In “Among School Children” Yeats meditated on lover’s passion, nun’s piety, and mother’s affection in the tradition of Plato’s dualistic philosophy. Plato’s philosophy is an idealistic system resting on a sharply defined dualism between mind and matter, God and the world, body and soul. Soul is always superior to body. Soul is the ideal world; body is the present world. Therefore, those who worship images like lover, nun and mother can not fulfill their dreams in the present world. There is a conflict in the dualistic world. But in the last stanza of the poem, the poet showed us the unified world of soul and body as in Hawom thought. The main features of the Hawom thought belong to Tushun and Chihyum, and Bobchang in China. Great Monk Euisang studied under Chihyum and later held the title of National Teacher in Shilla Era of Korea. His thought was given a pictorial form: a meander design made up of a poem consisting of 210 Chinese characters entitled the Hwaom Iisung Bubgyedo: the cosmology of dharma in the One-yana of Avatamsaka philosophy. In this paper I interpret the last stanza of the poem in the light of Euisang’s Hawom vision. The Hawom vision of the world can contribute to solving the problem of dualistic conflict. The Hawom vision of the world is based on the Mahayana ontology of Emptiness(sunyata) or nonsubstantiality. In Euisang’s Bobsungge, soul and body are not different from each other because both have nonsubstantiality. Yeats also said “Labour is blossoming or dancing where/ The body is not bruised to pleasure soul” in the first and second lines of the last stanza. He continued his song, “O Chestnut-tree, great-rooted blossomer,/ Are you the leaf, the blossom or the bole?” Euisang sang “One is in all, all is in one: one is all, all is one.” A Chestnut-tree consists of the leaf, the blossom, and the bole. The relationship between a part and the whole is in “organic” unity: a part is in the whole, the whole is in a part: a part is the whole, the whole is a part. Yeats argued “How can we know the dancer from the dance,” Euisang suggested ie is not differ from sa. For example, in a golden statue of lion, gold is ie, the statue is sa. ie is represented by sa. The dance is represented by the dancer. Nothing is self-sufficient and all things are interdependent. The Hawom philosophy views the world as a harmonious whole without any dualistic conflict of its fundamental nature. Euisang and Yeats showed us a beautiful vision of the universal reconciliation and harmony of all beings in the world. Euisang called it Buddha’s world whereas Yeats called it “Unity of Being.”

This paper starts with the hypothesis that Irish literature should be different from English literature in theme, feeling and the technique of expression. The differences the writer has found so far are as follows: the search for the father-omphalos, the personification of nature, the recognition of sex as an origin of creation, the search for aesthetics of darkness, the attachment to silence, the spirit of wandering, the cyclic view of the world and dramatic self-awareness, etc. Since the end of the 19th century, the Irish writers’ strong attachment to their own tradition has been expressed as their reaction to a sense of lack as reflected in terms such as “center,” “omphalos,” and “search for father.” This phenomenon accounts for the birth of Irish national literature. From Oscar Wilde and Bernard Show in the 19th century to the recent poet, Seamus Heaney, they tried to deanglicize and create their own literature. But through this process, they have not neglected the chance to become a master of the international literature, by using the language of enemy. And each writer has a peculiar method of deanglicizing. For example, Oscar Wilde and Bernard Show who contributed to cosmopolitanism of modern Irish literature attacked and illuminated the English audiences by the reversing play-role. Understanding the enhanced nationalism, W.B. Yeats and other revivalists of Irish literature integrated English culture and tradition into the nationalistic movement. This is why their works were called “the cracked glass of the servants.” J. Joyce and other modernists, in a genuine sense, sought for their original nationality and to do this, they tried to recognize the picture of themselves as paralysis. From the establishment of the Irish Republic to the recent, strong nationalism and internationalism, as it has grown as one of the European countries, have been reconciled. Modern Irish literature has succeeded in regaining its own tradition and reaching top as one of the international literatures, getting through the five phases. During the first phase it showed the spirit to reverse the English cultural system and value by preempting the role of the English. The second phase is the period when they stimulated the national feeling and praised national heros. At the third phase modernists including Joyce, Kinsella, and Clarke attacked the nationalism of the second phase, saying that it was like a bubble full of the imagination the English wanted, and they exposed the realistic viewpoint of Irish life to their literary works. The fourth phase shows the reconciliation between parochialism of P. Kavanagh and cosmopolitanism of J. Montague. The fifth phase shows that with the enforcing of nationalism caused by the Ulster Trouble, harmony of nationalism and internationalism has been sought. The most important element that has led modern Irish literature to the top level is the spirit of omphalos through their confidence in their own culture and the sense of lack, and thereby the attachment to losses in language, land and tradition. Besides these, modern Irish writers haveoriented from the early period the Irish Republic towards an international country. The harmony of regionalism and cosmopolitanism, as well as that of individual interests and community interests, has led the Irish Republic to become one of the best postcolonial countries and cultural models.

Though all of the poems including Yeats’s Last Poems were written during the last years of his life, the remarkable vigor of thought and of imagination, which increased with the poets’ years, is shown here once more. However, compared with the powerful impact of The Tower and The Winding Stair, the accent of their nonchalant freedom and more colloquial style was one principal source of the reviewers’ dissatisfaction. And T. R. Henn suggested that we should perceive the philosophical and satirical implications behind so many seemingly personal poems, even in the accent of lust and rage of the Last Poems. The primary concern of philosophy is the problem of the self, while the philosophical implication of Last Poems is the self itself. Yeats’s final aim in writing poetry is the perfection of the life and of the work in the process of creating the true self. In his last letter he said, “man can embody truth but he cannot know it, but he must embody it in the completion of his life.” In this sense, the life itself is the total work of art, the completed symbol. When he elucidated that he would write a poem “cold and passionate as dawn,” the pregnant word “dawn” is to be the completed symbol of the work of art. This passage concerns those transformations which are endemic to art. The prime idea must be that necessary infusion of joy in the most tragic contents - the incoherence of the actual life and the limitation of human life. It is the poetics of his itself which achieves “the dawn,” the twilight zone of the darkness of night and the light of day. Yeats found that his place could be the trysting-place of the extremity of sorrow and the extremity of joy, the perfection of personality, and the perfection of self-surrender, passion, and stillness. “Lapis Lazuli’s” “Black out: Heaven blazing into the head” means that the dark grow luminous while the void fruitful. Yeats wrote, “when I understand I am nothing and nobody” through the state of darkness, . . . there must be the dance at the trysting-place or at ‘the clearing’ Heidegger might coin, in the mingling of the contraries. The nobleness of art exists in playing together the contraries. Where all the contraries can play together, the dawn will break. As Yeats can embody the truth, his form of self-conquest should be achieved through the self-surrender and the transformation endemic to art.

최근까지만 해도 나는 Post-Colonial Theory를 W. B. Yeats 연구와 거의 무관하다고 여겨 관심밖에 두었으나, 마음을 바꾸었다. 그리고 같은 맥락에서, Edward Said가 Yeats에 대해 한 말에 관심을 갖게 되었다. 이것은 내가 그의 이론에 전적으로 동감해서가 아니다. 그가 주장하는 바가, 내가 말하고자 하는 것에 보다 더 집중하는 데에 도움이 되기 때문이다. 어떤 작가, 어떤 작품, 어떤 장르, 어떤 시기는, 다른 것들 보다 어떤 이론에 보다 더 쉽게 열려진다. 그러나, 어떻든, 이론은 우리가 지적으로 문학을 생각할 공간을 부여하며, 이 점에 있어서 Jonathan Culler와 동감이다. 이 글에서는, 문화연구는 상당한 진전이 있으며, 영국과 미국의 경향이 다르고, 대표적 학자들의 성향도 다양하여 여기서 깊이 들어 갈 수는 없다. Yeats 연구에 국한해서 문화연구의 범위와 타당성에 대해 논의한다. 여기서는 이론적인 틀을 만들기보다는 Yeats 연구가 이 분야에서 어떻게 진전되어 가나를 보고, 그 방향이 옳은 것인지 본다. 그러면 자연스럽게, 문화연구의 타당성과 범위가 도출된다.

보다 풍요하고 진실된 예이츠 시 원전 연구를 위한 방법론 개발의 한 일환으로서 시학 설정을 통한 비교연구를 시도하였다. 시학이 시문학 비평의 일반적 원칙을 설정하는 작업이라고 할 때, 예이츠 시와 동양시학을 비교연구 하면서 상호공통점과 그 성격을 발견할 수 있었다. 그 과정에서 선시적 직관적 이해를 중시하면서, 예이츠의 시적 특성을 몇가지 측면에서 정리할 수 있었다. 우선 그의 아일랜드 특성과 동양적, 더 나아가 한국적 정서의 공통성을 이원적으로 살펴보았다. 그 중에서도 감정의 승화과정이 동양적 공통성을 보이며, 한국의 한(恨)과도 유사한 감성 형태를 보여주었다. 다음으로, 그의 시는 드라마 중심보다는 서정시 중심의 표현 형태를 가지며, 그의 시성향은 자기 승화적인 점진적, 발전적, 긍정적 성향을 보이며, 영적 성장의 최후단계에서만 약간 망설이는 정신성이 발견된다. 또 그의 시는 언어중심보다는 총체적 상황(Context) 중심으로 이해되어야 하며, 그의 시는 동양시처럼 전거적(典據的)이기보다는 개인 창조력 중심의 시성이 강하다. 그의 시는 계량적 요소(시형론, 음운 등)보다는 내용적 요소가 중시되어야 한다. 이렇게 잠정적으로 설정된 예이츠 시학의 틀로서 “내전 시대의 명상시(Meditations in Time of Civil War)”의 일곱 번째 시, “나는 증오와 충심(充心) 그리고 무심(無心)의 환영을 보노라(I see Phantoms of Hatred and of the Heart’s Fullness and of the Coming Emptiness)”를 보편적, 비교문학적 해석으로 적용해보았다.

예이츠의 학교 어린이들 사이에서 (1927)와 파운드의 빌라네레: 심리적인 시간 (1916) 은 모두 장소의 개념을 시의 주제와 연결시키고 있다는 점에서 공통점을 발견할 수 있다. 이는 두 시인이 모두 외부경치의 묘사로 서두를 장식하는 낭만주의 명상시의 영향 아래 있었다는 것을 보여주고 있다. 그러나 두 시인이 사용한 장소의 개념과 각 시의 주제를 연결시켜 보면 두 시인의 다른 성향을 알 수 있다. 먼저, 학교 어린이들 사이에서 에서 예이츠가 사용한 교실은 생로병사 같은 인간의 한계를 상징적으로 표현하며 그 새장 혹은 감옥의 좁은 방과 같은 한계성을 어떻게 극복하느냐가 이 시의 주된 관심사라고 할 수 있다. 이 시의 마지막 시구 (“춤과 춤추는 이를 어떻게 구별할 수 있을 것인가?”)는 비록 학자마다 그 해석을 달리하여 아직도 논란이 있는 게 사실이지만 나의 소견은 예이츠가 추구해온 합일의 신비적인 힘을 결정적으로 표현한 것이라고 해석하고 싶다. 즉, 처음에 설정된 인간의 한계를 극복하는 길은 합일의 힘 뿐이라는 것이다. 다시 말하면 인간의 주관적인 힘에 더욱 더 무게를 두는 낭만주의의 전통을 그대로 간직하고 있음을 알수 있다. 한편, 파운드의 빌라네레: 심리적인 시간 은 집의 묘사로 그 서두를 장식하고 있는데 우리는 그 집이 화자의 시각 (주관적인 관점)을 제한하는 역할을 하고 있음을 알 수 있다. 이러한 장소의 선택으로 인간이 필연적으로 경험하게 되는 주관의 한계(집의 내부에서 밖을 보는데는 분명한 한계가 있음으로)를 극복하게 하려는 파운드의 치밀한 계산이 깔려있는 것이다. 파운드의 방법은 객관적인 시각을 받아들이는 것이다. 그래서 보다 다양한 관점을 유지하여 주관의 한계를 극복하려는 것이 다. 그러나 이 시에서는 파운드가 기다리고 기다리던 객관적인 관점은 이루어지지 않고 주관적인 관점의 한계만 드러낸 채 끝을 맺는다. 이는 예이츠와는 달리 파운드는 주관적인 힘 그리고 인간의 상상력의 힘에 대한 한계를 인정하고 있다는 의미이다. 예이츠의 상상력에 대한 동경으로 시를 쓰고 그에게 인정받으려고 노력했던 파운드가 이제는 예이츠의 시적 노선에 대해 조금씩 거부반응을 보이기 시작했다고 할 수 있을 것이다. 예이츠가 그 자신을 마지막 낭만파 시인이라고 말하고 있는 것과는 대조적으로 파운드는 이 시를 기점으로 이후에 보다 주관이 배제된 형식으로 객관적이고 사회적, 그리고 정치적인 시들을 발표했음을 알 수 있다. 이는 시가 시인의 내적세계라는 좁은 울타리를 나와 보다 이 사회의 발전에 적극적으로 참여해야 한다는 파운드의 시학으로 해석할 수 있을 것이다.

The poems in The Rose(1893) represent Yeats’s patriotic attempt to describe the heroic Irish past with “roses” symbolizing ‘eternal beauty’ mixed with pagan wisdom. He concretely suggested “Celtic wisdom” through the epic heroes in Irish myths such as Cuchulain, Fergus, Druid, and Cathleen. They sans, first, wander to get “eternal beauty” as to overcome man’s destiny, living just a day. Second, they don’t pursue impossible knowledge and passionate commitment as shown in Fergus and Cuchulain. Third, they transcend secular passions through the “ancient ways” to go to a Celtic paradise. Fourth, they seek the internal Tree of Life instead of indulging in the external Tree of Knowledge. Fifth, they remember that only such things as the sacrificial behaviors shown by Cathleen will allow us the chances to go to Heaven. So, Yeats wants the Irish and English to seek harmony and reconciliation through the “Celtic wisdom” to get rid of the disharmonious elements in Ireland and English at the end of the 19th century.

본 논문은 Joyce의 작품, 특히 Ulysses에서 Yeats의 죽음과 순교에 대한 견해를 작가가 어떻게 거부하고 있는지 보여준다. Ulysses는 Yeats의 두개의 극, Countess Cathleen과 Cathleen ni Houlihan 을 연상시키는 많은 장면을 포함하고 있다. Yeats의 Cathleen은 우유 배달하는 할머니로 속화되고 거부된다. 순교하는 애국자는 처음에는 영웅적 패배로 우상시되나, 곧 쉽게 잊혀지고 배반당한다. Bloom과 Stephen은 죽음과 순교를 거부하고 현재의 삶에 집착한다. 카톨릭 출신의 Joyce는 신교 출신의 Yeats와 문예부흥론자들의 순교의 숭배를 신교 지배계층의 역사적 딜레마와, 그들이 정신적으로 영국화(anglicization)되었음에 기인한다고 암시하고 있다. Cathleen의 이미지를 거부함으로써, Joyce는 영국지배자에 의해 만들어진 심리적 한계선을 따르기를 거부하고 있는 것이다.

This paper is not primarily about Blake’s influence upon Yeats, though it is concerned about the question of influence and tries to suggest what influence Blake has upon Yeats. Rather, its main concern is about how Yeats wages “Mental Fight” with Blake, his “master,” in order to define himself. Indeed, the figure of Blake stands like a pair of bookends around the literary career of Yeats. But Yeats’s relationship with Blake was a constant warefare between a poetic odd couple. In fact, Yeats’s whole career might be compared to beating on a wall, which Blake managed to pass through like a ghost. According to Yeats, Blake failed to eliminate himself properly from his poems. Because he was “a man without a mask,” he could not efface his own presence from his work. In other words, he could not become an impersonal medium for the voices out of the spiritual world. To outwit Blake and, in effect, to stake out his own spiritual territory, Yeats rejects not only Blake but also, in a sense, that part of himself which he has created in the mythic image of Blake. As the result of it he can subvert Blake. Now for Yeats, a “master” is not someone he emulates. Or he does not embody the way one has hoped to embody the voice of the Immortal Blake; rather, a “master” was his opposite or contrary, someone against whom he struggles to define himself. Even after “The Symbolism of Poetry” Yeats was not prepared to look like Blake, “a man without a mask.”

W.B. Yeats is a poet of constant changes. Death is characterized by the nature of fixing, fixing things as they are. Yeats fights against the forces of death. “The Tower” is an attempt to transcend the death of body by heightening the spiritual. The body is destined to death, but its spirit strives to overcome the power of death. Similarly, in “Sailing to Byzantium,” which precedes “The Tower” manifests the posturing of the poet who is in pursuit of a means to transcend death. The belief in transcending death is not a product of a moment but the consequence of a long quest of changing his poetic self. The image of gold in “Sailing to Byzantium” has a two-fold meaning. One is the meaning of the permanence of gold itself, and the other, the meaning of a form, or the existence of form. The gold is hammered into a form. The process of forging a form is “learning.” Yeats wishes to be changed by learning, and wishes to take a form through the process of changes. That Yeats could stand firm in face of death, comes from Yeats’s firm belief in changes. That belief could disarm the forces of death. He shows a way to overcome in a concrete way. “Under Ben Bulben” represents a third area, where life and death are one and the same. This is similar to the form of permanence in the other poem. When he says, “Horsemen, pass by!” he may want to reach a third stage, in which life and death do not exist. Yeats’s eye is cast upward, beyond the land of life and death; Upward, where the value of self could survive the test of time for good.