挪借《威尼斯商人》
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2011-07-01
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
國立臺北藝術大學戲劇學院
Abstract
改編自莎士比亞喜劇《威尼斯商人》的新編豫劇《約／束》，與其說是一「貼近原著精義」的改編，毋寧說是一跨文化的「挪借」，要來得恰切些。《約／束》的改編，在理論與實踐上有其根本的落差與扞格之處：一方面，改編者標榜「貼近原著精義」的改編策略，使讀者與觀眾期待看到很接近莎翁名劇《威尼斯商人》的文本與演出；另方面，在實踐上，卻又不顧原劇裡角色塑造與主、副線情節細密交織的特點，大幅度刪削，不僅刪除了婕西卡與羅倫佐的私奔，以及藍司羅逗弄老父與背離夏洛克的副線情節，更簡化了波霞（《約／束》裡的慕容天）的角色。此外，又無視於與原劇密不可分的宗教與族群差異，將場景由前現代時期的義大利改換到古中原，把夏洛克重新設定為放高利貸的大食人。透過對《約／束》兩位編劇自陳的改編理念與論述的引述與探討，連同對《約／束》與《威尼斯商人》文本及文化脈絡的比較與研究，本論文將對以上的論述有仔細的論證、分析和探討。
Adapted from The Merchant of Venice, the script of Taiwan Bangzi Company´s Bond, claiming to“press close to the essence of the original＂was, upon examination, more a cross-cultural appropriation of Shakespeare´s play than an adaptation as claimed. It was so because, while the adapters put forth such a claim as their adapting strategy, in practice, they chose to omit the subplot of Jessica and Lorenzo, along with that of Lancelot and his father Gobbo. Even Portia became less sophisticated. They ignored, too, the religious and racial differences as they transposed the play´s setting from early modern Italy to Sung Dynasty China, and converted Shylock in the original into an ancient Muslim. The omission and alteration, in turn, affect especially the characterization of Xia Luo (Shylock) in the adaptation. Such self-corroding contradictions between theories and practices are hard to be reconciled; and they fully demonstrate the cross-cultural adaptation was a de facto appropriation that justifies the present study.
Adapted from The Merchant of Venice, the script of Taiwan Bangzi Company´s Bond, claiming to“press close to the essence of the original＂was, upon examination, more a cross-cultural appropriation of Shakespeare´s play than an adaptation as claimed. It was so because, while the adapters put forth such a claim as their adapting strategy, in practice, they chose to omit the subplot of Jessica and Lorenzo, along with that of Lancelot and his father Gobbo. Even Portia became less sophisticated. They ignored, too, the religious and racial differences as they transposed the play´s setting from early modern Italy to Sung Dynasty China, and converted Shylock in the original into an ancient Muslim. The omission and alteration, in turn, affect especially the characterization of Xia Luo (Shylock) in the adaptation. Such self-corroding contradictions between theories and practices are hard to be reconciled; and they fully demonstrate the cross-cultural adaptation was a de facto appropriation that justifies the present study.