Made available in DSpace on 2015-03-26T13:44:33Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 texto completo.pdf: 531169 bytes, checksum: e0d729debd3fc44b346508e20fed716b (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-03-20 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / This work aims to analyze in a comparative way the tragedy King Lear, by William Shakespeare, and its adaptation The History of King Lear, by the Irish poet Nahum Tate. In order to make this comparative study practicable, it ́s necessary to understand conceptions of tragedy, since conceptions from the Ancient Greece to the Shakespearean tragedy, the social and historical contexts of the Elizabethan era (when the Shakespearean dramaturgy came to light and was developed) and the Restoration era (when Tate ́s adaptation was written) and theories about literary adaptation, having in mind that adaptations are based in a context and the tastes of the audience in a specific time. The theoreticians who guided our work are Gerard Genette (2006), Julie Sanders (2006), Linda Hutcheon (2006), Aristotle (1995), Friedrich Nietzsche (2007), Anatol Rosenfeld (1993), Albin Leski (2006), A.C. Bradley (1992), Frank Kermode (2006), Bárbara Heliodora (2001), Marjorie Garber (2004), Marlene Soares dos Santos (2008), James Black (1975), and others. / O presente trabalho faz um estudo comparativo entre a tragédia Rei Lear, de William Shakespeare, e sua adaptação intitulada The History of King Lear, do poeta irlandês Nahum Tate. Para viabilizar este estudo comparativo, faz-se necessário compreender concepções de tragédia, desde a Antiguidade Clássica até a tragédia concebida por Shakespeare, os contextos sócio-históricos das eras elisabetana (período em que a dramaturgia shakespeariana surgiu e desenvolveu-se) e da Restauração (período em que a adaptação de Tate foi escrita) e teorias de adaptação literária, tendo em vista que adaptações são escritas à luz de determinado contexto e dos gostos do público-leitor de seu tempo. Os teóricos norteadores deste trabalho são Gerard Genette (2006), Julie Sanders (2006), Linda Hutcheon (2006), Aristóteles (1995), Friedrich Nietzsche (2007), Anatol Rosenfeld (1993), Albin Leski (2006), A.C. Bradley (1992), Frank Kermode (2006), Bárbara Heliodora (2001), Marjorie Garber (2004), Marlene Soares dos Santos (2008), James Black (1975), entre outros.

No description available.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-27T19:32:42Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Rodrigo Seidl.pdf: 1488767 bytes, checksum: 0bd757518f92f78fba55bac5524e18fe (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009-11-10 / The objective of this dissertation was to investigate the ways in which Elizabethan professional theatre practice was, at the same time, a product and a producer of historical changes. Following the construction of London s first purpose-built playhouse in 1576, theatre slowly became a lucrative business run by full-time professionals. Soon after this historical development, the professional companies suffered constant attacks. These claimed that plays propagated sin and idleness among those who watched or took part in them. Through the analysis of the anti-theatrical writings and laws produced between 1576 and 1603, we observed the nature of the changes in theatrical practice in London and questioned the motives behind the attacks against the stage. We found that the process of professionalization of the London companies incorporated many of the social changes at work at the time. However, the new theatres created new social spaces in which transgressive social practices found their place beyond the City s control. Therefore, the professional theatre played an active role in making these new social values visible / O objetivo desta dissertação foi investigar as formas pelas quais a prática teatral profissional elisabetana foi, ao mesmo tempo, produto e produtor de mudanças históricas. Após a construção do primeiro teatro permanente de Londres em 1576, o teatro aos poucos se tornou um negócio lucrativo administrado por profissionais. Logo após este desenvolvimento histórico, as companhias profissionais sofreram ataques constantes. Estes afirmavam que peças teatrais propagavam o pecado e o ócio entre as pessoas que assistiam ou participavam nelas. Por meio da análise dos tratados e leis antiteatrais produzidas entre 1576 e 1603, nós observamos a natureza das mudanças na prática teatral em Londres e questionamos os motivos por trás dos ataques contra o teatro. Nós percebemos que o processo de profissionalização das companhias londrinas incorporou várias mudanças sociais que estavam em curso na época. Entretanto, os novos teatros criaram novos espaços sociais nos quais práticas sociais transgressoras acharam seu lugar fora do controle da Cidade. Portanto, o teatro profissional desempenhou um papel ativo ao dar visibilidade a estes novos valores sociais

Crime d’actualité au tournant du XVIe et du XVIIe siècle, le régicide est un objet de spéculations et un fait d’actualité en France et en Angleterre. Dans les deux royaumes, on débat de cette question sur fond de schisme religieux. Des théoriciens politiques réinventent la manière de parler de ce crime pour le légitimer et les dramaturges s’emparent de ce sujet problématique. Jacques de Fonteny met en scène le meurtre d’Henri III, Claude Billard de Courgenay celui d’Henri IV, Montchrestien représente l’exécution de Marie Stuart, Shakespeare et Marlowe mettent en scène les meurtres de Richard II et d’Edouard II. Au théâtre, le régicide est a priori un spectacle efficace, propre à provoquer de vives émotions chez le spectateur. Pourtant, ces représentations ne vont pas de soi. Comment, en effet, représenter un crime aussi énorme dans un contexte de crise politique ? Comment justifier le spectacle d’un meurtre d’une actualité aussi brûlante ? Les dramaturges négocient constamment entre des contraintes idéologiques et esthétiques, parfois contradictoires, qui pèsent sur la représentation. Ils empruntent souvent le détour par l’histoire. Plus le crime est inefficace politiquement, et plus il est efficace sur scène. La tyrannie du prince justifie sa mise à mort. Ses fautes morales transforment le régicide en châtiment acceptable et sa déchéance rend la scène pathétique. Un récit permet fréquemment de raconter la mort que l’on ne peut pas montrer sans risquer de décevoir le public. / The regicide is a topical crime between the sixteenth and the seventeenth-century. It is an object of many reflections and an actual event for french and english people. In both kingdom, there are debates on this issue while the schism has begun a reality. Because of the controversy, it is possible to speack about régicide as a punishment. Playwrighters perform this problematic subject. Jacques de Fonteny represent the murder of Henri Ird, Claude Billard de Courgenay represent Henri IVrth’s one, Antoine de Montchrestien represent the execution of Marie Stuart, Shakespeare and Marlowe perform the murders of Richard IInd et Edward IInd. A priori, such subject can move the audience. Nevertheless, such a performance isn’t an evidence. How, indeed, can a playwrighter show such an enormous crime during troubled period ? How can he justify the show in a crisis context ? Playwrighters have to consider ideological and aesthetic restrictions, which are sometimes in contradiction, to perform the murder of the sovereign. In many cases, they rewright history. Because the crime is usually ineffective as a politic action, it is effective for dramatic art. Tyranny justify that the prince is murdered. Some moral failures make this one acceptable. And because the king is falling, he appears as a pathetic victim for the spectators. When it is difficult to show the crime scene, the regicide is described by a messenger.