셸리의 『프랑켄스타인』 과 브론테의 『제인에어』 비교분석 : 라깡적 글읽기 = A Comparative Analysis on Shelley’s Frankenstein and Bronte’s Jane Eyre: A Lacanian Reading

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Both psychoanalysis and literature are concerned with narratives, with telling stories. By reinterpreting Freudianism in terms of language, Lacan permits us to reformulate the relation between psychoanalysis and literature. Lacan’s works is an original attempt to rewrite Freud’s unconsciousness by undertaking a thoroughgoing reassessment of the role of language. Lacan sees the unconscious as coming into being with language, stressing signifier over signified. One of Lacan’s well-known statements is that “the unconscious is the whole structure of language” and “man’s desire is the desire of the Other”. From Lacan’s perspectives, the purpose of this paper is to make a comparison between Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre, with an attempt to decode the unconscious through languages of works. It is worthwhile to approach Lacanian reading of these two novels because they have some similarities and differences simultaneously in terms of psychoanalytic views.
Chapter Ⅱ provides an outline of desire and unconscious in the texts. In Frankenstein, my emphasis is on the study of Oedipus Complex and the theory of the Imaginary, Symbolic order. In Jane Eyre, there is a focus on psychoanalysis as a practice which includes a discussion about Jane’s dreams and symptoms as the formation of the unconscious. The third part of this chapter concludes with the comparative analysis in the light of Lacan’s notions of “talking cure” and “transference”.
Chapter Ⅲ considers the “doubleness,” caused division of subject or self, as the one of important issues in Poststructuralism. According to Lacan, the mirror stage is the phase of alienating narcissistic identification; the subject is his own double more than he is himself. This concept of the mirror phase draws our attention to the interdependency of image and the identity as the way of appearing character’s double/other. As a result, double identity representing mirror self leads to the consideration of one double of Victor and creature, other double of Jane and Bertha, and the third double of a creature and Bertha. Therefore, “unconsciousness is the discourse of the other” means that human subject is decentered with inhibition by the other.
Lacan’s notion of the unconscious is formed by adding language to the structure of the repressed in Freud. Lacan’s concepts to literary works can be useful to thinkers in a wider variety of methods to read novels. Conclusively, the effect of Lacan’s theory is to revitalize literary criticism as a new way to reinterpreting literary works.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론
• Ⅱ. 욕망과 무의식
• Ⅲ. 상상계적 이중인물
• Ⅳ. 결론
• 인용문헌
• Abstract

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 "？Dialogue of Self and Soul ？ The Madwoman in the Attic" 336-71, 1984
• 2 "？A Lacanian Reading of Frankenstein ？ Frankenstein; or the Modern Prometheus" 245-58, 1992
• 3 "Romantic Imagery in the Novels of Charlotte Bront？" Macmillan 1978
• 4 "Mary Shelley and the Feminization of Romanticism" 332-47, 1980
• 5 "Frankenstein; or the Modern Prometheus" 1831;rpt1992
• 6 "Essays and Dialogue on Language U of Georgia P" 1990
• 7 "Creation as Catastrophe" 883-903, 1981
• 8 "Charlotte Bront？ and the Mysteries of Love Myth and Allegory in Jane Eyre" 1989