엘리엇의 고전주의적 형식주의: 컨벤션에 대한 집념
Concentration on Convention in Eliot’s Classical Formalism
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Although the so-called urbane classical formalism of T. S. Eliot was continued and more developed as an abstract formalism of the New Critics, they were not originated from the same idea. While the New Critics gave emphasis on the individual formal elements and poetic structure itself, Eliot had in mind not so much particular formal qualities as something close to the notion of a genre. He thought of this as “a system of conventions,” which is to be construed as an aesthetic limitation or circle beyond which an artist should not trespass. Eliot kept this notion quintessentially in his poetry and criticism. Accordingly, he criticized the English drama for its unlimited realism and lack of a convention, and insisted “a conventional scheme,” or “form to arrest” not to make it expand and end in the desert of futile realism. He also severely rebuked Matthew Arnold and his neo-Humanist followers for contending that poetry is at bottom a criticism of life and the best poetry supersedes both religion and philosophy. Eliot thought they had confused literary criticism with something else, because, for him, everything in this world or next has a convention of its own.
Abstract
Although the so-called urbane classical formalism of T. S. Eliot was continued and more developed as an abstract formalism of the New Critics, they were not originated from the same idea. While the New Critics gave emphasis on the individual formal elements and poetic structure itself, Eliot had in mind not so much particular formal qualities as something close to the notion of a genre. He thought of this as “a system of conventions,” which is to be construed as an aesthetic limitation or circle beyond which an artist should not trespass. Eliot kept this notion quintessentially in his poetry and criticism. Accordingly, he criticized the English drama for its unlimited realism and lack of a convention, and insisted “a conventional scheme,” or “form to arrest” not to make it expand and end in the desert of futile realism. He also severely rebuked Matthew Arnold and his neo-Humanist followers for contending that poetry is at bottom a criticism of life and the best poetry supersedes both religion and philosophy. Eliot thought they had confused literary criticism with something else, because, for him, everything in this world or next has a convention of its own.
참고문헌 (18)
- 권영탁, "시인과 설교가: T. S. 엘리엇 비평의 기본적 태도", T. S. 엘리엇연구, 15(2), pp.21~41 (2005), 한국T.S.엘리엇학회
- 김구슬, "엘리엇과 단테: 통합의 시학", 동서비교문학저널, (30), pp.21~44 (2014), 한국동서비교문학학회
- 이문재, "브레들리의 인식 틀에서 본 엘리엇의 ＂감수성의 통합＂론", 영어영문학연구, 44(3), pp.115~139 (2002), 한국중앙영어영문학회
- 이창배, "20세기 영미시의 형성" (1979), 민음사
- Bate, W. J, "Criticism : The Major Text" (1970), Harcourt College P
- Bradley, A. C, "Oxford Lectures on Poetry" (1965), St. Martins
- Canary, Robert H. T. S, "Eliot: The Poet and His Critics" (1982), American Library Association
- Eliot, T. S., "The Complete Poems and Plays of T. S. Eliot" (1975), Faber and Faber
- Eliot, T. S, "Four Quartets" (1943), Harcourt
- Eliot, T. S., "Knowledge and Experience in the Philosophy of F. H. Bradley" (1989), Columbia UP
- Eliot, T. S., "The Sacred Wood: Essays on Poetry and Criticism" (1928), Methuen
- Eliot, T. S, "Selected Essays" (1980), Faber and Faber
- Eliot, T. S., "The Use of Poetry and the Use of Criticism" (1975), Faber and Faber
- Matthews, T. S., "Great Tom: Notes towards the Definition of T. S. Eliot" (1974), Littlehampton
- Matthiessen, F. O., "Modern Poetry: Essays in Criticism", pp.172~195 (1968), Oxford UP
- Perkins, David, "A History of Modern Poetry : From the 1890s to the High Modernist Mode" (1976), Belknap
- Sencourt, Robert. T. S, "Eliot : A Memoir" (1971), Dodd
- Wimsatt, W. K, "Literary Criticism : A Short History" (1957), U of Chicago P