본 논문은 예이츠와 김종길 시에 나타난 ‘비극적 환희’를 연구한 논문이다. 두 시인은 각자의 어려움에도 불구하고 ‘비극적 환희’로 극복하려는 공통점을 지닌다. 비록 산 시기와 장소는 다르지만 ‘존재의 통합’ 내지 ‘자기실현’을 이루려고 각자의 시에서 ‘비극적 환희’를 공유한 것 같다. 이에 논자는 그들의 시에 나타난 어려움을 ‘비극적 환희’로 수용하면서 최선을 다한 두 시인의 친연성을 탐구한다.

예이츠의 후기 작품은 니체의 아폴로와 디오니소스의 이중성이라는 관점에서 볼 때 보다 더 정확하게 이해될 수 있다. 아폴로의 가상은 개인의 삶을 창조하는 힘인데 이러한 생각은 예이츠의 마스크 개념에서 가장 잘 표현된다. 지속적으로 개인의 가상을 새롭게 창조하기 위해서는 아폴로적인 것은 가상을 산산이 부수는 디오니소스적인 힘이 필요하다. 디오니소스적이고 아폴로적인 비극의 개념은 예이츠의 비극적 삶과 예술에 대한 태도를 관통하는 주제이며 특히 “비극적 환희”에서 가장 강력하게 반영된다.

It is well-known that Yeats had a very deep interest in the Oriental Thoughts throughout his life. In this paper, the focus is laid on his interest in Buddhism. Many of his friends and teachers, such as George Russel, Edward Dowden, Madame Blavatsky, Shri Purohit and Mohini Chatterjee introduced Buddhism to him and their friendship were lifelong. This paper examines the relationship between “Tragic Joy” in his poem “Lapis Lazuli” and Buddhism. In a letter to Dorothy Wellesley, Yeats confessed that as the east has its solution, the westerners must raise the heroic cry. His confession implies his object is oriental solution or the solution in the viewpoint of the union of oriental thoughts and occidental thoughts. The main theme of the poem, “Lapis Lazuli” is tragic joy. The characters created by artists aren’t afraid of death and play their roles to the end. Accomplishing their roles, they feel joy, though they know their roles are not reality and reality itself is empty. This attitude isn’t different from that of Buddhism. Buddhism sees that the Reality itself is empty. Though artists realize nothing can last forever, they create artifacts and feel joy in repeated creation. It is certain that Yeats believes that the source of all the existing things is the mind. All the things in the world are reflection of the mind and emptiness itself. To realize this truth is tragic but to create again is a joy.

In such poems as “The Dialogue of Self and Soul” and “Vacillation”, the antinomies and oppositions which I have traced in the previous issue of this Journal develop in a very complex manner within the frame of such figures as “the sword” and “the tower”, “brand” and “flaming breath”, “burning leaves” and “green lush foliage moistened with dew.” And they are always posited as implying the antinomies of life and death, remorse and joy, body and soul, earthly life and heaven. In the process of vacillating between “extremities”, Self and Heart which figure not only the body but also the poet’s self declines Soul’s request to “seek out reality, leaving things that seem.” Even though Heart vacillates between antinomies, always looking towards what are opposites to itself, it chooses Homer and his unchristened heart as its example and determines to “live tragically.” By opposing the life of a Swordman to that of a Saint and receiving Homer as the figural example of his art, Yeats puts the foundation that his lyric should be understood as tragedy. “The Gyres” and “Lapis Lazuli”, two tragic lyrics composed in Yeats’s last years, embody his idea of the tragic lyric as well as his tragic world view. In “The Gyres”, the poet, invoking his muse “the old Rocky Face” to look forth and view the world’s overall collapse, “but laugh in tragic joy”. And in “Lapis Lazuli”, the tragic heroes of the Shakespearean tragedy are displayed as the opposing powers or qualities to “the hysterical women” of the modern world. In both of these poems, the poet’s tragic joy or exultation springs from the tragic vision that all things “fall and are built again.” The very eternal recurrence of the battle of antinomies and opposite forces is the source which enacts the poet’s strength and energy to exalt in the midst of despair. Therefore, we may be able to say that the poet’s magical aesthetic which is based on the absolute power of death and the tragic sense of life elevates his lyrics to the height of disruptive tragedy, letting the poet to enact tragic authority at the same time.