✖


Jump to content

Персонаж (искусство)

Для других видов использования см. Характер .
Четыре персонажа Commedia dell'arte , костюмы и поведение, указывают на роли персонажа , которые они изображают в этом жанре

В художественной литературе , характер или персонаж , [ 1 ] человек роман или другой находится в повествовании (например, , игра , радио или телесериал , музыка , кино или видеоигра ) . [ 2 ] [ 3 ] [ 4 ] Персонаж может быть полностью вымышленным или основанным на реальном человеке, и в этом случае может быть сделано различие «вымышленного» и «реального» характера. [ 3 ] Полученное из древнегреческого слова χαρακτήρ , английское слово датируется реставрацией , [ 5 ] Хотя он стал широко использоваться после его появления в Томе Джонсе Генри Филдингом в 1749 году. [ 6 ] [ 7 ] Из этого развивалось чувство «часть, которую играет актер ». [ 7 ] (До этого развития термин «Драматис Перси» , натурализованный на английском языке с латинского и означающего «маски драмы», инкапсулировал понятие персонажей из буквального аспекта масок .) Характер, особенно когда он принят актером в театре или кино , включает в себя «иллюзию человека человеком». [ 8 ] В литературе персонажи направляют читателей через свои истории, помогая им понять сюжеты и обдумывать темы. [ 9 ] С конца 18 -го века фраза « по характеру » использовалась для описания эффективного подражания актером. [ 7 ] С 19 -го века искусство создания персонажей, практикуемое актерами или писателями , называлось характеристикой . [ 7 ]

Персонаж, который является представителем конкретного класса или группы людей, известен как тип. [ 10 ] Types include both stock characters and those that are more fully individualized.[10] The characters in Henrik Ibsen's Hedda Gabler (1891) and August Strindberg's Miss Julie (1888), for example, are representative of specific positions in the social relations of class and gender, such that the conflicts between the characters reveal ideological conflicts.[11]

The study of a character requires an analysis of its relations with all of the other characters in the work.[12] The individual status of a character is defined through the network of oppositions (proairetic, pragmatic, linguistic, proxemic) that it forms with the other characters.[13] The relation between characters and the action of the story shifts historically, often miming shifts in society and its ideas about human individuality, self-determination, and the social order.[14]

Creation

[edit]

In fiction writing, authors create dynamic characters using various methods. Sometimes characters are conjured up from imagination; in other instances, they are created by amplifying the character trait of a real person into a new fictional creation.[2][3]

Real people, in part or in full

[edit]

An author or creator basing a character on a real person can use a person they know, a historical figure, a current figure whom they have not met, or themselves, with the latter being either an author-surrogate or an example of self-insertion. The use of a famous person easily identifiable with certain character traits as the base for a principal character is a feature of allegorical works, such as Animal Farm by George Orwell, which portrays Soviet revolutionaries as pigs. Other authors, especially for historical fiction, make use of real people and create fictional stories revolving around their lives, as with The Paris Wife which revolves around Ernest Hemingway.

Archetypes and stock characters

[edit]
Literary scholar Patrick Grant matches characters from The Lord of the Rings with Jungian archetypes.[15]

An author can create a character using the basic character archetypes which are common to many cultural traditions: the father figure, mother figure, hero, and so on. Some writers make use of archetypes as presented by Carl Jung as the basis for character traits.[16] Generally, when an archetype from some system (such as Jung's) is used, elements of the story also follow the system's expectations in terms of storyline.

An author can also create a fictional character using generic stock characters, which are generally flat. They tend to be used for supporting or minor characters. However, some authors have used stock characters as the starting point for building richly detailed characters, such as William Shakespeare's use of the boastful soldier character as the basis for John Falstaff.

Some authors create charactonyms for their characters. A charactonym is a name that implies the psychological makeup of the person, makes an allegorical allusion, or makes reference to their appearance. For example, Shakespeare has an emotional young male character named Mercutio, John Steinbeck has a kind, sweet character named Candy in Of Mice and Men, and Mervyn Peake has a Machiavellian, manipulative, and murderous villain in Gormenghast named Steerpike. The charactonym can also indicate appearance. For example, François Rabelais gave the name Gargantua to a giant and the huge whale in Pinocchio (1940) is named Monstro.

Types

[edit]

Round vs. flat

[edit]

In his book Aspects of the Novel, E. M. Forster defined two basic types of characters, their qualities, functions, and importance for the development of the novel: flat characters and round characters.[17] Flat characters are two-dimensional, in that they are relatively uncomplicated. By contrast, round characters are complex figures with many different characteristics, that undergo development, sometimes sufficiently to surprise the reader.[18]

In psychological terms, round or complex characters may be considered to have five personality dimensions under the Big Five model of personality.[19] The five factors are:

Stock characters are usually one-dimensional and thin. Mary Sues are characters that usually appear in fan fiction which are virtually devoid of flaws,[21] and are therefore considered flat characters.

Another type of flat character is a "walk-on", a term used by Seymour Chatman for characters that are not fully delineated and individualized; rather they are part of the background or the setting of the narrative.[22]

Dynamic vs. static

[edit]
Further information: Character arc

Dynamic characters are those that change over the course of the story, while static characters remain the same throughout. An example of a popular dynamic character in literature is Ebenezer Scrooge, the protagonist of A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens. At the start of the story, he is a bitter miser, but by the end of the tale, he transforms into a kindhearted, generous man.

Regular, recurring and guest characters

[edit]

In television, a regular, main or ongoing character is a character who appears in all or a majority of episodes, or in a significant chain of episodes of the series.[23] Regular characters may be both core and secondary ones.

A recurring character or supporting character often and frequently appears from time to time during the series' run.[24] Recurring characters often play major roles in more than one episode, sometimes being the main focus.

A guest or minor character is one who acts only in a few episodes or scenes. Unlike regular characters, the guest ones do not need to be carefully incorporated into the storyline with all its ramifications: they create a piece of drama and then disappear without consequences to the narrative structure, unlike core characters, for which any significant conflict must be traced during a considerable time, which is often seen as an unjustified waste of resources.[25]: 147  There may also be a continuing or recurring guest character.[25]: 151  Sometimes a guest or minor character may gain unanticipated popularity and turn into a regular or main one;[26] this is known as a breakout character.[27][28]

Classical analysis

[edit]
Further information: Poetics (Aristotle)

In the earliest surviving work of dramatic theory, Poetics (c. 335 BCE), the Classical Greek philosopher Aristotle deduces that character (ethos) is one of six qualitative parts of Athenian tragedy and one of the three objects that it represents (1450a12).[29] He understands character not to denote a fictional person, but the quality of the person acting in the story and reacting to its situations (1450a5).[30] He defines character as "that which reveals decision, of whatever sort" (1450b8).[30] It is possible, therefore, to have stories that do not contain "characters" in Aristotle's sense of the word, since character necessarily involves making the ethical dispositions of those performing the action clear.[31] If, in speeches, the speaker "decides or avoids nothing at all", then those speeches "do not have character" (1450b9—11).[32] Aristotle argues for the primacy of plot (mythos) over character (ethos).[33] He writes:

But the most important of these is the structure of the incidents. For (i) tragedy is a representation not of human beings but of action and life. Happiness and unhappiness lie in action, and the end [of life] is a sort of action, not a quality; people are of a certain sort according to their characters, but happy or the opposite according to their actions. So [the actors] do not act in order to represent the characters, but they include the characters for the sake of their actions" (1450a15-23).[34]

Aristotle suggests that works were distinguished in the first instance according to the nature of the person who created them: "the grander people represented fine actions, i.e. those of fine persons" by producing "hymns and praise-poems", while "ordinary people represented those of inferior ones" by "composing invectives" (1448b20—1449a5).[35] On this basis, a distinction between the individuals represented in tragedy and in comedy arose: tragedy, along with epic poetry, is "a representation of serious people" (1449b9—10), while comedy is "a representation of people who are rather inferior" (1449a32—33).[36]

In the Tractatus coislinianus (which may or may not be by Aristotle), Ancient Greek comedy is defined as involving three types of characters: the buffoon (bômolochus), the ironist (eirōn), and the imposter or boaster (alazṓn).[37] All three are central to Aristophanes' Old Comedy.[38]

By the time the Roman comic playwright Plautus wrote his plays two centuries later, the use of characters to define dramatic genres was well established.[39] His Amphitryon begins with a prologue in which Mercury claims that since the play contains kings and gods, it cannot be a comedy and must be a tragicomedy.[40]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^ "personage — definition, examples, related words and more at Wordnik". Wordnik.com. Retrieved 2024-07-04.
  2. ^ Jump up to: a b Matthew Freeman (2016). Historicising Transmedia Storytelling: Early Twentieth-Century Transmedia Story Worlds. Routledge. pp. 31–34. ISBN 978-1315439501. Retrieved January 19, 2017.
  3. ^ Jump up to: a b c Maria DiBattista (2011). Novel Characters: A Genealogy. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 14–20. ISBN 978-1444351552. Retrieved January 19, 2017.
  4. ^ Baldick (2001, 37) and Childs and Fowler (2006, 23). See also "character, 10b" in Trumble and Stevenson (2003, 381): "A person portrayed in a novel, a drama, etc; a part played by an actor".
  5. ^ OED "character" sense 17.a citing, inter alia, Dryden's 1679 preface to Troilus and Cressida: "The chief character or Hero in a Tragedy ... ought in prudence to be such a man, who has so much more in him of Virtue than of Vice... If Creon had been the chief character in Œdipus..."
  6. ^ Aston and Savona (1991, 34), quotation:

    [...] is first used in English to denote 'a personality in a novel or a play' in 1749 (The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, s.v.).
  7. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Harrison (1998, 51-2) quotation:

    Its use as 'the sum of the qualities which constitute an individual' is a mC17 development. The modern literary and theatrical sense of 'an individual created in a fictitious work' is not attested in OED until mC18: 'Whatever characters any... have for the jestsake personated... are now thrown off' (1749, Fielding, Tom Jones).
  8. ^ Pavis (1998, 47).
  9. ^ Roser, Nancy; Miriam Martinez; Charles Fuhrken; Kathleen McDonnold (2007). "Characters as Guides to Meaning". The Reading Teacher. 60 (6): 548–559. doi:10.1598/RT.60.6.5.
  10. ^ Jump up to: a b Baldick (2001, 265).
  11. ^ Aston and Savona (1991, 35).
  12. ^ Aston and Savona (1991, 41).
  13. ^ Elam (2002, 133).
  14. ^ Childs and Fowler (2006, 23).
  15. ^ Grant, Patrick (1973). "Tolkien: Archetype and Word". Cross Currents (Winter 1973): 365–380.
  16. ^ Hauke, Christopher; Alister, Ian (2001). Jung and Film. Psychology Press. ISBN 978-1-58391-132-7.
  17. ^ Hoffman, Michael J; Patrick D. Murphy (1996). Essentials of the theory of fiction (2 ed.). Duke University Press, 1996. p. 36. ISBN 978-0-8223-1823-1.
  18. ^ Forster, E.M. (1927). Aspects of the Novel.
  19. ^ Pelican, Kira-Anne (2020). The Science of Writing Characters: Using Psychology to Create Compelling Fictional Characters. Bloomsbury Academic. ISBN 978-1-5013-5722-0.
  20. ^ Roccas, Sonia, Sagiv, Lilach, Schwartz, Shalom H, et al. (2002). "The Big Five Personality Factors and Personal Values". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 28 (6): 789–801. doi:10.1177/0146167202289008. S2CID 144611052.
  21. ^ Bennett, Lucy, Booth, Paul (2016). Seeing Fans: Representations of Fandom in Media and Popular Culture. Bloomsbury Publishing US. p. 160. ISBN 978-1501318474. Retrieved January 19, 2017.
  22. ^ Chatman, Seymour Benjamin (1980). Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film. Cornell University Press. p. 139. ISBN 978-0-8014-9186-3.
  23. ^ Sandler, Ellen (2008). The TV Writer's Workbook: A Creative Approach To Television Scripts. Random House Publishing Group. p. 40. ISBN 978-0-307-49221-0.
  24. ^ Epstein, Alex (2006). Crafty TV Writing: Thinking Inside the Box. Macmillan Publishers. pp. 27–28. ISBN 0-8050-8028-7.
  25. ^ Jump up to: a b Smith, Greg M. (2009). Beautiful TV: The Art and Argument of Ally McBeal. University of Texas Press. pp. 147, 151. ISBN 978-0-292-77784-2.
  26. ^ Kukoff, David (2006). Vault Guide to Television Writing Careers. Vault Inc. p. 62. ISBN 978-1-58131-371-0.
  27. ^ Weschler, Raymond (2000). "Man on the Moon". English Learner Movie Guides.
  28. ^ Miller, Ron (2005). "They really were a great bunch of happy people". TheColumnists.com. Archived from the original on July 16, 2011. Originally, the Arthur 'Fonzie' Fonzarelli character was to be a comic relief dropout type, put there for comic contrast to the whitebread Richie and his pals. He was a tall, lanky guy, but when Henry Winkler blew everybody away at his reading, they decided to cut Fonzie down to Henry's size. Ultimately, Winkler molded the character around himself and everybody, including Ron Howard, realized this would be the show's 'breakout' character.
  29. ^ Janko (1987, 8). Aristotle defines the six qualitative elements of tragedy as "plot, character, diction, reasoning, spectacle and song" (1450a10); the three objects are plot (mythos), character (ethos), and reasoning (dianoia).
  30. ^ Jump up to: а беременный Янко (1987, 9, 84).
  31. ^ Аристотель пишет: «Опять же, без действий, трагедия не может существовать, но без персонажей, это может быть. Для трагедий самых последних [поэтов] не хватает характера, и в целом есть много таких поэтов» (1450a24-25); См. Янко (1987, 9, 86).
  32. ^ Янко (1987, 9).
  33. ^ Aston and Savona (1991, 34) и Janko (1987, 8).
  34. ^ Джанко (1987, 8).
  35. ^ Джанко (1987, 5). Это различие, утверждает Аристотель, возникает по двум причинам, которые являются естественными и общими для всех людей - удовольствия, полученного при переживании представлений, и того, как мы учимся посредством подражания (1448b4—19); См. Янко (1987, 4—5).
  36. ^ Джанко (1987, 6—7). Аристотель указывает, что комедия представляет не все виды уродства и порока, а только то, что смешно (1449a32—1449a37).
  37. ^ Карлсон (1993, 23) и Янко (1987, 45, 170).
  38. ^ Янко (1987, 170).
  39. ^ Карлсон (1993, 22).
  40. ^ Амфритруо , строка 59.

Ссылки

[ редактировать ]
  • Астон, Элейн и Джордж Савона. 1991. Театр в качестве знаковой системы: семиотика текста и исполнения . Лондон и Нью -Йорк: Routledge. ISBN   0-415-04932-6 .
  • Баллик, Крис. 2001. Краткий Оксфордский словарь литературных терминов. 2 -е изд. Оксфорд: Оксфорд UP. ISBN   0-19-280118-X .
  • Берк, Кеннет. 1945. Грамматика мотивов . Калифорнийское издание. Беркли: U of California P, 1969. ISBN   0-520-01544-4 .
  • Карлсон, Марвин. 1993. Теории театра: исторический и критический обзор от греков до настоящего. Расширенное изд. Итака и Лондон: издательство Корнелльского университета. ISBN   978-0-8014-8154-3 .
  • Чайлдс, Питер и Роджер Фаулер. 2006. Словарь Routledge литературных терминов. Лондон и Нью -Йорк: Routledge. ISBN   0-415-34017-9 .
  • Эко, Умберто. 2009. О онтологии вымышленных персонажей: семиотический подход. Sign Systems исследования 37 (1/2): 82–98.
  • Элам, Кейр. 2002. Семиотика театра и драмы . 2 -е издание. Новые акценты Ser. Лондон и Нью -Йорк: Routledge. ISBN   0-415-28018-4 . Первоначально опубликовано в 1980 году.
  • ГОРИН, Розмари, изд. 1994. Словарь литературных персонажей Larousse. Эдинбург и Нью -Йорк: Ларус. ISBN   0-7523-0001-6 .
  • Харрисон, Мартин. 1998. Язык театра . Лондон: Routledge. ISBN   0-87830-087-2 .
  • Ходжсон, Терри. 1988. Словарь Драмы Батсфорда. Лондон: Батсфорд. ISBN   0-7134-4694-3 .
  • Янко, Ричард, транс. 1987. Поэтика с Tractatus coislinianus, Реконструкция поэтики II и фрагменты поэтов. Аристотель ​ . Кембридж: Хакетт. ISBN   0-87220-033-7 .
  • Макговерн, Уна, изд. 2004. Словарь литературных персонажей. Эдинбург: Чемберс. ISBN   0-550-10127-6 .
  • Павис, Патрис. 1998. Словарь театра: термины, концепции и анализ. Транс. Кристина Шанц. Торонто и Буффало: U of Toronto P. ISBN   0-8020-8163-0 .
  • Прингл, Дэвид. 1987. Воображаемые люди: кто есть кто из современных вымышленных персонажей. Лондон: Графтон. ISBN   0-246-12968-9 .
  • Рейнер, Алиса. 1994. Действовать, делать, выполнять: драма и феноменология действия. Театр: теория/текст/спектакль. Энн Арбор: Университет Мичиганской прессы. ISBN   0-472-10537-X .
  • Трумбл, Уильям Р. и Ангус Стивенсон, изд. 2002. Короче Оксфордский английский словарь по историческим принципам. 5 -е изд. Оксфорд: Оксфорд UP. ISBN   0-19-860575-7 ..
  • Пейсли Ливингстон; Андреа Саучелли (2011). «Философские перспективы на вымышленных персонажей» . Новая литературная история . 42, 2 (2): 337–60.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Character_(arts)&oldid=1232534187"
Arc.Ask3.Ru: конец переведенного документа.
Arc.Ask3.Ru
Номер скриншота №: b33a0cd2375bebfccf4b1d75c6cbda2f__1720065480
URL1:https://arc.ask3.ru/arc/aa/b3/2f/b33a0cd2375bebfccf4b1d75c6cbda2f.html
Заголовок, (Title) документа по адресу, URL1:
Character (arts) - Wikipedia
Данный printscreen веб страницы (снимок веб страницы, скриншот веб страницы), визуально-программная копия документа расположенного по адресу URL1 и сохраненная в файл, имеет: квалифицированную, усовершенствованную (подтверждены: метки времени, валидность сертификата), открепленную ЭЦП (приложена к данному файлу), что может быть использовано для подтверждения содержания и факта существования документа в этот момент времени. Права на данный скриншот принадлежат администрации Ask3.ru, использование в качестве доказательства только с письменного разрешения правообладателя скриншота. Администрация Ask3.ru не несет ответственности за информацию размещенную на данном скриншоте. Права на прочие зарегистрированные элементы любого права, изображенные на снимках принадлежат их владельцам. Качество перевода предоставляется как есть. Любые претензии, иски не могут быть предъявлены. Если вы не согласны с любым пунктом перечисленным выше, вы не можете использовать данный сайт и информация размещенную на нем (сайте/странице), немедленно покиньте данный сайт. В случае нарушения любого пункта перечисленного выше, штраф 55! (Пятьдесят пять факториал, Денежную единицу (имеющую самостоятельную стоимость) можете выбрать самостоятельно, выплаичвается товарами в течение 7 дней с момента нарушения.)