Browse

Conceptualizing the Uncanny
언캐니의 개념화 과정: 에.테.아.호프만의 모래사나이와 안젤라 카터의 매직 토이숍을 중심으로

Cited 0 time in Web of Science Cited 0 time in Scopus
Authors
이지현
Advisor
Eli Park Sorensen
Major
인문대학 협동과정 비교문학전공
Issue Date
2014-02
Publisher
서울대학교 대학원
Keywords
uncanny(unheimlich)author-functionauthorshipdeath of the author
Description
학위논문 (석사)-- 서울대학교 대학원 : 협동과정 비교문학전공, 2014. 2. Eli Park Sorensen.
Abstract
This thesis is a study on the theme of conceptualizing the uncanny, which purposes on examining how this theme plays a significant role in terms of the author-function and how its variation is staged in Angela Carters The Magic Toyshop(1967) and E. T. A. Hoffmanns Der Sandmann(1816).
In 1919, Freud defines the uncanny as class of the terrifying [feeling] which leads back to something long known to us, once very familiar in his essay Das Unheimliche. And this definition of the uncanny develops itself into the legitimate standard of conceptualizing the uncanny. According to Anneleen Masschelein, this phenomena proves that Freud functions as the founder of the uncanny so that he limits and controls the text. However, he could not completely conceptualize the uncanny as he confessed at the end of his essay on the uncanny. Masschelein argues that this aspect of Freuds essay functions as a de-stabilizing force to scatter the notion of the uncanny and overflow the boundary of the text, which eventually threatens the author Freud. In this manner, this de-stabilizing force reveals how the function of the author operates to limit and control the text by foregrounding how it threatens the author-function of Freud. On this premise, this thesis re-interprets the conceptualizing process of the uncanny in terms of the author-function in Freuds essay Das Unheimliche and expands this examination to Angela Carters The Magic Toyshop(1967) and E. T. A. Hoffmanns Der Sandmann(1816), where especially Freuds version of the conceptualizing the uncanny is staged.
On the aspect, it is significant that Carter liberates the uncanny from the puppet theatre of Uncle Philip at the last scene of The Magic Toyshop. Carter does not describe how Uncle Philip has burnt down, she has only focused on the break-down of the toyshop. She only stimulates wild surmise (200), as Foucault questions at the end of his essay. By asking What matter whos speaking?, Foucault does not suggest the specific strategy to emancipate the text. Likewise, Carter does not focuses on the collapse of the Uncle Philip. She only depicts the moment when the uncanny is unleashed from the theatre, which reflects Foucaults last question of speculating the utopian moment, when the author/text relationship is entirely dissolved and there is no need to ask What is an author?.
Language
English
URI
https://hdl.handle.net/10371/131749
Files in This Item:
Appears in Collections:
College of Humanities (인문대학)Program in Comparative Literature (협동과정-비교문학전공)Theses (Master's Degree_협동과정-비교문학전공)
  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse