 |
[email protected] |
 |
3275638434 |
 |
 |
| Paper Publishing WeChat |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
An Archetypal Analysis of the Scapegoat Motif in Atonement
ZHOU Tong
Full-Text PDF
XML 1347 Views
DOI:10.17265/2159-5836/2020.04.002
Jinan University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
The scapegoat persecution consists of four elements: the widespread social crisis, the accusation of crime, the scapegoat selection criteria and the violence itself. The goat, Jesus, Oedipus, etc. in the Bible all acted as scapegoats. This is the persecution of all individuals, but in most cases, it is hidden in the culture in a more secretive way. In the boiling point of the initiation of scapegoat mechanism, crowd plays an important role. People usually don’t blame themselves but blame others and the whole society. They can make up all kinds of accusations and make people feel that people who are scapegoats are particularly harmful. Scapegoats are often accused of special crimes. Although the charges can be varied, it is easy to find their unity to achieve social stability at the expense of one’s interests. And the protagonist of Ian McEwan’s Atonement—Robbie will be analyzed from 4 elements of the scapegoat theory in this paper comparing with the New Testament from the perspective of transmutation and displacement of archetypes.
McEwan, scapegoat, archetype, displacement, Bible
D’Hoker, Elke. (2006). Confession and atonement in contemporary fiction: J. M. Coetzee, John Banville, and Ian McEwan. Critique: Studies in Contemporary Fiction, 48(1), 31-43.
Finney, B. (2004). Briony’s stand against oblivion: The making of fiction in Ian McEwan’s Atonement. Journal of Modern Literature, 27, 68-82.
Fraser, I. (2013). Class experience in McEwan’s Atonement. Critique, (4), 465-477.
Frazer, J. G. (1993). The Golden Bough. London: Wordsworth.
Frye, N. (1971). Anatomy of criticism: Four essays. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Girard, R. (1989). The Scapegoat. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Good New Bible: Today’s English Version. (1976). New York: United Bible Societies.
Guerin, W. L., Earle, L., LeeMorgan, J. C. R., & John, R. (2004). Willingham. A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature (4th ed.). Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Halford, M. (2012). ‘Pass the Amo!’: Metonymy and class in Ian McEwan’s Atonement. The Albatross, 2(1), 25-32.
Ingersoll, E. G. (2004). Intertextuality in L. P. Hartley’s The Go-Between and Ian McEwan’s Atonement. Forum for Modern Language Studies, 40(3), 241-258.
Martin, J. (2011). Who killed Robbie and Cecilia? Reading and misreading Ian McEwan’s Atonement. Critique: Studies in Contemporary Fiction, 1, 55-73.
McEwan, I. (2001). Atonement. London: Jonathan Cape.
Mullan, J. (2003). Beyond fiction. Guardian, 29, 32.
Updike, J. (2002). Flesh on flesh: Review of Atonement. The New Yorker, (3), 80-83.
Wells, J. (2008). The shades of Austen in McEwan’s Atonement. Persuasions: The Jane Austen Journal, (3), 101-112.
丁建宁. (2004). 赎罪如何可能？—评伊恩•麦克尤恩的《赎罪》. 《外国文学动态》, 2004(06).
向冠桦. (2010). 《赎罪》小说与电影叙事与文学叙事的关系. 艺术审美批判, 2010(9), 210-211.
李巧霞. (2014). 无法完成的赎罪 ‘俄狄浦斯’—伊恩•麦克尤恩小说赎罪中女主人公的神话原型分析. 牡丹江教育学院学报, 2014(4), 1-2.
李树红. (2012). 《赎罪》中圣经原型分析”. 石家庄: 河北师范大学.
李炜. (2012). 伊恩•麦克尤恩《赎罪》的神话原型解读. 乌鲁木齐: 新疆大学.
杨丽丽. (2009). 伊恩•麦克尤恩小说中的成长主题研究. 上海: 上海师范大学.
王鑫. (2012). 西方文学中替罪羊形象的文化原型解读. 齐齐哈尔: 齐齐哈尔大学.
胡慧勇. (2013). 历史与当下危机中的伊恩•麦克尤恩小说. 上海: 上海外国语大学.
苌姗姗. (2012). 在赎罪中成长—从成长小说的角度解读《赎罪》. 武汉: 湖北大学.
蒲若茜. (1997). 对《呼啸山庄》中希斯克利夫与凯瑟琳的爱的原型分析. 《暨南学报》, 1997(02).
褚福晓. (2012). 赎罪中的圣经原型解读. 南宁: 广西大学.
邹涛. (2011). 叙事认识中的暴力与救赎---评麦克尤恩的《赎罪》. 当代外国文学, 2011(4), 66-73.
靳明玉. (2018). 替罪羊理论视角下《追风筝的人》中哈桑的人物解读. 哈尔滨: 哈尔滨师范大学.