초록 열기/닫기 버튼
This essay discusses the complex relationship of desires in between Christabel, Geraldine, and Leoline from the perspective of ethics of mourning. After hearing her mother’s will from the monk, Christabel is dominated by the desire for her mother and wedding day. In her unconscious as the site where her banished desires have gathered and intensified, Christabel figures Geraldine as the double of her lover and mother. She attempts to fulfill her own desire, which, however, cannot be done with-out replacing and betraying her mother. Indeed, Geraldine can acquire power only by vanquishing the mother and assuming her prerogatives. After recognizing the true nature of Geraldine, Christabel gradually moves beyond the horizon of guilt into affirming the irreplaceability and alterity of her deceased mother in mourning. On the other hand, the spiritually and physically ineffectual Leoline orders the matin bell to be tolled in a measured way, and instates a law in order to ascertain everyone in remembrance of her death. By excluding the meanings of mourning other than the ones that he imposes, he fetishizes his dead wife as an object of “custom and law,” and prevents any transformative interaction with her. Later enthralled with Geraldine, Leoline quickly abandons Christabel in her mute anguish, and takes up Geraldine as his new lady. When his feverish excitement about Geraldine reawak-ens his friendship with Sir Roland, her putative father, Leoline replaces the mourning for his dead wife with the recovery of his friendship with Sir Roland, thus doubly refusing to ethically engage with her.
