Ulysses and Tithonus As a Consistent Speaker For Alfred Tennyson in "Ulysses" and "Tithonus"

Yoon Hee-Oyck(윤희억) 신영어영문학회 2001 신영어영문학 Vol.20 No.-

알프레드 테니슨은 그의 가장 절친한 친구 아서 할렘이 죽은 이후인 1833년 과 1834년에 「율리시즈」와 「티소너스」를 연이어 발표했다. 테니슨에 따르면, 「티소너스」는 원래 「율리시즈」에 대한 속편이었다. 이러한 면에서 할렘의 죽음뿐만 아니라 「티소너스」가 「율리시즈」의 속편이라는 시인 자신의 언급은 이두 시편들을 읽기 위한 중심축으로써 작용한다. 이 두 시에는 뚜렷이 대조되는 분위기가 나타난다. 첫째는 「율리시즈」에 드러난 화자 율리시즈의 낭만적이고 모험을 추구하는 도전적인 정신이며, 둘째는 「티소너스」를 지배하는 티소너스의 나른하고 침잠된 꿈같은 정신이다. 일부 평자들은 할렘의 죽음에 대한 상심으로부터 벗어난 영웅적이고 진취적인 정신에 대한 은유로서 「율리시즈」를 읽는다. 다른 평자들은 「티소너스」는 거의 테니슨의 심미론에 대한 상징적 표현이라고 생각한다. 본고는 이와는 다른 시각에서 심리적 분석에 초점을 맞춘다. 즉 율리시즈와 티소너스 두 주인공들을 이 두 시를 전체로서 읽는데 도움을 주는 시인에 대한 일관된 대변자로서 보는 것이다. 시인의 영원한 미에 대한 정신적 항해는 순환적 움직임을 가진다. 「율리시즈」에서 시인은 도덕적 결함의 흔적없이 심미적 이상의 세계에서 자신을 함몰시키기를 갈망한다. 그리고 율리시즈의 그러한 은유적 장치는 보다 심리적 접근에 적절한 주인공인 티소너스에 의해 이어진다. 두 시편에서 테니슨은 그의 개인적 자각, 즉 그의 심미적 이상과 그의 비범한 감성에 대한 자만이 그를 인간적 공감의 영역으로부터 소외시켰다는 감정을 전달하기 위한 매개체로서 율리시즈와 티소너스를 사용한다. 그러므로 이 두 화자들은 모순된 감정들을 대변하는 별개의 전달자들이 아니라, 시인의 정신적 이행 단계를 보여주는 일관된 은유적 장치인 것이다.

『햄릿』의 은유 양식 : 극중 인물의 병치구조

윤희억(Hee-uhk Yoon) 한국셰익스피어학회 2006 셰익스피어 비평 Vol.42 No.4

In his major tragedies, Shakespeare parallels and contrasts characters by structuring each scene as a separate unit whose mutual opposition escalates dramatic tension. The opposition of characters between and in each scene seems to defy an organic unity, but rather makes it more dramatic. This dramatic methodology of Shakespeare's calls attention to the linguistic theory of Saussure and Jakobson. Especially Jakobson's dichotomy classifying language as the paradigmatic/ syntagmatic plays a key role in unveiling the parallelism of characters in Hamlet. Shakespeare's workmanship in Hamlet reveals preference of similarity to contiguity, of metaphor to metonymy. This assures us that the semiotic theory of Jakobson will offer useful access to the parallelism of characters as a metaphorical pattern in Hamlet. Shakespeare's major tragedies are, in essence, verse. Jakobson argues that metaphorical relationships prevail in poetry, while they weaken in prose. Thus, the study on the parallelism of characters as a metaphorical pattern in Hamlet turns into another interesting arena in which the validity of Jakobson's argument is debated. Shakespeare induces us to read Hamlet metaphorically. The signifie of Hamlet does not reside in the syntagmatic relationship with its signifiant. The signifie of Hamlet is decoded in the relationships with the parallelled characters. In other words, it depends upon multi-layered analysis on the parallelism of Hamlet's strikingly opposed characters: Laertes, Fortinbras, and Pyrrhus.

레비나스의 타자철학을 통한 『맥베스』는 “여성 부재의 남성만의 나라”라는 비판에 대한 재고찰

윤희억(Hee-Uhk Yoon) 한국셰익스피어학회 2020 셰익스피어 비평 Vol.56 No.4

Some patriarchal critics contend that Macbeth contains clear contempts for feminine values. The childlessness of Macbeth and Lady Macbeth is clearly contrasted with procreative images of babies, children, and the milk of the female breast. No compassion, hospitality and nurturing of otherness are in their world. Even some feminine critics argue that this play ends by consolidating patriarchal masculinity totally eliminating the feminine. This paper, however, refutes the argument that the patriarchal masculinity thoroughly marginalizes and erases the vestige of femininity and maternity in this play. I will touch on logical controversies raised by some patriarchal and feminine critics and reread the text of this play in view of Levinasian philosophy of otherness, for Levinas’s notions of conatus; femininity and motherhood are very useful to analyze the dichotomy of the two worlds: patriarchal masculinity and feminine gentleness. Levinas defines conatus as man’s self-centering desire trying to forget and eradicate the other. Macbeth plunges into conatus to murder the king Duncan and divest him of the crown. Driven by conatus, he thoroughly drains even one drop of femininity and maternity in his nature. Macbeth’s world of conatus is clearly contrasted with Duncan’s world in which masculinity and femininity coexist. In the end of this play, Macbeth’s conatus is destroyed by the harmonious world in which masculinity and femininity coexist without one dominated by the other. The procreative motherhood restored back by Malcolm and Macduff displaces Macbeth"s barren masculinity and inseminates the sweet milk of concord into the land of wilderness, Scotland.

아서 밀러의 『세일즈맨의 죽음』-레비나스의 타자 철학을 통해 본 윌리의 동일성의 세계와 타자의 망각

윤희억 ( Heeuhk Yoon ) 한국영어영문학회 2016 영어 영문학 Vol.62 No.2

In this play Arthur Miller explores the tragic condition of human existence in which Willy``s ego ceaselessly seeks after the game of success and suffocates itself in a tautological way of identity. Willy``s stubborn pursuit of wrong dream even destroys Biff``s future and drives himself to suicide. Willy``s suicide is an act not of self-annihilation but of self-assertion of his view of success. Miller also reflects the world in which Willy puts himself in cutthroat competition and then imprisons himself in total isolation from the community. Levinas argues that this world is a web of a relation in which the other is reduced to the same and divested of its strangeness. In terms of Levinas``s idea of the conatus of beings, men are struggling with one another, each against all. Levinas warns us that the world in which the one dominates the other is a hostile world of economy in which the other is marginalized and forgotten. In that respect Miller``s description of Willy``s relation with his family and the ontological world can be more clearly explored through Levinasian ethics of otherness: conatus, the economy of the same, and the forgetfulness of the other.

『리어왕』의 비평의 흐름

윤희억(Hee-uhk Yoon) 한국셰익스피어학회 2008 셰익스피어 비평 Vol.44 No.2

Until the 1960s, Christian readings have prevailed over criticism of King Lear. Despite the mixture of the play's pagan setting and the Christian allusions crossing this play, many critics tried to read traditional Christian messages, centering on the pattern of sin, suffering, self-awareness and redemption. However, Barbara Everett's skeptical reading in 1960 stays away from the idea of King Lear as a dramatized Christian pattern of sin, sacrifice and redemption. Elton also refuses to see this tragedy as a drama of suffering and redemption within a just universe ruled by higher powers. These critical debates on the significance of King Lear have hitherto neither shown any interest in the play's contemporary social implications or its past political power system, nor have tried to reconsider and reinterpret these historical contexts from the modem point of view. But the 1980s spawned theoretically well-armed criticism on Shakespeare's plays. Shakespeare studies have taken quite a different shape in modem literary theory, getting themselves out of the climate of traditional criticism. In recent years deconstruction, feminism, new historicism and cultural materialism show striking changes in the interpretation of King Lear, drawing contemporary historical documents into literary texts and highlighting political power, gender, and race. They are becoming the main critical movements currently delving into another aspect of significance of Shakespeare's plays. This fresh blooming of new criticism deals with oppressive structures of power and gender in Shakespeare's world and our own through new kinds of theoretical development. In this context, I believe that it is worth surveying the whole trace of change in the critical history of King Lear from 1800 to the present.

『햄릿』의 유령

윤희억(Hee-Oyck Yoon) 한국셰익스피어학회 1998 셰익스피어 비평 Vol.34 No.-

실성한 오필리어의 노래와 죽음의 상징성 연구

윤희억(Hee-Uhk Yoon) 신영어영문학회 2008 신영어영문학 Vol.40 No.-

Among major sources of Hamlet are Saxo Grammticus’ Historiae Danicae, Belleforest’s Histoires Tragiques and the Ur-Hamlet written by an anonymous author. In the first work, a beautiful woman who got along with Amleth since his childhood assumes the trace of Ophelia. But instructed to seduce him, she warns him of the trap so he can avoid it. In the second, Belleforest’s description of the seductive woman goes almost in the same way. Lastly, the Ur-Hamlet sprouts the characters of Polonius’s family including Laertes and Ophelia. What is more important is that the author genuinely invented the madness and death of Ophelia. In neither of the two preceding sources were madness, song and drowning of Ophelia. Shakespeare followed the footsteps of the basic frame of the Ur-Hamlet. It is, however, assumed that with his unbeatable imagination Shakespeare created both dramatically intense conflict between Hamlet and Ophelia; and the heart-breaking depiction of her madness, song and suicide. This paper aims to analyze Shakespeare’s embroidery of symbolism on madness, song and death of Ophelia, which reveals her unconscious desire for forgetting Hamlet and remembering Polonius. The symbolic study on Ophelia’s song and death, I believe, makes it possible to correct the marginality of Ophelia as a minor figure and put her up front back.

햄릿과 오필리어를 둘러싼 악령의 은유 양식

윤희억(Hee-uhk Yoon) 한국셰익스피어학회 2008 셰익스피어 비평 Vol.44 No.1

Since A. C. Bradley, many critics have not only defined the relationship between Hamlet and Ophelia as the abortive romantic love story, which functions as a decoration to a revenge story, but have also thought that Ophelia is a weak, dependant figure. But traditional criticism overlooks much of Polonius' suspicious manipulation of her daughter and the potentiality of Ophelia as a weak vessel, which complicates and intensifies Hamlet's agony. Recently Elaine Showalter, Annette Kolodney, and Gohlke have pulled Ophelia up in center from the marginal, and have reconsidered the turmoil of Hamlet's soul centering on the body and sexuality of Gertrude and Ophelia. In this context, my paper aims to put Ophelia back up front, highlighting the metaphoric pattern of evil spirits in the relationship of Hamlet and Ophelia. First, reconsidering Ophelia in center asks us first to see Claudius and Polonius as evil spirits in metaphoric pattern. In this play Claudius, who murdered King Hamlet and whored his wife, consciously or unconsciously dominates Hamlet's soul. Similarly Polonius, who once loyally served King Hamlet and now turned a tool for Claudius, even using her daughter Ophelia as a bait, distresses Hamlet's soul. Polonius is another shadow of Claudius's evil spirit. Second, Gertrude and Ophelia form a metaphoric pattern as evil spirits, which torment Hamlet's soul all through the play until he dies. Hamlet's mother Gertrude, who betrayed her husband and now quickly threw herself into the bosom of Claudius, consciously or unconsciously tortures Hamlet's soul. Likewise Ophelia, who once loved Hamlet and now returns his letters and gifts to him, showing a sign of a weak vessel, gnaws Hamlet's soul like an evil spirit.

레비나스의 타자철학을 통한 아서 밀러의 All My Sons의 고찰

윤희억(Yoon, Hee-uhk) 한국현대영미드라마학회 2014 현대영미드라마 Vol.27 No.3

햄릿과 그의 세계

윤희억(Hee-Uhk Yoon) 한국셰익스피어학회 2015 셰익스피어 비평 Vol.51 No.1

A wide range of modern essays written by contemporary critics have dealt with various aspects of the play in a large number of topics from character, theme, language to politics, and ideology. Traditional literary criticism on Shakespeare has always been concerned with the question of Being in tragedy within the scheme of sin, corruption, suffering, repentance, and salvation. Such traditional readings of Shakespeare are primarily concerned with the triumph of the good of a hero over the evil under the providence of God. In opposition to such traditional criticism stand more recent poststructuralistic readings: Psychoanalyticism, New Historicism, Cultural Materialism, Marxism, and Feminism. In the middle of these two extremes stands Heidegger’s existential ontology as a transitional foundation on which deconstructive readings are triggered off. Though there are some resistance against Heidegger’s political, idealogical traces in American and British criticism, it seems rather regrettable that there has been no such study on the whole text of Hamlet through Heidegger’s existential ontology. Heidegger’s ontological inquiries into human existence are well suited for examining tragedy. Heidegger can throw light on tragedy, but tragedy can throw light on our understanding of Heidegger’s philosophy. This is indeed the case with Hamlet. From Heidegger’s ontological view, Hamlet is a tragedy which demands remembering the forgetfulness of Being. Heideggerian ontology provides us with such insight that Hamlet can be more clearly understood in the context of historical milieu in which Hamlet is thrown. Hamlet is not a drama in which Hamlet’s life is machinated by God on the stage of the world; but it is a drama in which his life is disclosed in a historical scene. Hamlet lives in the world in which he is intertwined with the Others. Denmark is a swirl of the world in which Hamlet is thrown as Being-in-the-world. This essay explores Hamlet and his world on Heidegger’s existentiale of existential-ontology so that I can lay bare the basic state of Dasein: Hamlet as being-in-the-world; inauthenticity of Claudius and the surrounding characters; Hamlet’s “To be, or not to be”: boredom, melancholy and anxiety; Claudius’s conscience and terror; and Hamlet’s call of conscience; Hamlet’s readiness and death in Heidegger’s existential temporality.