사무엘 존슨과 18세기 계몽주의 공적 지식인의 초상: 21세기 융복합 시대의 새로운 통섭적 지식인을 향하여 = Samuel Johnson and Enlightenment Public Intellectual in the 18th Century: Towards a New Convergent or Consilient Critical Intellectual for the 21st Century

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The aim of this paper is to discuss Samuel Johnson (1709-1784) as a most representative public intellectual in the 18th-century England. It seems to me that we need badly a public intellectual like Johnson in this age of functional specialization. Many literary scholars and humanities intellectuals now stick to their ivory tower separated from the secular realities of the world. They tend to be secluded technical producer of academic papers for the very small number of professionals. They cannot reach the society and history to which they belong. This is the very beginning of the so-called "Crisis of the Humanities." We can discuss Dr. Johnson as public intellectual in three aspects. First of all, Johnson was a great scholar critic. As T. S. Eliot pointed out, Johnson was "one of the three greatest critics of poetry in English literature" (162) including John Dryden and S. T. Coleridge. The very essences of his criticism come from wide knowledge and acute understanding of language, close reading strategy, historical imagination and deep understanding of the humanities. Secondly, Johnson was a great prolific writer called "Great Cham of Literature" by Tobias Smollett. He read a wide range of books with various topics. Thirdly, Johnson was not a narrow specialist but an open-minded generalist who had a wide variety of intellectual curiosities and convergent or consilient methods. In other words, Johnson was really a public intellectual in the civil society of the 18th-century England with a vision of common reader, common culture and common humanities. How can we thresh Dr. Johnson as a critical intellectual for the 21st century? We can propose nine tentative memos as follows: (1) understanding importance of language in the humanities, and integration and interpenetration of language and literature; (2) the restoration of power of literature for the concrete life and society; (3) expanding the frontier of literary genres for the establishing the wisdom literature; (4) the return of dialogical imagination for the effective communication and comparison; (5) reestablishment of British literary tradition with balance, toleration and golden mean; (6) development of the convergent or consilient humanities; (7) reinvention of public intellectual with wise reading and critical consciousness; (8) avoidance of the philistinism and specialized professionalism; and (9) the pursuit of the whole man including spiritual problem in this age of rationalistic instrumentalism. In order to build a new convergent or consilient humanities in the public sphere for the 21st century we have to redraw and reproduce the portrait of Dr. Samuel Johnson as public intellectual in the year of tricentenary anniversary of his birth.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 정정호, "이론의 정치학과 담론의 비판학" 푸른 사상 2005

2 정정호, "사무엘 존슨 문학 비평과 이론의 현대성" 3 (3): 1994

3 발터 벤야민, "발터 벤야민의 문예이론" 민음사 1983

4 정정호, "문학 속의 인문학―지혜의 문학을 위하여" 한국문화사 2009

5 Bloom, Harold, "he Western Canon: The Books and School of the Ages" Harcourt 1994

6 Watson, George, "The Literary Critics: A Study of English Descriptive Criticism" Penguin 1968

7 Johnson, Samuel, "The History of Rasselas, Prince of Abissinia in: 애비시니어 왕자 래설러스 이야기" 동인 2008

8 Derrida, Jacques, "Specters of Marx" Routledge 1994

9 Johnson, Samuel, "Samuel Johnson's Literary Criticism" U of Nebraska P 1974

10 Johnson, Samuel, "Samuel Johnson" Rinehart 1952

11 Eliot, T. S., "On Poetry and Poets" Faber 1957

12 Leavis, F. R., "Johnson as Critic" 12 (12): 187-204, 1994

13 Benjamin, Walter, "Illuminations" Schocken 1969

14 Bloom, Harold, "Genius: A Mosaic of One Hundred Exemplary Creative Minds" Warner 2002

15 Postman, Neil, "Building a Bridge to the 18th Century: How the Past Can Improve Our Future" Alfred A. Knopf 2000

16 Boswell, James, "Boswell's Life of Johnson" Signet 1968

17 Said, Edward, "An Unresolved Paradox" 31 (31): 3-, 1999