Medieval European Studies in Korea Today

이동춘,안선재 한국중세근세영문학회 2008 중세르네상스 영문학 Vol.16 No.2

Medieval studies in Korean universities are limited by the perceived difficulty of the subject. Few universities offer courses on medieval topics, even at graduate school level. Yet there are a number of scholars whose main area of research is centered in the Middle Ages and a number of academic associations devoted partly or fully to that. Doctoral dissertations are written on medieval topics, at least occasionally. The number of books on medieval topics translated into Korea or written in Korean suggests a much wider potential interest, while the use of medieval setting in computer games indicates the enduring imaginative power of the period.

『제 2 목동극』의 희극관

송옥 한국중세근세영문학회 2009 고전·르네상스 영문학 Vol.18 No.1

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the unique comic form of the Second Shepherds’ Play which is the unique synthesis of God’s vision and human comedy. The play is the best known extant example of the mystery plays that made up the Wakefield cycle (or Townely cycle) which was written by one unknown dramatist. This cycle of religious dramas was presented on Corpus Christi Day in Wakefield during the time of the Middle Ages. The quality common to all comedy, from the time of Aristophanes to the present, is the comic view of life. This view of experience celebrates humankind's capacity to endure. All great comic characters celebrate the forces of life. The characters in The Second Shepherds’ Play, under the intervention of God, reveal the will to survive, no matter how miserable they are. The play concerns itself with three shepherds (suggesting the three wise men at Bethlehem), discouraged with misery and poverty, who become witnesses of the most significant event in earthly history. The paper examines the structure of the play which are divided into two parts: the story of the shepherds and the story of the infant Saviour. The first part of the drama deals with the experiences of the shepherds, particularly with the conniving sheep-stealer Mak and his wife Gill. The second part of the play involves the shepherds in gift-giving. There is another connection between the two plots as the story of Mak is a form of secular parody of the nativity. The cradle contains not the Lamb of God but a real sheep. This juxtaposition of the two parts explains how the anonymous Wakefield master utilizes a highly sophisticated system of metaphysics to infuse religious feeling and meaning into individual aspirations. The author demonstrates his intention of writing the play as social protest on one hand, in order to establish social order, and on the other, to engage these poor common lower people to become inflamed by the call from the Saviour: the promise of salvation from man’s depravity. He has infused the nativity into a pedestrian comedy and then transferred the playful secularization of the Christmas story to a serious conclusion. The design of The Second Shepherds’ Play is comic, portraying the reconciliation of all creation with its benevolent Creator. For the Wakefield master the Holy spirit and the comic are the same. Since God’s vision of history is comic, God’s Creation is a comedy of loss and restoration, like paradise lost and regained. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the unique comic form of the Second Shepherds’ Play which is the unique synthesis of God’s vision and human comedy. The play is the best known extant example of the mystery plays that made up the Wakefield cycle (or Townely cycle) which was written by one unknown dramatist. This cycle of religious dramas was presented on Corpus Christi Day in Wakefield during the time of the Middle Ages. The quality common to all comedy, from the time of Aristophanes to the present, is the comic view of life. This view of experience celebrates humankind's capacity to endure. All great comic characters celebrate the forces of life. The characters in The Second Shepherds’ Play, under the intervention of God, reveal the will to survive, no matter how miserable they are. The play concerns itself with three shepherds (suggesting the three wise men at Bethlehem), discouraged with misery and poverty, who become witnesses of the most significant event in earthly history. The paper examines the structure of the play which are divided into two parts: the story of the shepherds and the story of the infant Saviour. The first part of the drama deals with the experiences of the shepherds, particularly with the conniving sheep-stealer Mak and his wife Gill. The second part of the play involves the shepherds in gift-giving. There is another connection between the two plots as the story of Mak is a form of secular parody of the nativity. The cradle contains not the Lamb of God but a real sheep. This juxtaposition of the two parts explains how the anonymous Wakefield master utilizes a highly sophisticated system of metaphysics to infuse religious feeling and meaning into individual aspirations. The author demonstrates his intention of writing the play as social protest on one hand, in order to establish social order, and on the other, to engage these poor common lower people to become inflamed by the call from the Saviour: the promise of salvation from man’s depravity. He has infused the nativity into a pedestrian comedy and then transferred the playful secularization of the Christmas story to a serious conclusion. The design of The Second Shepherds’ Play is comic, portraying the reconciliation of all creation with its benevolent Creator. For the Wakefield master the Holy spirit and the comic are the same. Since God’s vision of history is comic, God’s Creation is a comedy of loss and restoration, like paradise lost and regained.

A Clash of Contrasting Linguistic Ideas in Coriolanus

이희원 한국중세근세영문학회 2010 고전·르네상스 영문학 Vol.19 No.2

This paper investigates into the conflict between Coriolanus and the community in terms of their contrasting linguistic views. It argues that the whole dramatic tension of the play grows from the discrepancy between the two contrasting attitudes toward language: namely Coriolanus’s natural abhorrence of eloquence and the community’s view of language as social convenience. Coriolanus denies formal language as dissembling, falsifying play-acting for his own personal integrity and the military action. On the other hand, the community claims the need for a conventional linguistic system governed by context for wider and interactive social communication. I criticize Coriolanus’s rejection of the conventional language in favor of deeds and actions, arguing that he is too idealistic to accept that actions are intrinsically bound up with the linguistic exchange of the community. At the same time I accept Coriolanus’s obstinate, but honest, ideal pursuit to get rid of the gap between word and action. I suggest that in some sense Coriolanus is warning us to be careful in the misuse of speech. In this way I attempt to apply a more balanced perspective in analyzing the clash between Coriolanus’s and the public’s different linguistic ideas. I conclude that we cannot blame the viewpoint of Coriolanus pursuing a ideal linguistic world without a mask, nor that of community whose main concern lies in social interaction.

Catachresis and Decorum in the Rhetorical Criticism

박우수 한국중세근세영문학회 2010 고전·르네상스 영문학 Vol.19 No.1

In rhetoric catachresis is defined as an improper transfer of meaning. According to Quintilian, it is a “necessary misuse. In pseudo-Cicero’s view, catachresis is distinguished from metaphor proper by its dissimilarity of the transferred meaning. In most cases, catachresis is characterized by its far-fetched, overreaching or even transgressing use of metaphoric words. Strictly speaking, however, every kind of metaphor is catachrestic in its initial stage and in its essence. Catachresis occurs whenever there is a need to name a new reality or to verbalize an unnamable new subjective experience. As shown in the phrase of a dead metaphor “the leg of a table,” catachresis is a necessity in the evolution of a language to make up for its poverty of expressions. As Friedrich Nietzsche speaks of metaphors as a sort of “a mobile army of language,” catachresis plays an inevitable and dominant part in our linguistic usage and functions as a mediator between two different dimensions of experience and reality. It is an old bottle with new wine. However, catachresis is not so extravagant as it is imagined to be. For the early modern English grammarians and rhetoricians, catachresis was to be sealed off by the idea of decorum. Decorum was central in the division of styles: the high or sublime, the middle, and the low or humble. It is ethical and class-bound. Shakespeare’s Hamlet in his conversation with the gravediggers complains of the new fashion and social manners of the peasants, who follow the heels of their superiors and catch their chilblain. He is adverse to the mingling of styles and social manners across the class boundary. In the transitional era of early modernity, catachresis was the very linguistic gear to fill up the gaps and lacks in a lexicon. In the face of the dangerous development of infectious catachresis, decorum is the great wall to keep up the ethical and socio-cultural barriers. Decorum was an ideological apparatus in early modern England to contain the social and linguistic mobilization.

제1및 제2사절판 『햄릿』의 인쇄와 발행에 관련된 사람들

신겸수 한국중세근세영문학회 2008 고전·르네상스 영문학 Vol.17 No.2

Concerning the publication of the First and Second Quartos of Hamlet, at least four people were involved: Nicholas Ling, John Trundle, James Roberts, and Valentine Simmes. What happened to them individually and collectively in the printing and publishing of Hamlet Quartos One and Two? About this mystery, David Scott Kastan has suggested a most persuasive explanation. He argued that these two stationers, Nicholas Ling and James Roberts "were known to one another." During the process of publishing early quartos of Hamlet, Kastan claims they came to "a pragmatic compromise." James Roberts was more of a printer than of a publisher even though he made business in both fields. He was in the habit of acquiring for his future use as many as assets by registering them in the Stationer's Company. Among these copyrights he registered (except for those he himself published), Roberts often transferred his rights to publish books to his co-publishers, and especially with Nicholas Ling. With him, Roberts co-published as many as 23 books. One may easily suspect, if we accept Kastan's theory, why did Roberts himself did not print Hamlet Quarto 1 in 1603? About this, Kastan says that Roberts was in "the third busiest year" of his printer's career so that he passed "the opportunity to work on Hamlet" to Valentine Simmes. After the Quarto 1 was published, Roberts was "no doubt delighted to produce a second edition," partly because the theater company was not happy with Quarto 1, and partly because both Simmes and he judged a new publication of Hamlet would make more profit. I think Kastan's scenario is attractive because there is no one until now who has suggested such plausible theory as this. Nevertheless, the possibility of pirate publication of Quarto 1 is still open. We need to consider that both Ling and Simmes were concerned with unhonorable printing or publication. If Valentine Simmes was allowed by James Roberts to do his printing of Hamlet Quarto 1, why did he omit his name on the title page? Another thing we need to remember is that James Roberts was not in good health around this time. Can we not we suppose that James Roberts could not prevent the clandestine publication of Hamlet’s Quarto 1 by John Trundle and Nicholas Ling because of his poor health? Is there no possibility that he was unable to give full attention to the general conditions extant in the printing and publishing market, as he was suffering from a chronic disease? My scenario for this mystery is as follows: John Trundle was a minor publisher without much money, yet he obtained the text of Quarto 1 through an unknown channel. Thus acquiring this Hamlet text, he hoped to profit by publishing it with Nicholas Ling. While accepting Trundle's offer, Ling also asked Valentine Simmes to quickly print this play secretly. Ling and Simmes learned printing under the same master, Henry Bynneman, and spent at least two years in the same printing house. Their special friendship was the reason for this disreputable double-printing. Worrying about unfavorable consequences, Simmes did not print his name on the title page. Concerning the publication of the First and Second Quartos of Hamlet, at least four people were involved: Nicholas Ling, John Trundle, James Roberts, and Valentine Simmes. What happened to them individually and collectively in the printing and publishing of Hamlet Quartos One and Two? About this mystery, David Scott Kastan has suggested a most persuasive explanation. He argued that these two stationers, Nicholas Ling and James Roberts "were known to one another." During the process of publishing early quartos of Hamlet, Kastan claims they came to "a pragmatic compromise." James Roberts was more of a printer than of a publisher even though he made business in both fields. He was in the habit of acquiring for his future use as many as assets by registering them in the Stationer's Company. Among these copyrights he registered (except for those he himself published), Roberts often transferred his rights to publish books to his co-publishers, and especially with Nicholas Ling. With him, Roberts co-published as many as 23 books. One may easily suspect, if we accept Kastan's theory, why did Roberts himself did not print Hamlet Quarto 1 in 1603? About this, Kastan says that Roberts was in "the third busiest year" of his printer's career so that he passed "the opportunity to work on Hamlet" to Valentine Simmes. After the Quarto 1 was published, Roberts was "no doubt delighted to produce a second edition," partly because the theater company was not happy with Quarto 1, and partly because both Simmes and he judged a new publication of Hamlet would make more profit. I think Kastan's scenario is attractive because there is no one until now who has suggested such plausible theory as this. Nevertheless, the possibility of pirate publication of Quarto 1 is still open. We need to consider that both Ling and Simmes were concerned with unhonorable printing or publication. If Valentine Simmes was allowed by James Roberts to do his printing of Hamlet Quarto 1, why did he omit his name on the title page? Another thing we need to remember is that James Roberts was not in good health around this time. Can we not we suppose that James Roberts could not prevent the clandestine publication of Hamlet’s Quarto 1 by John Trundle and Nicholas Ling because of his poor health? Is there no possibility that he was unable to give full attention to the general conditions extant in the printing and publishing market, as he was suffering from a chronic disease? My scenario for this mystery is as follows: John Trundle was a minor publisher without much money, yet he obtained the text of Quarto 1 through an unknown channel. Thus acquiring this Hamlet text, he hoped to profit by publishing it with Nicholas Ling. While accepting Trundle's offer, Ling also asked Valentine Simmes to quickly print this play secretly. Ling and Simmes learned printing under the same master, Henry Bynneman, and spent at least two years in the same printing house. Their special friendship was the reason for this disreputable double-printing. Worrying about unfavorable consequences, Simmes did not print his name on the title page.

Disorientation and Multiple-identities in John Marston's The Malcontent

남장현 한국중세근세영문학회 2010 고전·르네상스 영문학 Vol.19 No.1

This study attempts to examine John Marston’s The Malcontent with regard to his unique characterization and the concept of identity in Elizabethan and Jacobean England. He has been regarded as one of the most idiosyncratic dramatists of his era. His characterizations are allegedly flawed in the sense that each individual, like the playwright himself, lacks coherence and consistent stability throughout his works. However, this lack of coherence in his characters can be said to be quite intentional, since there is evidence to support Marston paid a great deal of attention to human mutability in his verses and dramas. Human mutability, when it is dramatized on stage, opens the possibility that Marston may not have believed one integrated harmonious identity but the coexistence of multiple identities in a human being. In this hypothesis, the first party of this study investigates the social disorientation and disjunction that a group of characters in The Malcontent experience and their mental state in which they cannot sustain their own consistent self. Consequently, each character wishes to annihilate his/her own identity, by eroding their self and yearning for death. Through such an unbearable experience, the characters start to assume multiple identities in one self which are incompatible, or sometimes entirely contradictory. Therefore, the second part highlights the course that the characters adopt various identities through dramatic devices such as disguise, deceit and role-playing. In particular, the character Malevole can be shown to portray a number of identities as a direct result of the turmoil and strife to which he finds himself subjected. Examining Marston’s play The Malcontent in terms of the possibility of multiple identities may not only illustrate Marston’s unique idea of human nature and his own perplexing character but also many critics’ diatribes of his character’s inconsistency. Marston leads us to think that, perhaps, living in his Jacobean world is akin to having the capability of possessing multiple identities, should they need or wish to do so. At the conclusion of the performance, the audience is left believing that any character could metamorphose into new contradictory identities at any time, and that they can achieve anything they put their minds to. Such potential flexibility certainly parallels the reality of human nature of the Jacobean era in which courtiers needed to adapt in order to survive.

유스투스 립시우스의 『항심(恒心)에 대하여』에 나타난 신스토아주의

이진아 한국중세근세영문학회 2010 고전·르네상스 영문학 Vol.19 No.2

On Constancy (De constantia) by Justus Lipsius, a Flemish philologist, philosopher and humanist, is the first restatement of classical Stoicism from a Christian point of view in Renaissance. This work influenced a number of contemporary intellectuals, inspiring the intellectual movement of Neostoicism. His ideas were possibly first introduced into the English literary coterie by Sir Philip Sidney, and might have had a considerable influence on the Elizabethan and Jacobean writers. Swayed by the religious wars and other turmoils of his time, Lipsius attempts in On Constancy to revive ancient Stoicism as a practical philosophy and, especially, as a practical antidote to public evils. His remedy for public evils is not an escape from them but the virtue of constancy, which is ‘a right and immovable strength of the mind, neither elated nor depressed by external or chance events.’ By cultivating reason one can attain constancy. The enemies of constancy are opinion, dissimulation and excessive patriotism, which are products of false judgments and affections. The causes of all evils are, according to Lipsius, God, Necessity, and Fate/Destiny. All public evils form parts of God’s plan, namely Providence, for our profits. They can also come from Necessity and Destiny, and yet these causes are working within the providential scheme of God for our sake. At this point of his arguments, Lipsius carefully distances himself from heretical Stoic materialism and determinism and modifies the Stoic doctrine in four points. He subjects Fate to God, not God to Fate, acknowledges miracles, contingency and more importantly human free will. Although later in the seventeenth century, Lipsius was denounced as an atheist because of determinism and materialism in Stoicism, his syncretic endeavors had been a great source of inspiration and consolation in the troubled time.

쿠퍼의 언덕 과 윈저 숲 에 나타난 정치적 자연풍경

최희섭 한국중세근세영문학회 2006 고전·르네상스 영문학 Vol.15 No.1

Hiesup ChoiSir John Denham's Cooper's Hill and Alexander Pope's Windsor Forest have lots of things in common; the invocation of Muse at the beginning, appearance of Windsor Forest and the Thames, hunting scene, the development of England, and hope for the bright future. The most important thing in common in both poems is that the landscape is used as a tool to praise the king and the queen respectively.As Denham praises the king Charles I in Cooper's Hill, so Pope praises the queen Anne in Windsor Forest. When Denham invokes the Muse's help at the beginning of the poem, he introduces the king and his palace. This method is duly copied by Pope, when he asks Muse to give help under Granville's order. Windsor Forest and the Thames are used as symbols of a peaceful and powerful reign of the king and the queen. The Thames flows forward the sea, and the trees in Windsor Forest become the fleet of the navy. That shows England's everlasting development in power and economy. In both poems there appears the hunting scene. The scene suggests the cruel political situation at that time. The political turbulence ends by the king and the queen. This means that the chaos and disorder turn into harmony and order by the reign of Charles I and Anne. Both poems emphasize the present development in comparison with the past. They describe it as the result of glorious rule of the king Charles I and the queen Anne respectively. They pray for the England's future to develop forever. In short, in both poems, the poets use the natural landscape as a tool to praise the reign of the king Charles I and the queen Anne.

고급연극과 저급연극 그 이분의 무효성: 왕정복고 이후 영국 정부의 규제와 그 허상

전준택 한국중세근세영문학회 2010 고전·르네상스 영문학 Vol.19 No.2

In reopening the theatres that had been closed by the Puritans, Charles II gave Killigrew and Davenant exclusive right to perform regular drama allowing actresses to perform for the first time. These companies began to compete exploiting female bodies in serious drama and offered pantomime as an afterpiece which was more popular than the main piece. In addition entertainments of singing and dancing were added between the acts of mainpiece violating neoclassical purism. The legality of the patents was confirmed by Parliament with the Licensing Act of 1737. This law further provided that, prior to production, each play had to be licensed by the Lord Chamberlain. Drury Lane and Covent Garden as the only legitimate theatres in England competed again with breeches parts and Shakespearean productions in main pieces and with pantomimes in afterpieces. However evasion of the law was common, with unlicensed theatres offering undefined entertainments and pantomimes. The monopolies on the performance of serious plays were eventually revoked by the Theatres Act 1843, encouraging the development of popular theatrical entertainments such as pantomimes, extravagazas and comic operas. Naturally most theatres enlarged the range of entertainment so as to appeal to the varied tastes of audiences. At the end of nineteenth century the bill became less complex as theatres began to specialize in a particular kind of entertainment. Though regular drama became a province of a more sophisticated group, a trend that was accelerated in the twentieth century by the development of motion pictures, high/low theatrical form dichotomy became unjustified as government regulations have long made it impossible to draw a clearly definable line between serious drama and minor forms.

『나니아 연대기』와 「쾌활한 사람」, 「사색하는 사람」에 구현된 세례받은 상상력

이인성,한유준 한국중세근세영문학회 2008 고전·르네상스 영문학 Vol.17 No.2

Regardless of time difference of three hundred years, John Milton and C. S. Lewis share a similar literary code in their ideas and philosophy on the issue of “myth.” As Milton who lived in the English Renaissance period focused on the ideas of history, culture, and nation, Lewis as one of the twentieth century famous writers and scholars also taught the same topics in the Medieval and Renaissance literature at the Cambridge and Oxford University. Furthermore, they both acknowledged their identity as Christian writers whose aim is to produce and spread the discourse of Christianity. Among several similarities, their fascination with the Greek-Roman mythology and the use of pagan elements in their literary texts are worthy of attention, not because they are regarded themselves as Christian writers, but because they employed the Greek-Roman myth as fictitious elements in comparison with Christian ideas as the factual truths. Thus, this paper aims at analyzing the literary aspects of the “myth” embodied in both Milton’s “L’Allegro” and “Il Penseroso” and Lewis’s The Chronicles of Narnia in order to understand the in-depth meanings and insights about these writers’ ideas of Christianity. This paper also shows that a classical text like Milton’s could be reincarnated in a popular literature like Lewis’s works in the contemporary times. The first part examines how Milton and Lewis represent the real world the Renaissance and World War II respectively. The second part analyses how Milton and Lewis discover the limitations of the mythical world. These limitations lead them to search the ultimate imaginative mythical world. The third part explores Miton and Lewis’s understandings of the “Baptized Imagination” that is the knowledge of Reality which could help human beings avoid the “human dilemma,” the knowledge about Reality, and introduce to the ultimate imaginative mythical world. The final part investigates the concepts of the “Baptized Imagination” and the “Myth became Fact” that are represented in the texts of Milton and Lewis. As Milton and Lewis embody the progress of the “Myth became Fact,” the conclusion discusses how they achieve their goals in which the readers experience complete and ultimate mythical world. Regardless of time difference of three hundred years, John Milton and C. S. Lewis share a similar literary code in their ideas and philosophy on the issue of “myth.” As Milton who lived in the English Renaissance period focused on the ideas of history, culture, and nation, Lewis as one of the twentieth century famous writers and scholars also taught the same topics in the Medieval and Renaissance literature at the Cambridge and Oxford University. Furthermore, they both acknowledged their identity as Christian writers whose aim is to produce and spread the discourse of Christianity. Among several similarities, their fascination with the Greek-Roman mythology and the use of pagan elements in their literary texts are worthy of attention, not because they are regarded themselves as Christian writers, but because they employed the Greek-Roman myth as fictitious elements in comparison with Christian ideas as the factual truths. Thus, this paper aims at analyzing the literary aspects of the “myth” embodied in both Milton’s “L’Allegro” and “Il Penseroso” and Lewis’s The Chronicles of Narnia in order to understand the in-depth meanings and insights about these writers’ ideas of Christianity. This paper also shows that a classical text like Milton’s could be reincarnated in a popular literature like Lewis’s works in the contemporary times. The first part examines how Milton and Lewis represent the real world the Renaissance and World War II respectively. The second part analyses how Milton and Lewis discover the limitations of the mythical world. These limitations lead them to search the ultimate imaginative mythical world. The third part explores Miton and Lewis’s understandings of the “Baptized Imagination” that is the knowledge of Reality which could help human beings avoid the “human dilemma,” the knowledge about Reality, and introduce to the ultimate imaginative mythical world. The final part investigates the concepts of the “Baptized Imagination” and the “Myth became Fact” that are represented in the texts of Milton and Lewis. As Milton and Lewis embody the progress of the “Myth became Fact,” the conclusion discusses how they achieve their goals in which the readers experience complete and ultimate mythical world.