In Raisin in the Sun, Lorraine Hansberry does not reject integration or the economic and moral promise of the American dream; rather, she remains loyal to
this dream while looking, realistically, at its incomplete realization. Once we recognize this dual vision, we can accept the play’s ironic nuances as deliberate social commentaries by Hansberry rather than as the “unintentional” irony that Bigsby attributes to the work. Indeed, a curiously persistent refusal to credit Hansberry with a capacity for intentional irony has led some critics to interpret the play’s thematic conflicts as mere confusion, contradiction, or eclecticism. Isaacs, for example, cannot easily reconcile Hansberry’s intense concern for her race with her ideal of human reconciliation. But the play’s complex view of Black self-esteem and human solidarity as compatible is no more “contradictory” than Du Bois’ famous, well-considered ideal of ethnic self-awareness coexisting with human unity, or Fanon’s emphasis on an ideal internationalism that also accommodates national identities and roles.
In which of the following does the author of the passage reinforce a criticism of the responses such as Isaacs’ to Raisin in the Sun?
- The statement that Hansberry is “loyal” to the American Dream
- The description of Hansberry’s concern for African Americans as “intense”
- The assertion that Hansberry is concerned with “human solidarity”
- The description of Du Bois’ ideas as “well-considered”
- The description of Fanon’s internationalism as “ideal”
답은 D인데 볼드체로 한 부분과 문제 해석, 저자의 주장 파악 좀 도와주세요
주장: 흑인의 자부심과 인류 결속이 Du Bois의 유명학 작품들보단 덜 대조적임
볼드: 실제로, 한스베리를 의도적인 아이러니를 가진 것으로 보는 것에 대한 끈질긴 거부는 몇몇 비평가들을 약간의 혼란, 대조, 절충주의라는 작품 주제의 충돌이라는 해석으로 이끌었다 예를 들어, 아이작은 한스베리 그녀의 인종에 대한 강한 걱정을 그녀의 이상적인 인류 화해로 화해시키지 못했다.
문제: 다음 중 아이작의 Raising int the Sun에 대한 반응과 같은 류의 비평을 저자가 강화하고 있는 것은?
본문의 주장 파악도 어렵고, 문제의 의도도 잘모르겠습니다.
문제를 봤을 때 저자는 아이작과 같은 입장인거 같은데 그런지도 전혀 모르겠고요..