Not a play about a man who can't make up his mind, but a play about a man who could not make real what was found in his mind
Austin divided the performative ability of language into three main forces:
*the locutionary force: the ability of language to deliver a message
*the illocutionaryforce: what is done in being said, such as denying a request, giving an order, etc.; *the perlocutionary force: what is achieved by being said, the consequences of one's utterance, such as an order being followed (or refused)
Shakespeare's characters frequently develop through "self-overhearing." This is considered the "road to individuation", a process which allows the character to realize their own utterances and then hopefully realize themselves.
Theory of performativity: sentences which are not only passively describing a given reality, but they are changing the (social) reality they are describing. Or an antithesis for "sticks and stones may break my bones but words may never hurt me."
Shakespeare's characters have the opportunity to self-overhear through the required soliloquys needed to deliver necessary information about what the character is thinking.
The most important scene where performance utterance is relevant is the conversation between Hamlet and the ghost of his father.
If the person who has sworn to do something does that something, that is a perlocutionary effect of his utterance, the illocutionary force of having sworn has compelled him to that action.
The emphasis on the emotional contexts of utterances is important for those trying to understand Hamlet and Austin's philosophy for that matter.
Hamlet's evolution is an evolution towards faith, closure, and acceptance not action
Fredrik deBoer wrote the paper to determine how performative utterance could pertain to Hamlet but instead, learned that Hamlet is a man who uses that performative power in the unending task of the realization of the self
No comments:
Post a Comment