초록 열기/닫기 버튼
Most of Pinter's critics question Pinter's ambivalent politics, pointing out that he does not clearly give any political or philosophical direction about life. However, this paper reads Pinter's ambivalence as having a subversive potential which holds revolutionary power in the sense that it shows the Oedipal's oppression, and it makes it possible to carry out a flight from the Odipal to make a difference which creates a new life in spite of the fact that it does not point to a clear alternative direction. The reason why Pinter does not show a clear political or philosophical direction in his plays is because he does not want to exclude many other possibilities in order to choose one in particular. It is not to make a mistake of producing another Oedipal structure, a violent dichotomy order system, in order to escape the given Oedipal one. Deleuzean Ethics also advocates 'difference' itself but does not adhere to any clear principle or form of certainty. Deleuze thought of the mission of philosophy as making the future different from the past. In this light, both Pinter's ambivalence and Deleuzean ethics can be seen as each other's double.
