摘要
本博士论文《莎士比亚传奇剧中父女关系的探索》选取了莎士比亚创作后期的四部传奇剧(悲喜剧)《佩里克里斯》、《辛白林》、《冬天的故事》以及《暴风雨》作为研究对象，采用美国文艺批评家希利斯米勒的文学阐释理论，从社会、心理、语言和神秘阐释四个方面加以评述。把女儿分成四类，缺席的女儿、遗失的女儿、反抗的女儿以及温顺的女儿，指出四种不同类型女儿的特点，女儿与父亲关系的本质构成各自复原力量的源泉。论文将父女关系研究与体裁、语言、修辞、语义与主题思想的分析融为一体，进一步揭示了四部传奇剧的历史意义、艺术魅力以及他们在莎士比亚一生创作中的地位。
论文的主体分为四大章节，第一章对《泰尔亲王佩里克里斯》进行了社会层面的探讨。把佩里克里斯与女儿的关系看作社会关系，剧中佩里克里斯被动无能，无力履行作为父亲、丈夫和国王的社会职责，而玛丽娜却能在逆境与不幸中展现非凡的勇气和能力，主动应对。缺席女儿玛丽娜的回归，使这对父女关系转入正常秩序：佩里克里斯在父权社会中重回主导地位，主动履行了父亲，丈夫和国王的社会职责，而玛丽娜退回至父亲的庇护之下。该章节继续深入探讨了两个违背父女社会关系的例证，乱伦和卖淫。前者，父亲僭越了父亲的职责，剥夺了女婿应尽的繁衍后代的社会责任。后者，女儿的繁殖能力从私有属性变成了公有属性，家族的代代相传从而中断，社会进程从而打破。
第二章从心理阐释的角度解读了《冬天的故事》中的父女关系。里昂提斯因嫉妒失常罹患精神错乱，使自己的家庭成员、宫廷的侍从和自己的王国都遭到灭顶之灾。除此之外，他的肉欲压倒理性、外表强势却内心脆弱。而其女儿柏蒂在肉欲和理智间找到平衡，象征一座自然花园，孕育治愈父亲创伤的良方。柏蒂的天真无邪源自于她从小从宫廷环境中“遗失”，她的纯洁天性给里昂提斯带来重生，重拾他身为父亲和一国之君的职责。女儿柏蒂的失而复得给里昂提斯带来心理上的重生，女儿象征自然力量的活力，治愈了里昂提斯的心理疾病同时给他注入了青春的力量，同佩里克里斯实现的社会力量形成鲜明对比。
第三章从语言的角度考察了《辛白林》中的父女关系。辛白林缄默无语，无论在私人事务比如女儿伊莫根的婚事，还是公共决策比如对罗马人采取什么政治立场，均受王后话语的操控。国王与女儿交流屈指可数，他的沉默和糟糕的语言沟通能力破坏了他和伊莫根的父女关系。相比之下，伊莫根能言善辩，语言风趣幽默、巧妙机智，使其它几部传奇剧中的女儿及该剧中的其它角色相形见拙。桀骜不驯的女儿伊莫根的回归，标志着辛白林重获话语能力的时刻。显而易见，她的语言实现了《佩里克里斯》和《冬天的故事》中的社会复原以及自然心理的复原。父女关系中疗伤语言的力量要小于玛丽娜实现的社会力量复原和柏蒂实现的心理健康恢复力量。但是，伊莫根的语言同时实现了社会和心理复原。
第四章力图通过神秘解释阐述《暴风雨》中普洛斯彼罗与米兰达的父女关系。“神秘解释”借自但丁对宗教术语的理解，尽管此处该词用以描述魔法而非宗教。从神秘解释的角度可以实现对所有体验的理解。但丁使用该词来表示所有的现象和体验都是基督教信仰的体现。在《暴风雨》中，莎士比亚意在表明他的世界观，无论是《佩里克里斯》的“社会”世界、《冬天的故事》的心理世界，还是《辛白林》中的社会心理语言世界，都是通过戏剧魔法，戏剧艺术得以体现。他对世界的认识是一切关系包括父女关系都是通过戏剧来表现,人生就是一个戏剧的舞台。普洛斯彼罗的魔法既操纵自然也操控人类。女儿居住在两个世界中：她们是“自然”生物，通过结婚的仪式进入人类的“公共”世界。普洛斯彼罗的魔法不带一丝感情，从而影响了他的语言、性格和行为，使他变得过分冷静和无情，但女儿所用的魔法更为温情，代表自然力量的女儿与代表人类力量的弗迪南德的结合让普洛斯彼罗变得更有人情味，最终使普洛斯彼罗到达宽恕的彼岸，恢复了理智和情感间的平衡，通过建立新家庭实现个人重生、政治地位恢复以及家庭和解，戏剧以此收场。
四部晚期戏剧分别通过社会、心理、语言学以及神秘解释的角度来阐释对应每部戏剧的“主导”力量。正是通过此种分类系统找到了传奇剧中的女儿所带来的不同种类的复原力量，而其中社会与心理相对应，前者是外部表现，后者是内部表现，而两者都是通过语言得以实现，而这三者又包含于莎士比亚的戏剧舞台艺术之中，是戏剧性的体现方式。通过对这四部传奇剧层层深入的探讨，试图得出这样的结论，莎士比亚是通过戏剧向观众传达他的思想，用戏剧来阐释整个世界。正如但丁认为这个世界的一切活动皆可用对上帝的信仰来解释，莎士比亚的世界观在于用戏剧魔法，戏剧艺术解读人类世界和人生体验。
This doctoral dissertation, A Study of the Father-Daughter Relationship in Shakespeare’sRomances, based on the four grounds of literary interpretation proposed by J. Hillis Miller,namely, the social, psychological, linguistics, and anagogic aspects, is intended to explore thefather-daughter relationships in Shakespeare’s late four romances (tragic-comedies), Pericles,Cymbeline, The Winter’s Tale, and The Tempest, with a view to resituating these late plays intheir themes, historical import, generic expression, and their mark on Shakespeare's dramaticcareer. The daughters in the romances are classified into four different types, the absentdaughter, the lost daughter, the disobedient daughter and the obedient daughter, whose naturein relation to their fathers forms the source of their respective regenerative power.
Four central chapters focus on the romances themselves. Chapter One is devoted to a socialinterpretation of Pericles, the Prince of Tyre. The relationship between Pericles and hisdaughter Marina is examined as a social construct, with Pericles remaining a passive characterwho fails to perform his social obligations as a father, a husband and a king, and Marina, incontrast, demonstrating her courage and capacity to fight against loss and adversity in asocially active manner. The restoration of Marina, the absent daughter, shifts the socialdynamics into its normal order, with Pericles resuming his dominant role in the patriarchalsociety and Marina retreating back under the protection of a father. This chapter furtherexplores two examples of the violation of this social construct, the seeming “private” crime ofincest and that of the seeming “public” crime of sexual trafficking and prostitution. Theseviolations clearly define aspects of father-daughter relationships within a social context insofaras the father usurps the role of the son-in-law and exploit him of his social obligation of futureprocreation in the former, and the fertility of the daughter becomes publicized in the latter, andin so doing the generative cycle and the healthy progression of society are disturbed.
Chapter Two presents a psychological reading of The Winter’s Tale. Leontes suffers from ablighting madness that derives from an unnatural jealousy, which brings destruction to hisfamily members, his attendant in court and his own kingdom. He also suffers from animbalance of sensuality and reason, and an inner fear of personal nothingness disguised in theoutward violence. In contrast, his daughter Perdita, guided by reason, internalizes the balance between her sensual attraction and her reason, and embodies of the natural garden that breedsa cure for her father that is very different from Marina’s actively self-conscious resistance tosocial attacks on her responsibilities as a daughter. Perdita’s very innocence marks her“lostness” from the courtly world; and her pure nature allows a rebirth to be restored toLeontes both as a father and as the king of a kingdom as well. The psychological rejuvenationis finally realized through the restoration of the lost daughter, Perdita, who embodies a naturalforce of vigor that cures Leontes of his mental disease and infuses in him the power of youthwhich is in stark contrast to the social force of vigor Pericles achieves.
Chapter Three examines the father-daughter relationship in Cymbeline from the perspective oflanguage and linguistics. Cymbeline has been kept tongue-tied and manipulated by thelanguage of the queen, in private matters like the marriage of his daughter Imogen and inpublic decisions like the political stand towards the Romans. The silencing of the King andhis awkward communication skills disrupt the father-daughter relationship between Imogenand himself. In contrast, Imogen distinguishes herself from all the other daughters of the lateromances and the rest of the characters in this play as the most eloquent character, whoselanguage generates charm and intellectual wit and carries a strong power in bringing languagecapacity to her father and her husband. In a notable way, her language achieves forms of thesocial and natural-psychological restoration enacted in Pericles and The Winter’s Tale. Thereturn of Imogen, the disobedient daughter, marks the moment when Cymbeline regains hispower of language. Healing language is less obvious a force than either the more obviousrestoration of social power by means of that relationship that Marina accomplishes or even therestoration of psychological well being that Perdita achieves. Yet Imogen’s languageaccomplishes versions of both social and psychological healing and describes the combinationof social forms and psychological strength implicit in the father-daughter relationship.
Chapter Four aims to expound on the relationship between Prospero and Miranda in TheTempest through an anagogic reading.“Anagogic” is a term borrowed from Dante, in hisunderstanding a religious term, though here it is used to describe magic rather than religion assuch. An anagogic understanding is one that situates itself from a point of view that allows allexperience to be understood in its terms. When Dante uses the term, he means to understandand interpret the world and all experiences by way of Christian faith. In The Tempest, Shakespeare means to describe both the world and experience–the “social” world of Pericles,for instance, and the psychological world of The Winter’s Tale as well as their combination inthe social-psychological language of Imogen in Cymbeline–as mediated by the magic and artof drama altogether. Shakespeare conceives the world and life as essentially theatrical, a stagethat informs every kind of relationships including the father-daughter relationship. There’retwo sides to Prospero’s magic: One being the manipulation of nature and nature-associatedspirits, the other being the control of human beings. Daughters inhabit two worlds: They are“natural” creatures who enter the “public” world of human beings in the ceremony of marriage.The raw magic Prospero wields taints him with a touch of coldness, influences his language,his character and his actions, but it is through the soft magic of the union between his daughter,the natural force, and Ferdinand, the human force that he reaches the end of forgiveness andrestores a balance of reason and emotion, which ends the play with personal rejuvenation,political restoration and familial reconciliation realized by the formation of a new family.
The four late dramas are interpreted respectively from the social, psychological, linguistic, andanagogic perspectives that correspond to “the dominant” impulse of particular plays. It is thisclassificatory system that discovers the different kinds of restoration brought by the daughtersin the tragi-comedies. The social interpretation, an outward representation, poses itselfopposite to the psychological interpretation, an inward representation, with both realizedthrough the expression of language. These three perspectives in turn are governed by theanagogic interpretation, as they stage the theatrical and artistic nature of dramas. Through theprogressive probe into the four romances, this dissertation strives to draw the conclusion thatShakespeare conveys his thoughts and ideas to his audience, and interprets all the parts of theworld by means of drama. As Dante interprets all the activities of the world by the faith inGod, Shakespeare views the human world and life experiences through the magic of thetheatre and the art of drama.
引文
1Jane M. Ford, Patriarchy and Incest from Shakespeare to Joyce (Gainesville, Fla.,1998).
2A political reading of the play can be found in the following works: G. Wilson Knight’s The Crown of Life:Essays in Interpretation of Shakespeare’s Final Plays (New York: Barnes and Noble,1961), Colin Still’s TheTimeless Theme (London: Ivor Nicholson&Watson,1936), George Lamming’s (The Pleasures of Exile (AnnArbor: University of Michigan Press,1992). Paul Brown’s “‘This thing of darkness I acknowledge mine’: TheTempest and the Discourse of Colonialism,” in Political Shakespeare: New Essays in Cultural Materialism, ed.Jonathan Dollimore and Alan Sinfield (Manchester: Manchester University Press,1985); Thomas Cartelli,“Prospero in Africa: The Tempest as Colonialist Text and Retext,” in Shakespeare Reproduced: The Text inHistory and Ideology, ed. Jean E. Howard and Marion F. O’Connor (London: Metheuen,1987); StephenGreenblatt’s Shakespearean Negotiations: The Circulation of Social Energy in Renaissance England (Berkeley:University of California Press,1988; Ann Skura’s “Discourse and the Individual: The Case of Colonialism in TheTempest,” Shakespeare Quarterly40(1989):42–69; and David Scott Kastan,“‘The Duke of Milan/And HisBrave Son’: Old Histories and New in The Tempest,” in Shakespeare After Theory (New York: Routledge,1999).Ania Loomba’s Shakespeare, Race, and Colonialism (Oxford: Oxford University Press,2002); Kim Hall’sThings of Darkness: Economies of Race and Gender in Early Modern England (Ithaca, NY: Cornell UniversityPress,1995). Donna B. Hamilton’s Virgil and “The Tempest”(Columbus: Ohio State University Press,1990).
3Schleifer adds that “such polysemy is a feature of discourse in general and of literary discourse in particularinsofar as literary texts are freed, in significant ways, from the historical and psychological contexts out of whichthey came.... Stephen Greenblatt, makes a similar argument when he argues, speaking of Shakespeare, that in‘contrast [with ordinary texts,] most of which are virtually incomprehensible when they are removed from theirimmediate surroundings,’‘works of art... contain directly or by implication much of [their cultural] situationwithin themselves, and it is this sustained absorption that enables many literary works to survive the collapse ofthe conditions that led to their production.’”(2009:182).
4Generation and Degeneration: Tropes of Reproduction in Literature and History from Antiquity to EarlyModern Europe, ed. Valeria Finucci and Kevin Brownlee (Durham: Duke University Press,2001); JacquelineMarie Musacchio, The Art and Ritual of Childbirth in Renaissance Italy (New Haven: Yale University Press,
5In reference to Susan M. Felch’s journal published on ANQ in2003
6Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch,‘The Tempest,’ in Twentieh-Century Interpretations of ‘The Tempest’ ed HalletSmith. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall1969.p.17
7L.H. Allen,“The Hypnosis Scene in The Tempest” Australasian Journal of Psychology and Philosophy,
4(1926),110-18
8Jan Kott, Shakespeare Our Contemporary, trans. Boleslaw Taborski. New York: Anchor Books,1966. HarryBerger, Jr.“Miraculous Harp: A Reading of Shakespeare’s Tempest.” Shakespeare Studies,5(1969).
The quotation of the original text is from Shakespeare Complete Works published by Oxford
University Press (1986).
Allen, L.H.“The Hypnosis Scene in The Tempest”. Australasian Journal of Psychology andPhilosophy4,1926.
Belton, Ellen.“‘When No Man Was His Own’: Magic and Self-Discovery in The Tempest”.University of Toronto Quarterly, Vol.55, Winter1985/1986.
Benson, Sean.“The Resurrection of the Dead in The Winter’s Tale and The Tempest”.Renaissance61.1,2008.
Bergeron, David M. Shakespeare’s Romances and the Royal Family. Lawrence: UniversityPress of Kansas,1985.
Bloom, Harold, ed. with introd. William Shakespeare: Comedies and Romances. NY: ChelseaHouse Publishers,1986.
Boose, Lynda E.“The Family in Shakespeare Studies; or–Studies in the Family ofShakespeareans; or–The Politics of Politics”. Renaissance Quarterly, Vol.40, No.4,Winter1987.
—“The Father and The Bride in Shakespeare”. Publications of the Modern LanguageAssociation of America, Vol.97Issue3,1982.
Bradley, Lynne.“Meddling with Masterpieces: the On-going Adaptation of King Lear”.University of Victoria,2008.
Brown, Paul.“‘This Thing of Darkness I Acknowledge Mine’: The Tempest and the Discourseof Colonialism,” in Political Shakespeare: New Essays in Cultural Materialism, ed.Jonathan Dollimore and Alan Sinfield. Manchester: Manchester University Press,1985.
Bullough, Geoffrey. Narrative and Dramatic Sources of Shakespeare. Vol VI. London:Routledge,1966.
Burton, Robert. The Anatomy of Melancholy. Manchester: FyfieldBooks,2004.
Cady, Christina. The Rhetoric of Bonds, Alliances, and Identities: Interrogating SocialNetworks in Early Modern English Drama. Santa Cruz: University of California,2011.
Carr, Joan.“Cymbeline and the Validity of Myth.” Studies in Philosophy,1978.
Cartelli, Thomas.“Prospero in Africa: The Tempest as Colonialist Text and Retext,” inShakespeare Reproduced: The Text in History and Ideology. Ed. Jean E. Howard andMarion F. O’Connor. London: Metheuen,1987.
Cavell, Stanley. The Claim of Reason: Wittgenstein, Skepticism, Morality and Tragedy.Oxford: Clarendon Press,1979.
Cohen, Derek.“Patriarchy and Jealousy in Othello and The Winter’s Tale.” Modern LanguageQuarterly, Vol.48,1987.
Dash, Irene G. Women’s Worlds in Shakespeare’s Plays. Newark: University of Delware PressLondon: Associated University Presses,1996.
Dollimore, Jonathan.“Introduction: Shakespeare, Cultural Materialism and the NewHistoricism.” Ed. Jonathan Dollimore and Alan Sinfield. Political Shakespeare: NewEssays in Cultural Materialism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press,1985.
Dreher, Diane.“Gardens of Healing and Transformation”. World&I,08879346, Vol.18,Issue10,2003.
—Domination and Defiance: Fathers and Daughters in Shakespeare. Lexington, KY:University Press of Kentucky, c1986.
Erasmus, Desiderius. In Praise of Marriage, in Erasmus on Women (ed.) E. RummelToronto/Buffalo/London,1996.
Felch, Susan M.“Noble Gentlewomen Famous for Their Learning: The London Circle ofAnne Vaughan Lock”. ANQ, Vol.16, No.2, Spring2003.
Felperin, Howard. Shakespearean Romance. Princeton: Princeton UP,2004.
Finucci, Valeria and Kevin Brownlee, ed. Generation and Degeneration: Tropes ofReproduction in Literature and History from Antiquity to Early Modern Europe, Durham:Duke University Press,2001.
Ford, Jane M. Patriarchy and Incest from Shakespeare to Joyce. Gainesville, Fla.,1998.
Forster, E. M.. Where Angels Fear to Tread. London: Penguin,2007.
Freud, Sigmund. Transformations of Puberty. The Standard Edition of the Completepsychological works. Ed, Angela Richards. Michigan: Random House of Canada Ltd,1986.
Frey, Charles.“Shakespeare’s Imperiled and Chastening Daughters of Romance”. SouthAtlantic Bulletin, Vol.43Issue4,1978.
Shakespeare’s Vast Romance: A Study of A Winter’s Tale. Columbia: Universityof Missouri Press,1980.
Frye, Northrop. Anatomy of Criticism. Princeton: Princeton University Press,1957.
—A Natural Perspective: The Development of Shakespearean Comedy and Romance.New York and London: Columbia UP,1965.
Ghirardo, Diane Yvonne.“The Topography of Prostitution in Renaissance Ferrara.” Journal ofthe Society of Architectural Historians, Vol.60, No.4, Dec.,2001.
Glazov-Corrigan, Elena.“Speech Acts, Generic Differences, and the Curious Case ofCymbeline.” Studies in English Literature,1500-1900; Spring, Vol.34Issue2,1994.
Greenblatt, Stephen. Shakespearean Negotiations: The Circulation of Social Energy inRenaissance England. Berkeley: University of California Press,1988.
—Will in the World. New York: W.W. Norton&Co., c2004.
Hall, Kim. Things of Darkness: Economies of Race and Gender in Early Modern England.Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press,1995.
Hamilton, Donna B.. Virgil and “The Tempest”. Columbus: Ohio State University Press,1990.
Hamilton, Sharon. Shakespeare’s Daughters. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland&Co. Pub., c2003.
Harry Berger, Jr.“Miraculous Harp: A Reading of Shakespeare’s Tempest.” ShakespeareStudies5,1969.
Hunter, Dianne.“Literature and Psychology.” Literature and Psychology, Vol48(3),2002.
—“Shakespeare's Continuity Through the Daughter.” Literature&Psychology. January,2002.
James, Carolyn.“Friendship and Dynastic Marriage in Renaissance Italy”. Literature andHistory,17, Spring2008.
Jakobson, Roman,“The Dominant,” in Language in Literature, ed. Krystyna Promorskaand Stephen Rudy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,1987.
—,“Poetics and Linguistics,” in Language in Literature, ed. Krystyna Promorska andStephen Rudy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,1987.
Kastan, David Scott.“‘The Duke of Milan/And His Brave Son’: Old Histories and New inThe Tempest,” in Shakespeare After Theory. New York: Routledge,1999.
Kermode, Frank. Shakespeare's language. New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux,2000.
Knight, G. Wilson.“The Shakespearian Superman: A Study of The Tempest.” Shakespeare’sRomances: Modern Critical Views. Ed. Harold Bloom. Philadelphia: Chelsea HousePublishers,2000.
—“King Lear and the Comedy of the Grotesque.” In The Wheel of Fire,4threv. ed.London:1949, chap.viii
—The Crown of Life: Essays in Interpretation of Shakespeare’s Final Plays. London:Methuen,1952.
Knight, W. Nicholas. Autobiography in Shakespeare's Plays: Lands So By His Father Lost.New York: P. Lang,2002.
Kott, Jan. Shakespeare Our Contemporary, trans. Boleslaw Taborski. New York: AnchorBooks,1966.
Lamming, George. The Pleasures of Exile. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press,1992.
Lenker, Lagretta. Fathers and Daughters in Shakespeare and Shaw. Westport, Conn.:Greenwood Press,2001.
Lindenbaum, Peter.“Time, Sexual Love, And The uses of Pastoral in The Winter’s Tale”.Modern Language Quarterly Vol.33,1972.
Loomba, Ania. Shakespeare, Race, and Colonialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press,2002.
Lorraine, Helms.“The Saint in the Brothel: Or, Eloquence Rewarded.” ShakespeareQuarterly, Vol.41.3,1990.
Louden, Bruce. Reading Through the Alcestis to The Winter's Tale. Classical and ModernLiterature,27.22007.
McDonald, Russ. Shakespeare’s Late Style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2006.
McEvoy, Sean. Shakespeare: The Basics. New York: Routledge,2000.
Miller, J. Hillis.“The Search for Grounds in Literary Study”. Rhetoric and Form:Deconstruction at Yale. Eds. Robern Con Davis and Ronald Schleifer. Norman,1985.
Miller, Ronald F..“King Lear and the Comic Form.” Genre VIII,1975.
Moore, Jeanie Grant.“Riddled Romance: Kingship and Kinship in Pericles.” Rocky MountainReview. Spring2003.
Murray, Barbara A. Introduction: Shakespeare Adaptations from the Restoration: Five Plays.Ed. Barbara Murray. Madison, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson UP; London: Associated UniversityPresses in conjunction with Modern Humanities Research Association,2005.
Musacchio, Jacqueline Marie. The Art and Ritual of Childbirth in Renaissance Italy. NewHaven: Yale University Press,1999.
M.S., Catherine, ed. Shakespeare and Language. Alexander Cambridge, U.K.; New York:Cambridge University Press,2004.
Nockimson, Rickard. L.. Entering the Maze: Shakespeare's Art of Beginning. New York: P.Lang,1996.
Patrides, C.A..“Shakespeare and the Comedy Beyond Comedy” Kenyon Review, Vol.10Issue2, Spring1988.
Plowden, Alison. Tudor Women: Queens and Commoners. London: Sutton Pub.,1998.
Plutarch. Lives of the Noble Greeks and Romans. in Great Books of the Western World. Ed.Hutchins, Robert Maynard. Chicago, Ill: Encyclopaedia Britannica (14edition),1952.
Sanchez, Melissa E..“Seduction and Service in The Tempest.” NC: The University of NorthCarolina Press,2007.
Sandberg, Brian.“All the Many and Varied Remedies and Secrets”. Early Modern Women,Vol.5, Fall2010.
Schleifer, Ronald.“The Semiotics of Speculation: A.J. Greimas and the Example of LiteraryCriticism.” Genre XLII Spring/Summer,2009.
Schleiner, Louise. Tudor and Stuart Women Writers. Bloomington: Indiana UP,1994.
Shugg, Wallace.“Prostitution in Shakespeare's London.” Shakespeare Studies, Vol.10,1977.
Skura, Ann.“Discourse and the Individual: The Case of Colonialism in The Tempest”.Shakespeare Quarterly40,1989.
Slover, George.“Magic, Mystery, and Make-believe.” Shakespeare Studies, Vol.11,1978.
Smith, Keverne.“Almost the Copy of My Child That’s Dead: Shakespeare and the Loss ofHamnet”. OMEGA: Journal of Death&Dying, Vol.64(1)29-40,2011-2012.
Still, Colin. The Timeless Theme. London: Ivor Nicholson&Watson,1936.
Sundelson, David. Shakespeare's Restorations of the Father. New Brunswick, N.J.: RutgersUniversity Press, c1983.
Taylor, Mark. Shakespeare’s Darker Purpose: A Question of Incest. AMS Studies in theRenaissance. New York: AMS,1982.
Thomas, Keith. Man and the Natural World: Changing Attitudes in England1500-1800,London. New York: Oxford University Press,1996.
Thorne, W.B..“Pericles and the ‘Incest-Fertility’ Opposition”. Shakespeare Quarterly, Vol.22,Winter1971.
Tigner, Amy L.“The Winter’s Tale: Gardens and the Marvels of Transformation”. EnglishLiterary Renaissance36(1),2006.
Traversi, Derek. Shakespeare: The Roman Plays. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford Univ. Press,1953.
Weddle, Saundra.“Women’s Place in the Family and the Covent: A Reconsideration ofPublicand Private in Renaissance Florence.” Journal of Architectural Education, Vol.55,Issue2,2001.
Young, Bruce Wilson. Family Life in the Age of Shakespeare. Westport, Conn.: GreenwoodPress,2009.
海因里希·海涅.莎士比亚的少女和妇人.绿原译.上海：上海文艺出版社,2007.
陆谷孙.莎士比亚研究十讲.上海：复旦大学出版社,2005.
---.莎士比亚全集.梁实秋译.北京：中国广播电视出版社、远东图书公司,1995.
---.莎士比亚全集.朱生豪等译.北京：人民文学出版社,1994.
张泗洋、徐斌、张晓阳.莎士比亚引论（上、下）.北京：中国戏剧出版社,1989.