동물이 등장하는 셰이머스 히니 시의 자연 세계는 때로는 폭력적이며, 인간의 이해를 뛰어넘어 훨씬 복잡하고 상징적이다. 그는 인간의 세계도 과거 폭력적인 역사를 겪어 지울 수 없는 흔적을 안고 균형과 조화의 추구를 깨닫는다. 히니 시의 빈번한 고전적 운율과 리듬은 형식과 내용의 균형감으로 볼 수 있다. 시인은 오해받는 오소리 이미지를 고려하고, 아첨하는 듯한 오소리 모습에서 오히려 우리도 마주하는 현실의 상황에 따라 그럴 수 있음을 수긍한다. 또 시인은 수달로부터 아내의 몸과 물을 가르는 힘 그리고 그녀와의 흐뭇한 여행을 화려하고도 단정한 동사와 형용사로 펼쳐낸다. 밤에 스컹크의 꼬리를 본 히니는 대다수가 떠올리는 냄새에서 벗어나 타지의 흙과 공기 그리고 베개의 아내 냄새로 치환하여 솔직하고 담담하게 아내와의 사랑을 추억한다.

본 논문의 연구주제인 수사학과 커뮤니케이션 관련 연구는 의사소통적 비평에서 몇몇 서구 비평가들에 의해 다루어지고 있기는 하지만, 하나의 연구주제로서 수사학적 커뮤니케이션 연구에 시를 적용하는 예가 많지 않다. 그래서 말이든 글이든 그 문화 콘텐츠를 가지지 않고는 화자의 올바른 의도나 글의 메시지를 포착하기는 쉽지가 않는 것이 사실이다. 이런 점에서 17세기 영국시인인 존 던의 경우 커뮤니케이션 스타일리스트로서 그가 수사학적 장치를 사용하는 목적과 의도에 주목하는 일은 새로운 연구방식의 하나이다. 던의 시는 ｢갇힌 사랑｣이라는 주제를 통해 여성의 문제와 시대의 편견과 사랑의 문제를 오늘날 매우 중요한 글쓰기 매체로 접근하고 있다. 그의 시는 성과 사랑의 본질을 시대적으로 조명하고 있으면서도 동시에 여성과 관련된 도덕의 중요성을, 즉 성스러움에 가까운 자기희생을 처음부터 강조하고 있어 사랑의 종교적 의미가 크다고 하겠다.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the theme of The Only Jealousy of Emer, one of W. B. Yeats's 'Cuchulain plays'. The central action of the play is the struggle of three women—Emeer, Eithne Inguba and Fand—for possession of Cuchulain. Unlike Eithne Inguba's confused, cowardly action, Emer's behavior is brave as well as insightful. And as the chorus suggests, Fand's allurements are transitory. Fand's metallic allurement contrasts with Emer's passionate suffering. Fand wants to catch him to fulfill herself, not to aid in his salvation. Emer is more courageous than Eithne Inguba, more self-sacrificing than Fand, and more forgiving than Aoife. Emer's love for her husband transfigures her, whereas Aoife's vindictive hatred for Cuchulain costs them their only child. Emer is certainly a Yeatsian heroine who performs as nobly as Deirdre or Cuchulain. Yeats's most immediate source for his Cuchulain plays was Lady Gregory's Cuchulain of Muirthemne, but he significantly altered the source to serve his purposes. Emer's thwarted desire to attack Fand with her knife is one of the few links between Yeats's source and his much changed finished work of art. From this primitive tale of vengeance and jealousy, Yeats created a sophisticated drama of mental suffering and self-sacrifice. A second major change in the source involves Cuchulain's recollection of Fand's attempt to ensnare his soul. Both his fear upon awakening and his later praise of Emer for saving him suggest that he is glad of his deliverance, not despondent over the loss of Fand. Yeats's greatest modification came in his treatment of Emer's temperament. Instead of the jealous wife of seeking vengeance for herself, she is jealous only for her husband's well-being. By renouncing the love of the man she needs to end her loneliness, Emer proves herself superior to the source heroine. In the final version, Yeats dramatized, through Emer's hope for the return of Cuchulain's love for her, through her initial inability to give up her hope of winning back his love, and through her final renunciation of his love, the depth of her love and the extent of her sacrifice.

“The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock” and “Portrait of a Lady,” two major works of T. S. Eliot’s early poems, have been regarded as a kind of ramatic monologues. Many critics indicated that Eliot’s use of dramatic monologue was different from Victorian poets’, so they called Eliot’s dramatic monologues “interior monologues” or “psychologues.” However, some critics like Won-Chung Kim insisted that Eliot’s and Robert Browning’s dramatic monologues shared some characteristics by comparing their masterpieces, “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock” and “My Last Duchess.” In this paper, my premise is that Eliot’s dramatic monologues are different from Victorian poets’ like Browning’s because I think that Eliot changed the technique of dramatic monologue to reflect the spirit of his age, that is, the beginning of the 20th century. In the early 20th century, many writers including Eliot thought that the self is illogical and split, and claimed that they should focus on the human consciousness and try to find the method to express it. In his early poems, Eliot expressed the speakers’ consciousness that was divided. Some critics has also indicated that the speakers of Eliot’ early poems have self-conscious character caused by the split self. To create this character of the speakers, I think, Eliot adapted the technique of dramatic monologue. While the traditional dramatic monologues focus on showing the speakers’ values, Eliot’s show the conflict of the speakers’ doubling self that produces the effect of irony. The speakers’ doubling self consists of the superficial and the fundamental self. One represents the self that tries to conform to the life style of the bourgeois world and is very concerned about people’s judgment. The other represents the self that longs for something higher, more emotional and spiritual. When this doubling self collides with each other and causes conflict, the speaker observes himself in a dramatic way, that is, as a object. Then, the speaker returns to his daily life again.