지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The aim of this thesis is to re-interpret Keats' Ode on a Grecian Urn which has still been mystified by most of critics and readers who have mainly been pinned down to the mythic parts of the poem. This is the emotional fallacy that used to be forbidden by New-Criticism, and the impressive way which appears among blind critics and readers, lack of poetic insight. The two faults often caused from getting to the poem stems from a kind of overflowing Romanticism. But to re-interpret the poem is a trial of the criticism of 'Readers' response', leading to a practice of what we call ‘deconstruction’ to renew and supplement the established ideas of the poem, refusing a minority of authoritative interpretations of it, and resulting in “death of author.”
The faults can be squarely contradictory with Keats’ positions of poetics to Things: negative capability and empirical attitude, which get rid of critics’ and readers’ intention or imagination far away from Things or phenomena. Namely, this is to check the excessively emotional interference of the interpretive community to the poem whose nature seems to be concerned with Phenomenology favoring epoche(stopping one’s decision) and reducing to the nature of Dasein(given Things). For its alternative, T. S. Eliot’s ‘objective correlative’ is properly favored that aims to link poetic things to Things.
For the first stanza, Harold Bloom tells us the mythic level centering on the patterns of the “Urn.” But we approach the stanza for phenomenological level. Here “Urn” is an art in itself visible to us.
The second stanza, Bloom welcomes rhetorical oxymoron and tends to adhere to it. And Kenneth Burke contrasts sensuals with spirituals. But we see that Keats regrets the contemporaries’ vulgarity and blindness for art, as shown in a few critics(especially, Sanders and Claire Lamont)’ research.
From the third stanza, Burke separates secular things from transcendental things. But we finds the poet’s fate of being forced to keep on singing regardless of his contemporaries’ concerns and tastes, which shows Keats' agony losing universality and popularity for his works.
The forth stanza reminds Cleanth Blooks of a sacrifice-ritual by archaic custom and unreasonably leads him to mythic level. But we find the tragic end of a poet as a scape-goat. In the result, the angry God cursed and devastated the community in which the poet was persecuted to death.
The fifth stanza hits to Paul H. Fry that there are a static situation and sensual mood in it. Here we find that the “Urn” is sublimated to an artistic, supreme being and the poetic narrator regrets and rebukes the blind critics and readers unable to grasp its entity or nature.
In conclusion, Keats foregrounds the “Urn” and backgrounds significance of art and simultaneously sets mythic historicity and contemporary presentness in parallel. The mythic elements remarkably fore-grounded in the poem forces critics to mislead to the mystified level of the “Urn” so that if they can’t grasp it, they are alienated from the poetic truth of the “Urn.” This is concerned with the oracular message to blind and foolish critics and readers over centuries : “Beauty is truth, truth beauty, - that is all / Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.”
The faults can be squarely contradictory with Keats’ positions of poetics to Things: negative capability and empirical attitude, which get rid of critics’ and readers’ intention or imagination far away from Things or phenomena. Namely, this is to check the excessively emotional interference of the interpretive community to the poem whose nature seems to be concerned with Phenomenology favoring epoche(stopping one’s decision) and reducing to the nature of Dasein(given Things). For its alternative, T. S. Eliot’s ‘objective correlative’ is properly favored that aims to link poetic things to Things.
For the first stanza, Harold Bloom tells us the mythic level centering on the patterns of the “Urn.” But we approach the stanza for phenomenological level. Here “Urn” is an art in itself visible to us.
The second stanza, Bloom welcomes rhetorical oxymoron and tends to adhere to it. And Kenneth Burke contrasts sensuals with spirituals. But we see that Keats regrets the contemporaries’ vulgarity and blindness for art, as shown in a few critics(especially, Sanders and Claire Lamont)’ research.
From the third stanza, Burke separates secular things from transcendental things. But we finds the poet’s fate of being forced to keep on singing regardless of his contemporaries’ concerns and tastes, which shows Keats' agony losing universality and popularity for his works.
The forth stanza reminds Cleanth Blooks of a sacrifice-ritual by archaic custom and unreasonably leads him to mythic level. But we find the tragic end of a poet as a scape-goat. In the result, the angry God cursed and devastated the community in which the poet was persecuted to death.
The fifth stanza hits to Paul H. Fry that there are a static situation and sensual mood in it. Here we find that the “Urn” is sublimated to an artistic, supreme being and the poetic narrator regrets and rebukes the blind critics and readers unable to grasp its entity or nature.
In conclusion, Keats foregrounds the “Urn” and backgrounds significance of art and simultaneously sets mythic historicity and contemporary presentness in parallel. The mythic elements remarkably fore-grounded in the poem forces critics to mislead to the mystified level of the “Urn” so that if they can’t grasp it, they are alienated from the poetic truth of the “Urn.” This is concerned with the oracular message to blind and foolish critics and readers over centuries : “Beauty is truth, truth beauty, - that is all / Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.”
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
시마자키 도손(島崎藤村) 시 『백자화병 부』의 국제성 : 키츠의 『희랍항아리 부』와의 영향관계를 중심으로
일본연구
2013 .02
-
Keats의 'Ode on a Grecian Urn'
새한영어영문학
1985 .02
-
존 키츠의 ｢그리스 항아리에 부치는 송시｣ : 그리스 항아리의 진실, 그리고 그 이면
새한영어영문학
2011 .02
-
A Synthesis of "Beauty" and "Truth" in "Ode on a Grecian Urn"
영어영문학
1987 .10
-
The Function of Art in Keats's “Ode to a Nightingale” and “Ode on a Grecian Urn”
영어영문학
2015 .11
-
존 키츠의 송시들 : 역설의 작용
새한영어영문학
2006 .02
-
Keats의 5大 Ode 硏究
통일인문학
1992 .08
-
미완의 신화
영어영문학연구
2010 .01
-
On the Sonnets of Keats : in Relation to the Odes
코기토
1977 .12
-
John Keats의 서사시와 신화의 상징성
새한영어영문학
1996 .02
-
Critics of Society
Korea Journal
1986 .09
-
Keats's Statuary : Poetical Characters and Sculptural Postures in Keats's Poetics
19세기 영어권 문학
2008 .08
-
윤동주 「서시」의 의미 연구
한국시학연구
2011 .08
-
어둠의 공명으로서의 시—세이머스 히니의 『산사나무 랜턴』
영어영문학21
2014 .01
-
키츠의 욕망과 전유, 시적 독립
동서인문학
2011 .12
-
John Keats의 시의 원형으로서의 Shakespeare
새한영어영문학
1998 .05
-
키이츠의 정치적 로망스 : 『엔디미언』(Endymion)
신영어영문학
2000 .02
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
존 키츠의 ｢그리스 항아리에 부치는 송시｣ : 그리스 항아리의 진실, 그리고 그 이면
이은아
새한영어영문학
2011
.02
Keats의 'Ode on a Grecian Urn'
양순덕
새한영어영문학
1985
.02
존 키츠의 「그리스 항아리에 부치는 송시」("Ode on a Grecian Urn")에 나타난 부정적 시적 허구 전략
이은아
새한영어영문학회 학술발표회 논문집
2010
.10
백석 시의 낭만성과 동양적 상상력 : 유토피아 의식을 중심으로
이경수
한국학연구
2004
.11
낭만적 사랑의 의미론
김동식
문학과사회
2001
.02
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-840-016406929