17세기 말~18세기 초 風格批評의 중국 詩話 수용 양상 - 金錫胄, 洪萬宗, 金漸의 비평을 중심으로 -

Abstract

Stylistic criticism, which originated in China, became an important method of literary criticism and had a profound influence on Korean classical poetry criticism. In particular, critics such as Kim Seok-ju (金錫胄), Hong Man-jong (洪萬 宗), and Kim Jeom (金漸) adopted Chinese poetic discussions, including Ao Taosun’s (敖陶孫) Quwengshiping (臞翁詩評) from the Song Dynasty and Wang Shizhen’s (王世貞) Guochaoshiping (國朝詩評) from the Ming Dynasty, and incorporated them positively into their work. They used intensive and continuous metaphorical style criticism to depict the figurative elements of poetry. This paper examines the selective adaptation and variation of Chinese poetic elements in Korean poetry criticism, focusing on works such as the Hyeonhosoekdam (玄湖鎖談), Sowhashipyung (小華詩評), and Seokgyeongsihwa (西京詩話), which are representative of the style criticism of Kim Seok-ju, Hong Man-jong, and Kim Jeom. The aim is to shed light on the characteristics of this new form of criticism, which emerged in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, and to distinguish it from earlier stylistic criticism. First, in the field of Chinese poetry criticism, there is a notable presence of large-scale and concentrated style criticism that employs parallelism and sustained metaphor. This style of criticism first found expression in Korean poetry. In particular, the criticism of poets such as Hong Man-jong and Kim Seok-ju is composed of meticulously structured four-character sentences that re imbued with the beauty of form and poetic rhythm. Meanwhile, the poetry criticism of Kim Jeom and the poetic theories of Nam Yong-ik (南龍翼) use a structure characterized by phrases such as “such as ~ + another such as ~” to create expansive metaphors. This technique allows them to unravel the intricate aspects of stylistic features and reveal a variety of aesthetic nuances in the works. In addition, critics combine abstract poetic styles with vivid and concrete imagery, which vividly reveals the inner spirit of their criticism and the overall charm of the works. The ambiguity resulting from the abstract nature of the concept of style is refined, and the critics’ rich aesthetic knowledge is delicately conveyed to the readers. In particular, the critics not only actively show the diversity and unique characteristics of various poetic styles, but also point out the shortcomings of these styles, providing a critical perspective that illuminates the strengths and weaknesses of their craftsmanship. This reflects the critics’ keen awareness of the critical process. In the field of Chinese poetry criticism, critics have used a variety of specific images, often drawing from nature, using allusions, and dissecting characters to engage in image-style criticism. By citing a variety of intricate character images and classical references, they have emphasized a more comprehensive and three-dimensional approach to style criticism. This suggests that the development of style criticism tended toward greater maturity and perfection. In conclusion, from the late seventeenth century to the early eighteenth century, style criticism used specific images to construct vivid metaphors, leading to more precise and sustained representational criticism. Significantly, this method not only had a lasting impact on literary criticism, but also extended its influence to Korean poetry. It also left its mark on criticism in various artistic fields, including calligraphy, painting, and music.