当今我们如何面对生态危机有着深刻的启示。
Shakespeare’s four great tragedies which have rich implications and far-reaching influence, are the sparkling pearls in world literature. Under different critics’discussions during dissimilar periods, they present diverse splendors. With the assistance of the present eminent literal theory --- green ecocriticism, the thesis tries to discuss the relationships between nature and women, between nature and human, between nature and civilization in Shakespeare’s four great tragedies. Its purposes are to find out how people think of nature and how people view the association between nature and human beings, and to dig out the ecological thoughts in the plays. In this way, the research helps to make the plays emit new brightness. Besides, as a contribution to the construction of the theory ecocriticism, it is beneficial to assist people in reflecting the cultural root of the current ecological crisis and to apply some ecological wisdom.
The thesis consists of five chapters.
Chapter 1 is an introduction. It briefly introduces the source of the subject, surveys the studies on Shakespeare’s four great tragedies, and especially cards the scholarship in the ecocriticism study, from which the writing intention and innovation of the thesis come out. Then the origin, development, and actuality of ecocriticism as a new study are provided while its definition, core viewpoints and the relative theoretic points are mainly stressed. The end of this chapter is about the structure of the thesis.
Chapter 2 deals with the relationship between nature and women. In Shakespeare’s tragedies, nature is closely related to women, which is firstly proved in that the natural images appearing with the females have special connotations. Ophelia in Hamlet is a good example. Her emergence is always accompanied by various flowers, trees, water and the soil, which are not simply natural things but represent more than what they are. The close interaction between nature and women is secondly demonstrated in that the two images of nature, one as a kind and peaceful mother, the other as a wild and uncontrollable witch are respectively reflected in Cordelia of King Lear and the witches of Macbeth, which actually mirrors different classes’distinct views towards nature in that transitional time.
Chapter 3 discusses the association between nature and human, chiefly embodying the analogy between nature and human, and human’s status in natural world. On the one hand, in western cosmology system, the analogy between nature and human is the microcosm-macrocosm correspondence. Then the cosmos music that symbolizes the highest level of universal harmony corresponds to the harmony in human hearts, namely, human music, which has specific examples in Hamlet and Othello. On the other hand, people in Renaissance overvalued humanism so much that they placed human beings above all the other creatures, which was full of anthropocentric pride and prejudice. Hamlet’s famous soliloquy is the best illustration. Nevertheless, at the same time, Hamlet also has to admit that human is part of the food chain, relying on other creatures. Thus, human should not overtop other creatures with his reason, but become a defender instead of a ruler of the natural world.
Chapter 4 explores the connection between nature and civilization, whose connection is centrally glassed in King Lear. They experience the process from antithesis to fusion. To some extent, the two wandering on the heath, Lear who is baptized by the heavy storm and Edgar who is saved by the tree hallow, represent nature while the two sisters Goneril and Regan, and Edmund who live in the castle and enjoy wealth and culture are the mouthpieces of civilization. The antitheses between nature and civilization own three aspects, geographical place and living style, property status, and spiritual state. However, the civilization opposed to nature is dissimilated and unhealthy. Civilization’s healthy development can be without the cooperation and fusion of nature. The death of Goneril, Regan and Edmund, and Lear and Edgar’s being given the governing right of the country stand for the mergence of nature and civilization, which also incarnates Shakespeare’ideal.
Chapter 5 is conclusion. Shakespeare’s great tragedies not only reveal people’s attitudes towards nature and the association between nature and human, truly and vividly reflecting the culture and thoughts of Renaissance, but also contain abundant ecological wisdom, consumedly inspiring us in how we should treat the environmental crisis nowadays.
论文分为五个部分。
第一章为引言。主要介绍论文课题来源、国内外研究莎士比亚四大悲剧的现状和水平,尤其总结分析了从生态批评角度分析莎剧的前人研究成果,由此引出本论文的研究切入点和创新点。接着,简单介绍作为新理论生态批评的起源、发展和现状,主要呈现它的定义、核心观点以及论文中涉及的理论要点。最后是本论文的结构。
第二章讨论自然与女性。在莎士比亚悲剧里,自然与女性的联系十分紧密。这首先表现在和女性出场的自然意象有着特别的内涵,《哈姆莱特》里的欧菲莉亚就是一例,她的出现总是伴随着各种不同的花、树、水以及泥土的意象,而这些自然意象有着超越它们本身的意义。其次,大自然的两种不同形象,慈善、宁静犹如慈母,或是疯狂、不可控制犹如女巫也分别表现在不同类型的女性人物身上,如《李尔王》的考第莉亚和《麦克白》的女巫们。这其实反映了过渡型社会不同阶级对自然的不同看法。
第三章分析自然与人,主要体现在自然和人之间的类比、人在自然世界的位置。一方面,在西方宇宙观中,自然是大宇宙,人是小宇宙,自然与人是相互对应的关系。宇宙中象征着最高和谐的天体音乐也对应着人内心的音乐,即心灵的和谐,这在《哈姆莱特》和《奥赛罗》里面均有反映。另一方面,文艺复兴时期的人们过分推崇“人本主义”,以致把“人”推向万物之上,有人类中心主义之傲慢与偏见,哈姆雷特的著名独白之一就是例证。而这种过分的人类中心主义,其实就是生态危机的文化根源。与此同时,哈姆雷特又不得不承认,人是食物链上的一环,必须依靠别的生物生存,并不能因为理性而凌驾于万物之上。人应该是自然世界的守护者而非统治者。
第四章探究自然与文明。它们的关系在《李尔王》中有着集中的反映,经历了从对立到融合的过程。在一定程度上,经过暴风雨洗礼的李尔和被树干挽救生命的埃德加在荒原上流浪,代表着自然;而居住在城堡、享受着财富和文化的刚乃绮、里根两姐妹以及艾德蒙则代表着文明。自然与文明两阵营的对立体现在地理位置与生活方式、财产和所处状态的对立。但是,与自然对立的文明是异化的文明、不健康的文明,文明要健康的发展,终归要自然的参与与融合。刚乃绮、里根两姐妹和艾德蒙的死去,李尔和埃德加最后回到文明社会并被授予管理国家的权利,代表了自然和文明的融合,体现了莎士比亚的人文理想,亦是一种健康的生态智慧。
第五章为结论。莎士比亚悲剧不仅揭露了人们对自然以及自然与人的看法,真实而生动地反映了文艺复兴时期的文化和思想;而且也蕴含着丰富的生态智慧,对于当今我们如何面对生态危机有着深刻的启示。
Shakespeare’s four great tragedies which have rich implications and far-reaching influence, are the sparkling pearls in world literature. Under different critics’discussions during dissimilar periods, they present diverse splendors. With the assistance of the present eminent literal theory --- green ecocriticism, the thesis tries to discuss the relationships between nature and women, between nature and human, between nature and civilization in Shakespeare’s four great tragedies. Its purposes are to find out how people think of nature and how people view the association between nature and human beings, and to dig out the ecological thoughts in the plays. In this way, the research helps to make the plays emit new brightness. Besides, as a contribution to the construction of the theory ecocriticism, it is beneficial to assist people in reflecting the cultural root of the current ecological crisis and to apply some ecological wisdom.
The thesis consists of five chapters.
Chapter 1 is an introduction. It briefly introduces the source of the subject, surveys the studies on Shakespeare’s four great tragedies, and especially cards the scholarship in the ecocriticism study, from which the writing intention and innovation of the thesis come out. Then the origin, development, and actuality of ecocriticism as a new study are provided while its definition, core viewpoints and the relative theoretic points are mainly stressed. The end of this chapter is about the structure of the thesis.
Chapter 2 deals with the relationship between nature and women. In Shakespeare’s tragedies, nature is closely related to women, which is firstly proved in that the natural images appearing with the females have special connotations. Ophelia in Hamlet is a good example. Her emergence is always accompanied by various flowers, trees, water and the soil, which are not simply natural things but represent more than what they are. The close interaction between nature and women is secondly demonstrated in that the two images of nature, one as a kind and peaceful mother, the other as a wild and uncontrollable witch are respectively reflected in Cordelia of King Lear and the witches of Macbeth, which actually mirrors different classes’distinct views towards nature in that transitional time.
Chapter 3 discusses the association between nature and human, chiefly embodying the analogy between nature and human, and human’s status in natural world. On the one hand, in western cosmology system, the analogy between nature and human is the microcosm-macrocosm correspondence. Then the cosmos music that symbolizes the highest level of universal harmony corresponds to the harmony in human hearts, namely, human music, which has specific examples in Hamlet and Othello. On the other hand, people in Renaissance overvalued humanism so much that they placed human beings above all the other creatures, which was full of anthropocentric pride and prejudice. Hamlet’s famous soliloquy is the best illustration. Nevertheless, at the same time, Hamlet also has to admit that human is part of the food chain, relying on other creatures. Thus, human should not overtop other creatures with his reason, but become a defender instead of a ruler of the natural world.
Chapter 4 explores the connection between nature and civilization, whose connection is centrally glassed in King Lear. They experience the process from antithesis to fusion. To some extent, the two wandering on the heath, Lear who is baptized by the heavy storm and Edgar who is saved by the tree hallow, represent nature while the two sisters Goneril and Regan, and Edmund who live in the castle and enjoy wealth and culture are the mouthpieces of civilization. The antitheses between nature and civilization own three aspects, geographical place and living style, property status, and spiritual state. However, the civilization opposed to nature is dissimilated and unhealthy. Civilization’s healthy development can be without the cooperation and fusion of nature. The death of Goneril, Regan and Edmund, and Lear and Edgar’s being given the governing right of the country stand for the mergence of nature and civilization, which also incarnates Shakespeare’ideal.
Chapter 5 is conclusion. Shakespeare’s great tragedies not only reveal people’s attitudes towards nature and the association between nature and human, truly and vividly reflecting the culture and thoughts of Renaissance, but also contain abundant ecological wisdom, consumedly inspiring us in how we should treat the environmental crisis nowadays.
引文
[1] Bate, Jonathan. The Song of the Earth[M]. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2000.
[2] Biedermann, Hans. Dictionary of Symbolism[M], trans. James Hulbert. New York: Facts on File, 1992.
[3] Branch, Michael P. and Scott Slovic, (eds.). The ISLE reader: ecocriticism, 1993-2003[C]. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 2003.
[4] Buell, Lawrence. The Future of Environmental Criticism[M]. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2005.
[5] -. The Environmental Imagination: Thoreau, nature writing, and the formation of American culture[M]. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1995.
[6] Clark, Kenneth. Landscape into Art[M]. Boston: Beacon Press, 1961.
[7] Danby, John F. Shakespeare's Doctrine of Nature: a Study of King Lear[M]. London: Faber and Faber, 1949.
[8] Egan, Gabriel. Green Shakespeare: From ecopolitics to ecocriticism[M]. London: Routledge, 2006.
[9] Elton, W.R. Shakespeare and the thought of his age[A]. In Stanley Wells (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare Studies[C]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2000.
[10] Engels, Frederick. The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State[M]. New York: International Publishers, 1942.
[11] Estok, Simon C. Theory from the fringes: animals, ecocriticism, Shakespeare. Mosaic (Winnipeg) [J]. Literature Resource Center, 2007(3):61.
[12] Frye, Northrop. Fools of Time: Studies in Shakespearean Tragedy[M]. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967.
[13] Garrard, Greg. Ecocriticism[M]. London: Routledge, 2004.
[14] Glotfelty, Cheryll and Harold Fromm, (eds.). The Ecocriticism Reader: Landmarks in Literary Ecology[C]. Athens: the University of Georgia Press, 1996.
[15] Grady, Hugh. Shakespeare Criticism, 1600-1900[A]. In Margreta De Grazia, and Stanley Wells (eds.). The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare Studies[C]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2003.
[16] Kernan, Alvin B. Formalism and Realism in Elizabethan Drama: The Miracles in King Lear[A]. In S. Schoenbaum (ed.). Renaissance Drama[C]. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1966.
[17] Knights, L. C. Some Shakespearean Themes[M]. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1960.
[18] Manes, Christopher. Nature and Silence[A]. In Cheryll Glotfelty and Harold Fromm (eds.). The Ecocriticism Reader: Landmarks in Literary Ecology[C]. Athens: the University of Georgia Press, 1996.
[19] Merchant, Carolyn. The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution[M]. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1980.
[20] Meeker, Joseph W. The Comedy of Survival: Studies in Literary Ecology[M]. New York: Scribner’s, 1972.
[21] Muir, Kenneth. Twentieth-century Shakespeare Criticism: the tragedies[A]. In Stanley Wells (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare Studies[C]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2000.
[22] Nicolson, Marjorie Hope. The Breaking of the Circle: Studies in the Effect of the“New Science”Upon Seventeenth-Century Poetr[M]. New York: Columbia University Press, 1965.
[23] Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. Emile[M], trans. Barbara Foxley. Project Gutenberg eBook, April, 2004.
[24] -. Discourse on the Origin of Inequality[M], trans. Franklin Philip. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994.
[25] Shakespeare, William. Hamlet, the Tragedies of Shakespeare[M]. London: Oxford University Press, 1912.
[26] -. Macbeth, the Tragedies of Shakespeare[M]. London: Oxford University Press, 1912.
[27] -. King Lear, the Tragedies of Shakespeare[M]. London: Oxford University Press, 1912.
[28] -. Othello, the Tragedies of Shakespeare[M]. London: Oxford University Press, 1912.
[29] Starobinski, Jean. Jean-Jacques Rousseau: Transparency and Obstruction[M], trans, Arthur Goldhammer. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988.
[30] Tillyard, E. M. W. The Elizabethan World Picture[M]. New York: Random House, 1942.
[31] White, Lynn. Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis[M]. In Cheryll Glotfelty and Harold Fromm (eds.). The Ecocriticism Reader: Landmarks in Literary Ecology[C]. Athens: the University of Georgia Press, 1996.
[32] Worster, Donald. Nature’s Economy: A History of Ecological Ideas[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977.
[33] Thatcher, Virginia Sarah, (ed.). The New Webster’s Encyclopedic Dictionary of the English Language[Z]. New York: Random House Value Publishing, Inc, 1997.
[34] Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/, 2009-8-11.
[35]胡家峦.历史的星空——英国文艺复兴时期诗歌与西方宇宙论[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 2000年.
[36]蒋倩.论莎士比亚<李尔王>中的愚人、疯癫者及其他[J].四川外语学院学报, 2007(6): 77-81.
[37]李伟民.艰难的进展与希望_近年来中国莎士比亚研究述评[J].四川外语学院学报, 2006(1): 28-33.
[38]李长春.人文主义理想的悲歌绝响——话说《李尔王》[J].外国文学研究, 1988(4): 135-141.
[39]王诺.欧美生态批评[M].上海:学林出版社, 2008年.
[40]叶维廉.叶维廉文集(第二卷)[M].合肥:安徽教育出版社, 2003年.
[41]郑土生.莎士比亚研究和考证[M].南京:江苏教育出版社, 2005年.
[42]周铭.从男性个人主义到女性环境主义的嬗变——威拉?凯瑟小说《啊,拓荒者!》的生态女性主义解读[J].外国文学, 2006(3): 52-58.
[2] Biedermann, Hans. Dictionary of Symbolism[M], trans. James Hulbert. New York: Facts on File, 1992.
[3] Branch, Michael P. and Scott Slovic, (eds.). The ISLE reader: ecocriticism, 1993-2003[C]. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 2003.
[4] Buell, Lawrence. The Future of Environmental Criticism[M]. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2005.
[5] -. The Environmental Imagination: Thoreau, nature writing, and the formation of American culture[M]. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1995.
[6] Clark, Kenneth. Landscape into Art[M]. Boston: Beacon Press, 1961.
[7] Danby, John F. Shakespeare's Doctrine of Nature: a Study of King Lear[M]. London: Faber and Faber, 1949.
[8] Egan, Gabriel. Green Shakespeare: From ecopolitics to ecocriticism[M]. London: Routledge, 2006.
[9] Elton, W.R. Shakespeare and the thought of his age[A]. In Stanley Wells (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare Studies[C]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2000.
[10] Engels, Frederick. The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State[M]. New York: International Publishers, 1942.
[11] Estok, Simon C. Theory from the fringes: animals, ecocriticism, Shakespeare. Mosaic (Winnipeg) [J]. Literature Resource Center, 2007(3):61.
[12] Frye, Northrop. Fools of Time: Studies in Shakespearean Tragedy[M]. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967.
[13] Garrard, Greg. Ecocriticism[M]. London: Routledge, 2004.
[14] Glotfelty, Cheryll and Harold Fromm, (eds.). The Ecocriticism Reader: Landmarks in Literary Ecology[C]. Athens: the University of Georgia Press, 1996.
[15] Grady, Hugh. Shakespeare Criticism, 1600-1900[A]. In Margreta De Grazia, and Stanley Wells (eds.). The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare Studies[C]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2003.
[16] Kernan, Alvin B. Formalism and Realism in Elizabethan Drama: The Miracles in King Lear[A]. In S. Schoenbaum (ed.). Renaissance Drama[C]. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1966.
[17] Knights, L. C. Some Shakespearean Themes[M]. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1960.
[18] Manes, Christopher. Nature and Silence[A]. In Cheryll Glotfelty and Harold Fromm (eds.). The Ecocriticism Reader: Landmarks in Literary Ecology[C]. Athens: the University of Georgia Press, 1996.
[19] Merchant, Carolyn. The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution[M]. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1980.
[20] Meeker, Joseph W. The Comedy of Survival: Studies in Literary Ecology[M]. New York: Scribner’s, 1972.
[21] Muir, Kenneth. Twentieth-century Shakespeare Criticism: the tragedies[A]. In Stanley Wells (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare Studies[C]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2000.
[22] Nicolson, Marjorie Hope. The Breaking of the Circle: Studies in the Effect of the“New Science”Upon Seventeenth-Century Poetr[M]. New York: Columbia University Press, 1965.
[23] Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. Emile[M], trans. Barbara Foxley. Project Gutenberg eBook, April, 2004.
[24] -. Discourse on the Origin of Inequality[M], trans. Franklin Philip. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994.
[25] Shakespeare, William. Hamlet, the Tragedies of Shakespeare[M]. London: Oxford University Press, 1912.
[26] -. Macbeth, the Tragedies of Shakespeare[M]. London: Oxford University Press, 1912.
[27] -. King Lear, the Tragedies of Shakespeare[M]. London: Oxford University Press, 1912.
[28] -. Othello, the Tragedies of Shakespeare[M]. London: Oxford University Press, 1912.
[29] Starobinski, Jean. Jean-Jacques Rousseau: Transparency and Obstruction[M], trans, Arthur Goldhammer. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988.
[30] Tillyard, E. M. W. The Elizabethan World Picture[M]. New York: Random House, 1942.
[31] White, Lynn. Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis[M]. In Cheryll Glotfelty and Harold Fromm (eds.). The Ecocriticism Reader: Landmarks in Literary Ecology[C]. Athens: the University of Georgia Press, 1996.
[32] Worster, Donald. Nature’s Economy: A History of Ecological Ideas[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977.
[33] Thatcher, Virginia Sarah, (ed.). The New Webster’s Encyclopedic Dictionary of the English Language[Z]. New York: Random House Value Publishing, Inc, 1997.
[34] Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/, 2009-8-11.
[35]胡家峦.历史的星空——英国文艺复兴时期诗歌与西方宇宙论[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 2000年.
[36]蒋倩.论莎士比亚<李尔王>中的愚人、疯癫者及其他[J].四川外语学院学报, 2007(6): 77-81.
[37]李伟民.艰难的进展与希望_近年来中国莎士比亚研究述评[J].四川外语学院学报, 2006(1): 28-33.
[38]李长春.人文主义理想的悲歌绝响——话说《李尔王》[J].外国文学研究, 1988(4): 135-141.
[39]王诺.欧美生态批评[M].上海:学林出版社, 2008年.
[40]叶维廉.叶维廉文集(第二卷)[M].合肥:安徽教育出版社, 2003年.
[41]郑土生.莎士比亚研究和考证[M].南京:江苏教育出版社, 2005年.
[42]周铭.从男性个人主义到女性环境主义的嬗变——威拉?凯瑟小说《啊,拓荒者!》的生态女性主义解读[J].外国文学, 2006(3): 52-58.