Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T09:36:03.024Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stage Metaphor

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 January 2009

Eli Rozik
Eli Rozik
Affiliation:
Department of Theatre Studies, Tel Aviv University.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Two major theoretical requirements should be fulfilled before embarking on an attempt to suggest an adequate description of stage metaphor. First, an appropriate description of verbal metaphor is mandatory. Such a prerequisite does not imply that stage metaphor is a derivative of verbal metaphor; it assumes, rather, a common deep structure underlying both verbal and stage metaphors and recognizes the fact that theories of verbal metaphor are much more advanced. There is no way to avoid striving for a unified theory of metaphor, which assumes the existence of a common deep structure, and explains the generation of both particular types of metaphor. Second, an appropriate description of theatrical language, which is a particular case of iconic communication, is also mandatory since, according to the same premise, differences in the structure of metaphor in varying languages should be accounted for on the grounds of the specific features of the respective languages.

Type
Articles
Information
Theatre Research International , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , Spring 1989 , pp. 50 - 70
Copyright
Copyright © International Federation for Theatre Research 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. See my ‘Theatrical language’, Semiotica 45, 1/2, 1983, 65–87Google Scholar; ‘The vocabulary of theatrical language’, Assaph C2, 1985, 15–26Google Scholar; ‘Acting – a study in theatrical reference’, Approches de l'opéra (Paris, Didier, 1986) pp. 199–204Google Scholar; ‘The syntax of theatrical language’, Assaph C3, 1986, 43–57.Google Scholar

2. See Beardsley, Monroe C., ‘Metaphor’, Aesthetics (N.Y., Harcourt, 1958) pp. 134–44Google Scholar; and Searle, John, ‘Metaphor’, Expression and meaning (Cambridge University Press, 1986) pp. 76–116.Google Scholar

3. Ionesco, , Les Chaises, Théâtre (Paris, Gallimard, 1954) Vol. I.Google Scholar

4. Ionesco, , Le Roi se meurt, Théâtre, Vol. IV.Google Scholar

5. Beckett, , Waiting for Godot, (London, Faber, 1965).Google Scholar

6. Arrabal, , Picnic on the Battlefield, (London, John Calder, 1961).Google Scholar

7. Ionesco, , Les Chaises.Google Scholar

8. Arrabal, , Picnic on the Battlefield.Google Scholar

9. Treen, J. and Foote, D., ‘A redefined Richard III’, Newsweek, 10.6.85.Google Scholar

10. Directed by Peter James. Cf. Brooks, Cleanth, ‘The Naked Baby and the Cloak of Manliness’, The Well-Wrought Urn (New York, Harcourt, 1947) pp. 22–49.Google Scholar

11. In my opinion, non-verbal elements are the most reliable indices of types of speech acts: see Austin, John, How To Do Things With Words (Oxford University Press, 1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Searle, John, Speech Acts (Cambridge University Press, 1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12. Ionesco, , Les Chaises.Google Scholar

13. Beckett, , Waiting for GodotGoogle Scholar, ibid.

14. Arrabal, , Picnic on the Battlefield.Google Scholar

15. Ionesco, , Les Chaises.Google Scholar

16. Ionesco, , Amédée, Théâtre, Vol. I.Google Scholar

17. Everyman, The Genesis of the Early English Theatre (New York, Mentor, 1962) pp. 66–94.Google Scholar

18. Beckett, , Waiting for Godot.Google Scholar

19. Ionesco, , Rhinocéros, Théâtre, Vol. III.Google Scholar

20. See Esslin, Martin, The Theatre of the Absurd (New York), Doubleday, 1961) pp. 125–7.Google Scholar

21. There are three plays by the same name by Calderón de la Barca: two autosacramentales and the famous comedy. See dela Barca, Calderón, La vidaes sueño (Paris, Klincsieck, 1957).Google Scholar

22. Lorca, , Blood Wedding, Three Tragedies (London, Penguin, 1969).Google Scholar

23. The Moon, which is viewed as part of the collusion, is also personified as ‘a young woodcutter with a white face’ (p. 77).Google Scholar

24. Ionesco, , Rhinocéros.Google Scholar

25. Lorca, , The House of Bernardo Alba.Google Scholar

26. Beckett, , Krapp's Last Tape (London, Faber, 1979).Google Scholar

27. Beckett, , Happy Days (London, Faber, 1970).Google Scholar

28. I have derived the term ‘praxical’ from Aristotle's definition of tragedy in terms of imitation of ‘praxis’ (Poetics, 1449 b 24). The term is needed for regular plays, in opposition to ‘allegorical’ plays.

29. de la Barca, Calderón, La vidaes sueño (Zaragoza and Madrid, Ebro, 1968).Google Scholar

30. Shakespeare, , Macbeth.Google Scholar

31. Similar considerations apply to the first murderer when he strikes out the light in Banquo's murder scene (III, iii, 17).

32. de Molina, Tirso, El burlador de Sevilla, (Zaragoza and Madrid, Ebro, 1971).Google Scholar

33. Racine, , Phèdre, Pr´face (Paris, La Pléïade, 1950) p. 745.Google Scholar

34. It is my view that also in praxical plays the basic relationship of a theatrical text to an audience is always metaphorical.

35. See my ‘Metaphoric characterization in the Theatre of the Absurd’, On Metaphor in Theatre and Poetry, pp. 110–131Google Scholar. (Tel Aviv, Dvir, 1981), 11–32 (Hebrew). English translation available.

36. See Henle, Paul, ‘Metaphor’, Language, Thought and Culture, (Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 1951) pp. 173–95Google Scholar. In my opinion feeling is only one type of ‘referential associativeness’.

37. Modifiers are adnominals, i.e. they are once removed from nouns. Cf. Lyons, John, Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics (Cambridge University Press, 1969) p. 327.Google Scholar

38. This principle explains why inversion of metaphor is possible although it will result in different meanings. See Henle, Paul, ‘Metaphor’, p. 190.Google Scholar

39. This surface structure resembles what I have suggested as surface structure no. 7 of verbal metaphor: a metaphor in which the metaphoric modifier consists of an alien modifier alone, whereas the alien noun and the common literal modifier are implicit.

40. For types of surface structure of metaphors, see my ‘Poetic metaphor’, On Metaphor in Theatre and Poetry.Google Scholar