@article{oai:nagoya.repo.nii.ac.jp:00027875,
 author = {佐橋, 里美 and Sahashi, Satomi},
 journal = {IVY},
 month = {Oct},
 note = {In this essay, I will argue about the contradictory impulses of assertion and evasiveness in A Vision. In A Vision, We can notice the discontinuity of discourse. This discontinuity is the result of the paradox of informative assertion and open-endedness. The contradictory impulses show the tendency toward the numinous in A Vision. Then, we can say that A Vision is mythic.  A Vision is very assertive in that it seemingly intends to reveal a symbol of the universe. Yeats systematizes "every completed movement of thought or life" into the twenty-eight phases of moon in "The Great Wheel." In this systematization and description, we can recognize the optimistic presupposition that man can represent the universe by way of language.  However, the undecidability of the authority in the work undermines the trustworthiness of the system of twenty-eight phases of moon. The source of the system is never revealed. The concealment of the source makes A Vision very evasive. Then, we can find no reference in A Vision though it takes the accomplished form. A Vision is, in this sense, self-referential. "Stories of Michael Robartes and His Friends，" one of the prefatory materials, also shows that A Vision is self-referential. In this story, the voices create the atomosphere of verisimilitude and reliability. The voices, however, create irony, contradiction, and doubt that undermine both verisimilitude and reliability. This paradox reveals that the story is written in a very self-referential way. The self-referential writing is one of the typical embodiment of mythical intention. The mythical intention comes from the recognition of the duplicity of sign.  The notion of the duplicity of sign is very post-modern. In fact, the anti-representational impulse exists in the writing in modernism. The difference between postmodernism and modernism is the difference of the notion of literary object. For modernists, the object was still hypostatized. Modernists concerned themselves with how to represent the unrepresentable, that is, the futility and anarchy of the contemporary world by way of language. However, for postmodernists, the correspondence between the signifier and signified is illusion. We come to be sceptical about the existence of literary objects.  The contradictory impulses in A Vision show that man can never fill the gap between signifier and signified. A Vision rejects the representation of a determined content. In this sense, A Vision precedes the postmodern., 本稿は、1991年10月5日、三重大学にて開催された日本英文学会中部地方支部第43回大会における口頭発表を基にしている。},
 pages = {65--80},
 title = {『ヴィジョン』における神話性 : イェイツとポストモダニズム},
 volume = {25},
 year = {1992}
}