천재 신화의 풍자 -존 폰 뒤펠의『괴테가 전화하다』

함수옥 ( Su Ok Ham ) 韓國世界文學比較學會 2015 世界文學比較硏究 Vol.50 No.-

Novel of the artist (Kunstlerroman) has long been one of beloved genres in the German literature since its heyday in the Romantic period. Readers are attracted to the novels of the artist with their curiosity over the creative individual and secrets of his or her works while authors are attracted by the possibility of being able to reflect on their own problems as writers by using artists as main characters in their novels. Goethe ruft an, a newly published novel by John von Duffel who is one of the most active authors in the German literary circle, may be categorized as a novel of the artist as it has an author as its main character and brings up the issue of ``secrets of creative writing,`` but at the same time, it takes a critical stance against traditional novels of the artist by making a caricature of motifs carved in the images of artists since the Romantic period such as genius, inspiration, depth of inner self, and masterpieces. This thesis analyzes Duffel``s novel as a parodic novel of the artist in the Post-Modern era and aims to find that Duffel``s satirical critique over traditional images of artists and esthetic views is relevant to his unique poetics that considers creative writing a physical as well as mental labor. 독일문학에서 예술가소설은 그 융성기였던 낭만주의 시대를 거쳐 현재까지도 꾸준히 사랑받는 장르이다. 작가들이 예술가 주인공을 매개로 하여 창작자로서의 자신의 문제를 성찰할수 있는 가능성에 끌린다면 독자는 창조적 개인과 그의 작품의 비밀에 대한 호기심으로 인해 예술가소설에 매료된다. 현재 독일문단에서 가장 활발한 활동을 하는 작가 중 한 사람인존 폰 뒤펠의 신작 소설 『괴테가 전화하다』는 작가가 주인공으로 등장하고 ‘창작의 비밀’이중요한 화두라는 점에서 예술가소설의 범주에 포함되지만 낭만주의 시대이래 예술가 상(이미지)을 각인해온 모티프들 천재, 영감, 내면의 깊이, 명작 등을 희화화함으로써 전통적 예술가소 설과는 비판적 거리를 취하고 있다. 본고는 뒤펠의 작품을 포스트모던 시대의 패러디적 예술가소설이라는 범주에서 분석하고 풍자를 통한 전통적 예술가 상 및 미학관에 대한 작가의 비판이 예술가는 노동자이며 창작은 정신 뿐 아니라 육체를 기반으로 한 노동이라는 그의독특한 시학과 연결되어 있음을 규명하고자 한다.

괴테의 초기 송가 ｢방랑자의 폭풍노래｣ 연구

임우영 한국외국어대학교 외국문학연구소 2002 외국문학연구 Vol.- No.12

The mythic figures in ｢Wandrers storm song｣ cannot be identified on the basis of the old mythology. “Genius”, “Jupiter Pluvius”, “Bromius” and “Apollo” are used always after the intentions of the poet, where his aesthetic opinions are to be represented symbolically. Thus Goethe mixes the Greek mythology with the Christian “genesis”, in order to let the creative artist reach a God similarity. On the other side he represents Gods such as Bromius (Baccus) and Apollo than representatives of a contemporary artistry, which does not produce true art after Goethe's view. Goethe rejects Theokrit and Anankreon, and Jupiter Pluvius and Pindar are the genius (protection God) of the ingenious and creative artist and the ideal model, which the artists of the recent time are to follow. Jupiter Pluvius is a creator God, which rules over the large natural phenomena (thunderstorm, hail weather), the wanderer as origin of his artistic experiences “glow”. The old-Greek poet Pindar wrote the Ode “victory song”, in which the courage of a car steering wheel is praised. That is after Goethe a model of the artist. Goethe presents into <Wanderers storm song> a “lyric I”, which wants to achieve a goal both from the life and from the art. Goethe refers to the scene of the Pindars of car steering wheel as the best symbolic paragon for the poets of the more recent time, where a hero down-floats regardless of the danger of the mountains. In this condition could the lyric I (one of ingenious artists) and the genius unite. But the other side of the ‘Wanderer’ in the Epode of the 3. Triad, where the proud wanderer recognizes himself as ‘an ingenious artist’ and directly as a “Unbehauster”(homeless), is to be compared with the Ikarus myth. The wanderer, who believes to be raised by the godlike inspiration like that glowing and to a “divinity” like the car steering wheel in the Pindars Ode, longs suddenly for a small “hut”, where he can stay on earth. He envies the small “feuerigen”(mettlesome) returning farmer and tries to overcome the terrestrial luck blessedness of the farmer by highest artist consciousness raised from Pindar. After his “high” flight he feels absolutely necessary to return again to the reality. Because he recognizes, that his genius cannot always remain for him and give him the ingenious inspiration. Here the loud statement of the wanderer is related that he is an ingenious artist like the Gods and therefore he can exceed the terrestrial limitation “godlike”. As in <Prometheus> and <Ganymed> an ambivalence is also shown in Goethe’s Ode <Wandrers storm song>, which mentioned that “ingeniously” a young artist must come into a conflict between the godlike feeling artistry and not always with the “divinity” agree becoming reality.

괴테의 초기 송가 『방랑자의 폭풍노래』 연구

임우영(Lim Woo-young) 한국외국어대학교 외국문학연구소 2002 외국문학연구 Vol.- No.12

The mythic figures in 『Wandrers storm song』 cannot be identified on the basis of the old mythology. “Genius”, “Jupiter Pluvius”, “Bromius” and “Apollo” are used always after the intentions of the poet, where his aesthetic opinions are to be represented symbolically. Thus Goethe mixes the Greek mythology with the Christian “genesis”, in order to let the creative artist reach a God similarity. On the other side he represents Gods such as Bromius (Baccus) and Apollo than representatives of a contemporary artistry, which does not produce true art after Goethe's view. Goethe rejects Theokrit and Anankreon, and Jupiter Pluvius and Pindar are the genius (protection God) of the ingenious and creative artist and the ideal model, which the artists of the recent time are to follow. Jupiter Pluvius is a creator God, which rules over the large natural phenomena (thunderstorm, hail weather), the wanderer as origin of his artistic experiences “glow”. The old-Greek poet Pindar wrote the Ode “victory song”, in which the courage of a car steering wheel is praised. That is after Goethe a model of the artist. Goethe presents into 〈Wanderers storm song〉 a “lyric I”, which wants to achieve a goal both from the life and from the art. Goethe refers to the scene of the Pindars of car steering wheel as the best symbolic paragon for the poets of the more recent time, where a hero down-floats regardless of the danger of the mountains. In this condition could the lyric I (one of ingenious artists) and the genius unite. But the other side of the ‘Wanderer’ in the Epode of the 3. Triad, where the proud wanderer recognizes himself as ‘an ingenious artist’ and directly as a “Unbehauster”(homeless), is to be compared with the Ikarus myth. The wanderer, who believes to be raised by the godlike inspiration like that glowing and to a “divinity” like the car steering wheel in the Pindars Ode, longs suddenly for a small “hut”, where he can stay on earth. He envies the small “feuerigen”(mettlesome) returning farmer and tries to overcome the terrestrial luck blessedness of the farmer by highest artist consciousness raised from Pindar. After his “high” flight he feels absolutely necessary to return again to the reality. Because he recognizes, that his genius cannot always remain for him and give him the ingenious inspiration. Here the loud statement of the wanderer is related that he is an ingenious artist like the Gods and therefore he can exceed the terrestrial limitation “godlike”. As in 〈Prometheus〉 and 〈Ganymed〉 an ambivalence is also shown in Goethe’s Ode 〈Wandrers storm song〉, which mentioned that “ingeniously” a young artist must come into a conflict between the godlike feeling artistry and not always with the “divinity” agree becoming reality.

현업작가 3인의 예술노동과 직업 인식에 대한 연구

백미현(Paek Mihyun) 한국문화융합학회 2021 문화와 융합 Vol.43 No.11

이 연구는 3인의 시각예술분야의 작가를 대상으로 예술가 직업정체성과 예술노동에 대한 인식을 고찰하였다. 연구 결과 이들은 사회적으로 직업을 밝혀야 할 때 예술가 대신 작가, ‘강사’라고 하거나 적당히 둘러대는 것으로 나타났다. 그 이유는 예술가가 사회적으로 직업으로 받아들이지 않기 때문이며, 대학에서 취업도 잡히지 않는‘무직’으로 취급받기 때문이다. 또한 참여자들은 각기 예술노동에 대해 인식이 달랐다. 예술노동이 노동처럼 보상받아야 한다는 생각은 C가 가장 강했고 현실적으로 자신의 독자성과 시장수요를 맞춰가며 작품 판매에 적극적으로 노력하고 있다. 전업작가인 A는 작품을 적게 팔아도 그 액수에 맞게 간소하게 살고 있다. B는 예술노동을 사회적으로 ‘지원’받는 방식을 비판하고 예술가가 예술의 가치로 사회에 기여함으로써 ‘존중’을 받아야 한다고 생각한다. 이를 위해 예술가들이 예술의 공공성을 실현하고자 노력해야 한다고 보았다. In this study, I examined the perception of artist occupational identity and art labor for threewriters in the field of visual arts. As results of the study, they were found to be “creator” or “instructor” instead of identifyingthemselves as “artist” when they had to reveal their jobs socially. The reason is that artists arenot socially accepted as jobs, and they are treated as “unemployed” who do not get a job incollege. In addition, each participant had a different perception of art labor. The idea that artlabor should be compensated like labor was the strongest in C, and in reality, C is activelystriving to sell works by matching her own uniqueness and market demands. Full-time creator Alives simply according to the amount even if she sells a small number of works. B criticizes theway art labor is socially “supported” and believes that artists should be “respectful” by contributingto society as the value of art. B saw that to this end, artists should try to realize the publicity ofart.