본 논문은 바이런(Byron)이 쓴 ｢돈 주안｣(Don Juan)에 나타난 주인공의 종 교적인 감수성을 사원 내의 갤러리, 런던, 그리고 자연배경과 같은 장소에 대한 인식을 토대로 고찰한다. 작가의 다양한 장소와 주안의 심오한 영적 내면과의 관계를 통한 종교적인 접근은 ｢돈 주안｣이라는 인간과 문명에 대한 현실적이고 풍자적인 대서사시에 영적인 진지함을 더함으로써 작품을 좀 더 다채롭게 만들 어 주고 있음을 역설하고 있다. 아울러, 본 논문은 장소에 대한 주인공의 종교적 명상을 살펴봄에 있어서, 이러한 주제가 바이런의 초기 작품부터 어떻게 태동하 고 있으며, 전개되어 왔는지도 연구함으로써 바이런의 일관되고도 역동적인 시 상을 보여준다. 이 논문은 주안이 여러 장소를 경험하며 느낀 내면의 생각과 느 낌을 다루면서, 주인공이 삶의 변화무쌍함을 인식하고 궁극적으로는 영원성과 절대적 존재를 지향하고 있음을 보여주고 있다.

This paper aims to survey in brief Byron and his characteristic features by scrutinizing “Don Juan,” his masterpiece which causes him to be more generally esteemed for the satirical realism. It is true that his name has become a symbol for the deepest romantic melancholy on the one hand and for the aspirations of political liberalism on the other. Byron himself lived a life of freedom, violence, dissipation as a great demonstrator of his own thoughts, while trying to show the European discontents and hopes of that time. In “Don Juan” especially he was concerned with the same disparity between the real and the ideal, but in the main he shows it in its comic, or at least sardonic, aspects. Finally, this paper suggests the possibility of linking Byron, who stands in contrast to Shelley, to W.B. Yeats. It seems that there are many parallels between the two poets. Like Byron, the later Yeats strongly despises the hypocritical aspects of politics, religion, and moral. Throughout his life, Yeats was deeply involved with mysticism, or Oriental philosophy. And also, though Byron and Yeats are different in composing poems - Byron rarely corrects what he has written down while Yeats hardly leaves what he wrote uncorrected, as Yeats was a kind of perfectionist poet - the poems, as final products, by both poets do not seem very different. Both of their poetry flow like water.