워즈워스의 주체성 회복을 위하여

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to restore the subjectivity of Wordsworth, which has been annihilated by many New Historicists who would not allow a poet the ability to overcome the prevailing ideology in his / her society. These critics, comparing with William Gilpins Observations on the River Wye, argue that Wordsworth disguises the ugly social situation in Tintern Abbey by failing to mention anything about the abbey where, they presume, the beggars were Prevalent at that time. Contrary to their argument that the abbey must be the main concern in the trip to that area, however, a closer look into Gilpins book reveals that he himself was also impressed much more by the natural landscape around it than by the abbey itself. This is a good example showing that the New Historicists are too predetermined negatively on Wordsworth's subjectivity to have an objective perspective of his poetry.Since the New Historicists reject Wordsworth's subjectivity, they tend to compel from him the right ways, in their eyes, to express in poetry, leaving no latitude of how to express his feelings poetically. David Simpson, for example, is not satisfied with the way in which Wordsworth tells the story in Michael be cause he believes that the poet should give more details about what exactly caused the tragedy of Michaels family. Their intruding attitude toward what a poet should say seems to be what Theodor Adorno was concerned about in the late capitalist society. In such a society where mass production is prevalent, individualities of people become fungible and replaceable: the non-identical are treated as if they are identical. Thus, when we defy the principle of identification in capitalism, the subjectivity of the poet will be treated fairly.