• Journal of English Language & Literature
• /
• v.55 no.4
• /
• pp.567-596
• /
• 2009

A staple of feminist literary anthologies which was instrumental in reevaluating the writer Susan Glaspell, Trifles(1916) has received numerous comments from feminist scholars so far. Most of them tend to concentrate on the themes of female solidarity and justice challenging the androcentric system of law and order. Lacking in the plethora of thematic approaches to the play's feminist subject, however, are formal analyses considering the way in which the play's generic form assists in communicating such thematic concerns of feminism. An alternative to the typical scenario at the courtroom whose mistreatment of women must have loomed large to the young Glaspell as she revisited the old trial of a midwestern murderess which she had covered as a journalist for a local newspaper in Iowa, Trifles serves as a corrective to the courtroom dynamics offering a 'dramatic justice' as opposed to a strictly legal procedure. What this article discovers at the heart of this dramatic justice is the celebration of the unsayable, or what Wolfgang Iser termed negativity, of women's experience which has no room for reflection in the legal discourse at the courtroom tyrannized by the sayable and the evident. Examining how the dramatic form of Trifles gives a voice to the unsayable of woman's experience, which can not be properly represented at the courtroom governed by the straightforward and definitive male rhetoric, the article argues that the play is a better form than its fictional adaptation "A Jury of Her Peers"(1917) in that it syntactically suppresses the monopolizing operation of the verbal by giving precedence to the scenic and non-verbal which is constituted of setting, props, gesture and eye contacts. As a theoretical frame of reference with which to examine the modes of the unsayable in the play the article brings the concept of 'negativity,' defined by Iser as textual effects or modes of the unspeakable and unsaid, into the discussion of the taciturnity of the absent heroine and the non-verbal representation of drama.

• Journal of the East Asian Society of Dietary Life
• /
• v.8 no.4
• /
• pp.441-453
• /
• 1998

Varieties of the cereals produced in the Biblical times and the ways these cereal foods have been grafted into Korean food culture has been pursued, and the regulations of agricultural life and the metaphors or parables of cereals represented throughout the Bible have been studied. The word "grain" appears eight times in the KJV and one hundred seventeen times in the RSV. On the other hand, the word "corn" shows up one hundred and one times in the KJV but not in the RSV at all. Wheat, one of the earliest cultivated and the most important grains for food is mentioned fifty two times in KJV and generally the rich in those days lived on wheat in the parched state or in the form of bread. Barley, one of the staple cereal crops of Palestine is referred to thirty six times in the KJV. It was less expensive than wheat and so was used mainly for the food of such animals as horses, donkeys and cattle, but sometimes it was mixed with flour and used for making bread for men, mostly for Poor men. The spelt (in ASV and RSV) and the rie(in KJV) appearing in Exodus 9:32 is a kind of grain, which is translated into Na-mack (in Hangul Revised Bible ; HRB), Ssal-bori (in Hangul Common Translated Bible : HCB) and Ho-mil (in Hangul King James Bible; HKJB) but which should be put into Spelt-mil in Korean. The lentil appearing in Genesis 25 : 34 is translated into Pat (red-bean) and Bul-kong respectively in HRB and HCB but the same word in the Second Book of Samuel is translated into Pat in both HRB and HCB. HCB translates lentil into Bul-kong in Genesis and into Pat in the Second Book of Samuel (23:11). HCB and HKJB which put lentil into Pat in previous parts translate the word into Nok-tu in the Second Book of Samuel. The word, lentil here should be put into lentil-kong and parched pulse into "Poken-Chong-ja" not into Poken-Nok-tu. Millet which is translated into Cho should be put into Gui-jang. filches should not be classified as a grain or a cereal but as a flavor or a condiment, so the word filches should be put into So-Hoi-hyang or Hoi-hyang. Regulations in reference to agriculture are included in the Bible. That is, it is seen that the Bible regulates the observance of the sabbatical year and feasts, the partition of land, how to sow and so on. It is also observed that grains are used for metaphors or parables: wheat represents the peaceful times and straws are compared to trifles. As seen above, there should be more prudent examinations and standards for the translation of grains into Pat, Pul-kong, Nok-tu, Gui-ree, Ssal-bo-ri and Na-mack.i-ree, Ssal-bo-ri and Na-mack.