Blake, Yeats, and Bishop wrote poetry about children from a child’s perspective, to make us take a closer look at our behaviors, thoughts, and society. Both Yeats’s “The Stolen Child” and Blake’s “The Chimney Sweeper” in Songs of Innocence juxtapose two different worlds, and the child in each poem is associated with the ideal world of our dream. For Blake, the other world as opposed to this world is characterized by perfection filled with love and compassion, which only God can create. Yeats’s “The Stolen Child,” on the other hand, is not characterized by good versus evil; the world we inhabit, though full of sufferings, has traces of beauty that God has given to humanity. Yeats makes us reminisce about our childhood when we were innocent, suggesting that the key to happiness in our daily lives can be found there. Bishop furthers the device of childhood reminiscence with an emphasis on human perceptions, making a psychological approach to her poems, “The First Death in Nova Scotia,” “Sestina,” and “Manners”; hence, the perspective of her child speaker is much more complicated so as to reveal human conditions. We have to find out what the actual world looks like in the poem by inferring what the child gives. Because the psychology of the child is not explained by anyone else in the poem, we place ourselves in child’s perspective and compare the experiences from an adult’s point of view. All the poems about children discussed in this paper are really about adults.

W. B. Yeats in his whole life suffers from his introvert or passive self that hesitates to take action. In his agony, he creates his anti-self that boldly expresses his instinctive rage, and the anti-self is concretely established as a “fiery mask” in his poems. However, not oppressing the introvert and passive self completely, the fiery mask frequently conflicts and clashes with the passive self. Therefore, this paper explores how the fiery mask conflicts with the passive self in his “September 1913” and “Easter 1916,” and how in “Crazy Jane Talks with the Bishop,” the fiery mask overcomes such a discord represented in the two previous poems. In the first poem, the poet is indignant at political Irish nationalists who are unable to appreciate the true valuable arts. Attacking the political nationalists through the fiery mask, however the poet reveals his hidden self that hangs back from taking action. In the second poem, such hidden self under the fiery mask becomes undisguised, and the conflict between the fiery mask and the passive self is exacerbated and maximized. Such conflict is dissolved through a female mask, crazy Jane in the third poem. Usually, mad woman’s angry voice makes a strong impact on society even though she does not take a proper act from asocial responsibility of her rage such as revenge. Therefore, the fiery mask of crazy Jane makes the poet escape from his duty to take action resulting in the solution of the conflict between the fiery mask and the passive self. Ironically, Yeats’s ideal anti-self is completed in the mad female mask, crazy Jane, not in the courageous male mask.

전통의 개념과 몰개성시론을 주창한 T. S. 엘리엇의 ｢전통과 개인의 재능｣은 후속 문학이론, 문화이론에 의해 광범위하게 논의되고 비판을 받아왔다. 이러한 획기적인 비평문에 대한 다양한 반응과 반박 중에 여성 시인들의 직접적인 반응은 거의 보이지 않는다. 이에 따라 본 연구는 비숍이 대학시절에 작성한 ｢소설을 위한 차원들｣이라는 제목의 글에 초점을 맞추어 비숍이 현저히 다른 수사적 장치로써, 엘리엇의 “현존하는 기념비들”에 대한 개념과 전통관에 어떻게 대응하는지 살펴본다. 비숍은 ｢소설을 위한 차원들｣에서 ｢엘리엇의 전통과 개인의 재능｣을 인용, 재인용하면서 소설 창작의 진행, 소설 내에서의 행위의 지속적인 재조정, 질서를 형성하는 현존하는 기념비들에 대해 논의한다. 본고는 이 두 편의 비평문과 엘리엇의 ｢시의 현대적 경향｣과 함께, 기념비와 시에 대한 두 시인의 생각을 담은 작품들을 비교한다. 엘리엇의 󰡔황무지󰡕는 세계대전 이후의 파편들로부터 문학과 문화의 기념비를 구축하고, 시인 자신의 일차적 경험으로부터 거리를 둠으로써 작품을 몰개성적으로 만들어보려는 시도이다. 반면 비숍의 ｢기념비｣와 ｢시｣는 초월과 정통, 주제의 종결에 대해 의문을 가지며, 시인의 개인적 삶, 기억, 가족의 역사로부터 도피하지 않는 작품이다.

This study is caused by the argument of Wendy Meyer, who argues that to characterize Chrysostom as a “lover of the poor” is to misunderstand him against the argument of Peter Brown. She insists that it is more accurate to call him not “champion of the poor,” but “champion of the voluntary poverty.” But the author is not to focus on the contrast argument of above two scholars but to investigate their argument from view point of the monk-bishop leadership. Therefore, the purpose of this work is to present how the leadership of monk-bishop leadership is forming and figuring out. In fact, “the lover of voluntary poverty” and “the lover of the poor” seems to have the deep gap, which could not overcome. Nevertheless, the new leadership, which evolves above two strange factors, is emerging in the name of monk-bishop leadership in late Antiquity. By focussing on life, work and time of John Chrysostom, this investigation will, portray the transitions of how “the lover of voluntary poverty” and “the lover of the poor” are connecting. John Chrysostom (d.407) lived the monastic life for the several years in the mountain. And he was the presbyter and bishop of Antioch and the Bishop of Constantinople. He is very strong position. in its examination of late-antique poverty. He had an enduring influence on his communities with abundant references to the poor and/or almsgiving to be found in his 823 homilies, 242 letters and fourteen treatises. Particulary, in studying of church and state in late Antiquity, this work has great depts on the study of Peter Brown.