The New Rhetoric : Korean Transplantation and Its Problems

WooSoo Park(박우수) 한국수사학회 2011 수사학 Vol.0 No.15

셰익스피어 로마극의 재평가

박우수(Park WooSoo) 한국셰익스피어학회 2004 셰익스피어 비평 Vol.40 No.4

Shakespeare's Roman plays, wedged between his great tragedies and late Romance plays, put on stage the extreme pursuit, and its tragic effects, of heroism and honour. With the exception of Titus Andronicus, which is an experiment in Senecan blood tragedy of revenge, his Roman plays--Julius Caesar, Antony and Cleopatra, and Coriolanus--all put in opposition masculine virtues of discipline, manhood, measure, temperance and cold reason against the feminine elements of indulgence, overflowing, idleness, infinite variety of imagination, and emotion. These Roman plays depict the male fear of effeminization and pollution of manhood through contact with the feminine. For example, Coriolanus sucked his courage from the breast of his mother, Volumnia, and achieved his colossal selfhood and pride thereby. However, his final kneeling down before the pleas of his mother on the brink of his triumphal attack on Rome proves himself the boy of his mother. And this means the self-destruction of manhood by the feminine. Antony and Cleopatra, among his Roman plays, seemingly dramatizes the polar conflicts of values between Rome and Egypt with its epic shifts of elusive thirty-six scenes in total. Rome is the world of men in contrast to the Egyptian world of women. This apparent polarity, however, is put into question in this play of paradoxes and ambiguities. The negative values of Egypt are transmuted into positives ones in the later parts of the play, while Roman pursuit of honour and heroic militarism is proven self-deceiving and expedient as is shown by Pompey in his galley. By his dramatic strategy of transvaluation, Shakespeare appears to maintain that every fact and truth are possible dependent on the given situation, and therefore partial at most. Here any perspective is the mutable one of the viewer projecting his own desires into the object of his gaze. The ever-present renewal and undecidability of meanings is one of Shakespeare's strategies to criticize the strongly self-willed virtues of Roman Caesarism and 'civilized' imperialism done through male power and violence at the cost of the feminine elements. Shakespeare reads new and different meaning into his cultural tradition by transforming Aeneas, the hero and builder of Rome and civilization, into the hero of love. Shakespeare performs his "cultural susurrus," or cultural negotiation with his literary heritage of history as a kind of a text. Antony identifies himself with Aeneas, not the stoic hero of Rome, but the idle lover of Dido, the Queen of Carthage. This historical misreading goes against the grain of Virgil and Marlowe. The heroics of love and death of Antony with Cleopatra exalt them above the barren earth of kingdoms and clay. Death is experienced as a consummation and a part of life, which makes the tragic vision of the play somewhat affected and makes it similar to the vision of the tragicomedies of Shakespeare's final phase. The heroics of love and death of the titular hero and heroine, together with their aristocratic virtues of generosity and affection, is suggested as an alternative, if not a substitution for, to the Roman values of colonialism and imperialism. Shakespeare's Roman plays in general, and Antony and Cleopatra in particular, prepare the way to the happily mingled resolution of the masculine and the feminine in his Romance plays.

셰익스피어의 바다와 극적 구조

박우수(WooSoo Park) 한국셰익스피어학회 2007 셰익스피어 비평 Vol.43 No.1

Under the influence of Greek romances and the New Comedies of Plautus and Terence, Shakespeare's late plays or romances are set in the sea. In these Mediterranean plays, the sea is the setting for shipwrecks and sufferings of separation, but it is also the place for a rebirth and resurrection, and a family reunion. In the sea, sorrow changes into joy, death into resurrection, and separation into reunion. This sea of changes represents loss of an identity from Shakespeare's early comedies onwards to his major tragedies and Roman plays, as a drop of water confounding itself in the water. However, in his romances the sea travelers experience their loss of identity after their initial experience of a sin, and succeed in regaining their lost identity by finding out their lost family members. The tripartite phases of identity crisis, identity dissolution and the final identity re-solution of the main characters correspond to the three parts of plot development in Shakespeare's last plays: protasis, epitasis, and catastrophe. Shakespeare inherits the traditional plot structure of the New Comedy and creatively varies it in his last romance plays. In Pericles, the titular hero experiences an Edenic fall in his marriage proposal and riddle test. Seeing into the incest of Antiochus with his daughter, he contaminates himself with the sin of thwarted sexual desire and is haunted by his vision of distorted feminine sexuality. This crisis in his identity comprises the protasis or the problem of the play. Afraid of murder and war, he puts himself to the sea of wandering and shipwrecks. Pericles's repeated sea voyage dissolves his identity as the prince of Tyre and lowers himself to a kind of a "wet" beggar. The dissolution of Pericles's identity on the sea in the middle part of the play is dramatized by his comatose state and his speechlessness, a drastic change from the famous Athenian orator. The stormy turbulence of the sea reflects the passions of his mind and a patient conformity to the cosmic order. The experience of sea suffering and the deadly dissolution of his identity corresponds to the epitasis or the complicated knotting of the plot. In his final meeting with his daughter and his wife, both supposed to be dead and lost, Pericles enjoys the experience of resurrection and regains his identity as father and husband. This family reunion brings his tragic problem to a resolution or a catastrophe. The sea in this experimental epic play is the setting for changes of events and identity. Shakespeare's sea is more than a mere setting in his romances, and does play both thematic and structural functions.

인지 수사학: 비유의 수사적 기능을 중심으로

박우수(Park WooSoo) 한국외국어대학교 영미연구소 2016 영미연구 Vol.36 No.-

비유는 언어의 지시기능과 더불어 우리가 사물을 인식하고 표현하는 방법이라는 점에서 일종의 길이다. 그 길 위에서 우리는 살아가며, 때로 우리는 스스로 자발적으로 걸어간다고 생각하지만 사실은 그 언어의 길이 컨베이어 벨트처럼 우리를 실어 나 르고 있는 것이다. 그 길 안에서 우리는 타자와 만나고 의미를 형성한다. 그 길을 벗어나는 순간 우리는 무의미가 아니라 존재부정으로 일탈한다. 이미 비유적 언어가 우리의 존재를 규정하고 나아가 우리를 구성하고 있는 것이다. 아리스토텔레스는 비유를 유사성을 발견하는 능력으로 규정하고 있는데, 다양한 언어적 차이에도 불구하고 인간의 의사소통이 가능한 것은 바로 이 비유가 전제하고 있는 공통된 인식의 터전 때문이다. 이를 수사학에서 공통화제(locus communis)라 지칭하고 있는데, 이는 인간이 이성적으로 공유하는 인식의 장(sensus communis)을 의미한다. 여기에서 페렐만이 말하는 수사적 보편청중이 가능해진다. 발견과 판단과 같은 인간의 인식기능은 대체로 같음과 다름을 판별하는 유추능력에 근거한다. 유추, 혹은 유비는 일상 언어에 가해진 폭력, 그것으로부터의 미끄러짐이라는 수사비유로 작용한다. 수사비유를 인식하고 사용하는 능력이 수사적 설득의 과정이며 이 과정에 참여하는 모든 종류의 의사소통행위는 이성의 작용과 동시에 최고 단계의 이성으로서 이미지를 만드는 능력, 즉 상상력을 전제한다. 비유의 언어는 그 자체로 이미 인식의 언어이며 현시적 힘을 담보하는 상상력의 산물이다. This essay examines cognitive attributes of rhetoric, focusing on the rhetorical function of metaphor as language itself. With the conception of rhetoric as a counterpart of dialectic goes the establishment and revaluation of rhetoric as the art of argumentation and judgement. Judgement is applied, before invention and after, to every domain of the rhetorical field. It works especially in the matrix of analogical imagination. On the other hand, analogy is a faculty to find similarity in apparent dissimilarities and dimensional differences. In this sense, analogy is a kind of metaphor. A metaphor is more than an unfamiliar and hence forceful expression, functioning on the principle of inventive judgement and reasoning. Here metaphor as the transcendence of the given is the way we as language users join in, and in language and on the way to language we pass over our individuality to settle in personalities. In the metaphoric function of cognition and condensation of different experiences and expressions, we can achieve the possibility of universal audiences. In fine, metaphor represents a shocking sharing of knowledge, and in it we often fall on the other side of our worn-out life and expression. In the use of well-wrought metaphors extended, we extend ourselves and our lives, since metaphor works as a thought process and heuristic principle.

르네상스 극에서 사적 공간과 자아의 발전 : 『햄릿』의 경우

박우수(WooSoo Park) 한국셰익스피어학회 2002 셰익스피어 비평 Vol.38 No.2

In the English Renaissance culture, an autonomous, self-authorizing and impenetrable self is regarded as rebellious to the state power and hence an object of constant gaze and surveillance. The self whose inward and secret heart causes anxiety to the powers that be, brings forth the birth of information apparatuses. The inner and secret sanctum of the self is a private center which can be arrived at only by passing through the long corridor of public rooms and antechambers. Once reached, the private center is no longer a room of one own, but a public place. Therefore the early modern self is a moot point where the subject and the object are meddled with. This means that the Shakespearean self is quite different from the Descartean self, which is totally detached from the impersonated nature and following its own method of reasoning procedure. Gertrude's closet is still invaded by the presences of Polonius, Hamlet, and even the Ghost, and therein she is forced to pry open her secret heart. The private space of the self is openly appropriated to the public eyes on the Renaissance stage. The flourishing of the English Renaissance drama was made possible by the ambiguous nature of the self, both self-concealing and self-revealing at once. If the self is particular and singular inwardness completely resistant to the penetration of public eyes, it is impossible to limn it into a typical character, while if it is a public room "unpacking its heart like a whore," individuation of an authentic and autonomous character is likewise impossible. This kind of dilemma on the part of the playwright is represented by the conflict of self-will and the cosmic moral order on the part of dramatic characters. However, both this dilemma and conflict paradoxically make the deeper and richer characterization possible. Hamlet's perplexing and playacting self is the source of mysteriousness of his heart into which we enter in doubt and never come out of its bourn with its secret. The Ghost is a kind of narrative of the past asking Hamlet to re/member him. Hamlet's revenge of his father is equivalent to rewriting the story of his father's death written by Claudius. The Ghost is a modern self haunting here and everywhere, anxious and eager to reinvent and revise the past. It is an old mole progressing in the underground towards the light of the Enlightenment. By impersonating the Ghost, Hamlet can write his own story crying out, "Tis I, Hamlet the Dane." However, Shakespeare gives the final voice to Fortinbras and so implies that the sovereignty of consciousness and a private self is still subject to the medieval and militaristic heroism. Shakespeare is still hovering over the writings of his past as memory traces.

Korea’s nation-building in War Time

Park, WooSoo(박우수) 한국수사학회 2013 수사학 Vol.0 No.19

1954년 7월 31일 이승만 대통령의 미국 상 하원 합동연설은 그의 정치 경력의 한 전환점을 이룬다. 1948년 초대 대통령 취임 이후부터 지속적으로 추구해온 일민주의와 북진통일은 그의 통치 이데올로기를 넘어서 현실을 구성하고 지배하는 일종의 신화로 자리매김하고 있다. 초대 문교부 장관을 지낸 헤겔주의자 안호상이 추장한 일민주의는 다분히 나치식 국수주의의 색채가 강해서 후에 북진통일 신화로 함몰되기는 했지만 일민주의와 북진통일이라는 정치적 두 축은 이승만 정권의 추진력이자 동시에 족쇄로 작용하고 있었다. 이 대통령의 미의회연설은 현실과 허구의 경계를 허문 그의 정치적 신념과 신화를 단적으로 보여준 사건이다. 이 연설에서 그는 공산주의를 콜레라와 같은 전염병으로 규정하고 이를 방치할 경우 자유세계가 모두 병사할 위험을 미국인을 상대로 경고한다. 국빈으로서 일종의 과시적 연설에 그치지 않고 자신의 반공주의와 군국주의적 사고를 자유민주주의 수호라는 이름으로 미국시민들에게 직접 설파하려고 시도한 이 정치적 연설의 핵심은 한국군의 재무장과 어렵게 이룩한 정전협정을 무효화하고 북진통일을 위한 새로운 전쟁을 수행할 필요를 역설한 것이다. 그는 자신의 정치적 신념에 도취되어 새로운 냉전체제를 지속적으로 유지하고자 한 미소의 노력과 평화주의를 지향하는 새로운 국제 정치질서를 읽어내지 못하는 과오를 범함으로써 자유의 투사로서 신념을 지닌 노 정치가라는 평가에도 불구하고 위험한 늙은이라는 워싱턴의 냉대를 감수하게 된다. 이 연설에서 그는 흥미롭게도 한국은 미국의 앞마당이기 때문에 한국이 무너지면 다음 공격대상은 미국이 될 것이라는 논리적 비약을 통해서 새로운 세계전쟁의 당위성을 정당화하려고 시도하는데, 이러한 논리적 비약과 다분히 정서적인 성급함은 북진통일과 반공이라는 그의 정치적 신화가 얼마나 강력하게 그의 정신을 지배하고 그의 현실인식을 지배하고 있는지 잘 보여주는 사례이다. 그의 정치적 확신과 신념은 새로운 세계질서 안에서 전쟁 광신자이자 노망한 늙은이로 평가 받을 수 있는 여지를 남겼으며, 미국의 신뢰를 잃게 만든 직접적인 계기가 된다. “인생 최대의 실수”로 기록된 이 대통령의 미의회 연설은 정치적 연설에서 관중의 의도를 파악하는 것이 얼마나 중요한 일인지를 보여주는 역사적 사례이며, 외교 수사학의 심도 있는 연구와 실천의 필요성을 더욱 가중시킨다. 올리버(Robert Oliver)의 표현처럼 국제 정치무대에서 문화적 상대주의를 극복하기 위한 최소한의 장치로 연설문 대필가의 필요성이 정당화되는 이유가 여기에 있다.

비너스의 무어인 오델로(Othello, the Moor of Venus)

박우수(WooSoo Park) 한국셰익스피어학회 2017 셰익스피어 비평 Vol.53 No.2

Othello, the mercenary soldier, confronts the crisis of his identity when he enters the watery city of Venice and meets there the Venusian woman of Desdemona. The name of Desdemona still keeps her ancient kinship with Circe and Siren. The fluidity and liquidity of the sea in Shakespeare represents sea sufferings and sea changes undergone by his heroes and heroines. If Shakespeare portrayed in his narrative poem, Venus and Adonis, the tragic experience of the adolescent Adonis symbolically suffocated and stifled by the buxom and luxurious middle-aged Venus, in the tragedy of Othello, the black Moor is drowned in the waters of Venus-Desdemona. Othello’s turbulent passions of jealousy and fear of a white woman are realized in Cyprus, the birthplace of Venus genetrix in the far east of the Mediterranean. The Pontic torrents flood him down into the rocks of a frantic self-loss blurred by his energetic self-dramatization. Desdemona as a Venus of the open sea engulfs Othello’s masculinity in her obscure and murky liquidity and sexuality of which Othello is constantly afraid that he cannot sound the depth. This doubtful un-knowledge, though incensed by Iago, leads Othello to his tragic self-murder.

“내 생애의 첫 산물”

박우수(WooSoo Park) 한국셰익스피어학회 2012 셰익스피어 비평 Vol.48 No.3

Shakespeare’s Venus and Adonis is a narrative poem depicting the birth-pangs of a new poet in the English Ovidian tradition. In the rhetorical debate of the epyllion Venus the goddess of love tries to persuade the young fondling Adonis into her carnal desires. In the poem Venus wants to break and over-sway the unbroken wild horse of Adonis by commanding all the flourishes and ornaments of the then prevalent Ovidian and Petrarchan languages of love, though she seems to apparently subvert the given gender roles of the Petrarchan convention: she is too virile and aggressive. One of the outstanding characteristics of Venus is that she is talking and talking, even stopping Adonis’s mouth by kissing him when he tries to talk back. Venus wants Adonis the young adolescent to be immersed in the Ovidian tradition of love poems. However, to Adonis"s stubborn ears, the honey-tongued rhetorical figures of Venus are like a Siren song composed in order to trap and effiminate him into old and well-wrought tradition of Ovidan love poems. When Venus recommends Adonis to hunt for Wat the hare instead of a wild boar, she is really entombing him in the womb of lust by divesting him of his vigour and dangerously untamed originality. Adonis wants the initiation of manhood of a strong poet, even it means his death, when he refuses to hear the old and mouldy tales of love Venus pours into his ear-holes. The young poet as a green orator seems to be defeated in his pursuit of a new poetics of love in the last part of the poem. However, his apparent defeat is paradoxically redeemed by his metamorphic resurrection into a white and red anemone. The "breath" of anemone represents the poetic inspiration of a new poet. Through Adonis Shakespeare succeeds in placing himself as an autonomous poet in the serious art of poetry, though he joins quite late in the early 1590s in the well-established tradition of English Ovidian love poems.

사랑과 죽음의 이중성 : 『로미오와 줄리엣』과 모순어법

박우수(Park WooSoo) 한국셰익스피어학회 2005 셰익스피어 비평 Vol.41 No.3

Shakespeare deals with the multiple and hidden aspects of love and death in his early tragedy of Romeo and Juliet. In this play love is a madness, a malady, a quest, and a cult, while timeless death is, in its nocturnal metaphor, transformed into the eternal stellarization of mortal and sensual love. Shakespeare depicts from the very beginning of the play that mingling of contradictory elements of love and hate, peace and violence, day and night, and body and spirit. These mutually exclusive elements are not, as they might appear, absolutely and essentially compartmentalized, but they suffer metamorphoses to the contrary in the operations of time and seasonal cycles of nature. Metaphor is the linguistic device par excellence to express this metamorphic character of things and ever shifting meanings of words. Oxymoron is the rhetorical device Shakespeare uses in this play predominantly of all others in order to dramatize the dialectical and dynamic nature of love and death. Oxymoron, or double-crossing, draws together of contrary elements to produce an unexpected sense of balance and some shocking recognition of seeming hidden truths of things. It is a kind of very witty and conceited play of words. However, here it is more than a witty word game. Rather it is a thematic device expressing the conflict and conflation of love and violent death. Oxymoron is also at the bottom of the structural development of the play, crossing comedy into tragedy, and tragedy into comedy in turn. Romeo and Juliet achieve their consummation of love in death, not in copulation. To Romeo death is his rival lover, not the destroyer of love. As is seen in Juliet's sexually candid apostrophe to Night, the typical image of Death, Death is eagerly wished for as a lover. In this play of names, the definition of a word is turned into its opposite, as poison is called a medicine, a cordial, and a restorative. In this double crossing of two or more contradictory dimensions, one is cancelled out by the other, and a third new con-fusion is brought forth. If Romeo and Juliet's love is possible from the fatal loins of the family feud, their death is the jointure drawing together of two enemy hands into love. Oxymoron is the golden monuments, made of the jointure of Romeo and Juliet. Tomb and womb are more than rhyme's sake in this play of turnings and tropes. Oxymoron is the rhtorical device as well as the thematic and structural one of the play. It is assumed to be the main character in this tragedy.

I. A. 리처즈(Richards)의 맹자 해석과 번역

박우수(Park Woosoo) 한국수사학회 2007 수사학 Vol.0 No.7

The interest of 1. A. Richards' on the Chinese classics, especially on Confucius and Mencius, was instigated quite early in his Cambridge days by his college, James Wood. Richards was attracted by the profundity and ambiguity of Chinese characters. Since he considers poetry as the unique, and highly intense forms of speculative elaborations, classical Chinese philosophical works are considered as condensed poetry. He found in the Confucian idea of sincerity something quite similar to Coleridge idea of imagination, the ensenplastic power of the whole soul. According to Confucius and Mencius, sincerity is a kind of principle and energy to unite man and his external nature in convergence, and it is also a natural tendency to an increased order and a self-development. Sincerity is a social virtue to make a man transcend his definite ego. By juxtaposing the idea of sincerity with Coleridge's idea of imagination as the positive activity of the whole soul. Richards hopes to bridge the different cultures of West and East, and also to restore the organic community which has been dissolved into fragments of modern technological societies since the Renaissance in the West. Richards' speculative trials at the cure of social diseases is realized in his experiment in multiple definitions. As he considers misunderstanding and non-communication as the typical modem diseases, he tries to cure these by his linguistic remedies. In terms of his contextualism and multiple definitions, he believes that he can bridge the gap between what a man feels he thinks and what he believes he means. Since most of our argumentative misunderstandings derive from the differences in the definition of key terms, multiple definitions as a kind of synoptic vision and the unitary theory of all disciplines are believed to bring in philosophical peace. In his book, Mencius on the Mind(l932), Richards tries to include all the senses and gestures of a word in its definition. Because he thinks the Chinese language is pre-logical and ore-like in uniting various elements in the same character, it is prerequisite to place a word or a passage in its context in order to understand it. Chinese words are inter-animated among themselves in their meanings and hence are mutually dependant on their linguistic situation. By taking advantage of his multiple definitions. Richards translated experimentally some passages of psychology from Mencius. This is a vertical translation. trying to follow up the author's speculative elaborations, not the apparent expressions. This experiment can be justly called a heuristic, not a translation. However, the efficacy of this thought-translation to a non-Chinese speaker is a moot question. As his concept of sincerity is quite weak in suggesting some concrete and practical ways of uniting a self-development with the external nature in the spoiled and split modern world, so his experiments in multiple definitions are of no real help in curing the social diseases of misunderstanding and non-communication. Multiple definitions and any translations based upon them are closed systems imposed upon human consciousness working in a historical time.