Symbols, Emblems, Tokens
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4735993 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Stephen Hannaford (corresponding author) |
| Year | 1981 |
| Volume | 33 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 467 |
| Publication date | 1981-12-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Theatre Journal (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0192-2882 • E-ISSN: 1086-332X |
| Publisher | JSTOR (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/3206771 |
| OpenAlex | W2318610666 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
Anyone who has written about dramatic literature as a kinetic rather than a static art has run into the problem of inadequate vocabulary. The problem is compounded by the incomplete mixture of two kinds of discourse.' On the one hand there is a set of literary terms, based in part on Aristotle, in part on the terminology created for the analysis of lyric poetry. This vocabulary (words such as metaphor, imagery, recognition, haemartia) is applicable to a limited range of dramatic literature, most especially poetic tragedy. For Shakespeare, this vocabulary seems appropriate; for Moliere, however, it is insufficient. On the other hand, we have a set of pragmatic theatrical terms, rooted in the work of modern directors (such as pace, spine, concentration). These terms, indispensable for theatre practice, fall short when applied to anything but the mechanics of a particular production
| Citations per year | 0.03 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 1989 - 1989 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |