Master, She Wrote: Theodora Bosanquet`s Henry James in Henry James at Work

( Ki Yoon Jang ) 미국소설학회(구 한국호손학회) 2012 미국소설 Vol.19 No.1

Henry James died almost a century ago, but he still has a great impact upon literary studies and critical theories as if alive. Recently, his presence becomes more palpable as the biographical novels about him gain a wide range of popularity. Those novels testify to what Sean Burke calls "the return of the author," or the resurrection of the Barthesian dead author through readers` re-interpretation of her or his biographical dimensions. The return of James the dead author, however, already occurred by means of his last and longest-lasting amanuensis, Theodora Bosanquet. In 1924 she wrote a memoir of James, Henry James at Work, based on her working experience as his typewriter for 10 years until he died. Though one of the earliest biographical writings about James, the memoir has not been attracting much scholarly attention except for its being a factual account of the later stage of the Master`s life and career. This essay, borrowing Burke`s insight, proposes to take the memoir as Bosanquet`s readerly attempt to re-construct James`s life and person and resuscitate his authorial being. For that purpose, the essay examines various narratorial strategies that Bosanquet employs to present a less authoritarian and more reader-sensitive image of James and to encourage her readers to conceive multiple personae of James based on their readings of the memoir.

Master, She Wrote: Theodora Bosanquet’s Henry James in Henry James at Work

장기윤 미국소설학회 2012 미국소설 Vol.19 No.1

Henry James died almost a century ago, but he still has a great impact upon literary studies and critical theories as if alive. Recently, his presence becomes more palpable as the biographical novels about him gain a wide range of popularity. Those novels testify to what Seán Burke calls “the return of the author,” or the resurrection of the Barthesian dead author through readers’ re-interpretation of her or his biographical dimensions. The return of James the dead author, however, already occurred by means of his last and longest-lasting amanuensis, Theodora Bosanquet. In 1924 she wrote a memoir of James, Henry James at Work, based on her working experience as his typewriter for 10 years until he died. Though one of the earliest biographical writings about James, the memoir has not been attracting much scholarly attention except for its being a factual account of the later stage of the Master’s life and career. This essay, borrowing Burke’s insight, proposes to take the memoir as Bosanquet’s readerly attempt to re-construct James’s life and person and resuscitate his authorial being. For that purpose, the essay examines various narratorial strategies that Bosanquet employs to present a less authoritarian and more reader-sensitive image of James and to encourage her readers to conceive multiple personae of James based on their readings of the memoir.

작가와 국적

최경도(Kyong-do Choi) 한국아메리카학회 2013 美國學論集 Vol.45 No.3

Henry James became a British citizen a year before he died in 1916. This had brought a controversial debate as to the motive of his decision to abandon his native land as well as United States citizenship. In American circles, James was criticized sharply. To many people in the U. S., James's decision was regarded as an act of disloyalty, a confirmation that James was "anti-American." However, James was thoroughly a cosmopolitan both in his life and writing. He was national in his choice of characters and subject since his characters were mostly Americans while his subject was concerned with the uniquely American experiences in Europe. James was at the same time international because the world of his novel predominantly depicts the intermingling of two different worlds on both sides of the Atlantic. As an American expatriate living in Europe, James was inevitably associated with the question of nationality. To James the question of national identity was crucial since his fiction shows a remarkable play of this issue, largely through the international theme. With their experiences in Europe, James's American characters were able to define their own national identity. James was transnational in an era when national boundaries were keenly felt to people in his age. Anticipating the cosmopolitanism of the expatriate writers in the 1920s, James performed his role as an international writer across the geopolitical boundaries. James made his readers undermine the physical and psychological conventions that define the nation as indivisible entity. After all, James's writings emphasize the human capability to learn from cultural, social, and national differences.

울슨과 제임스

최경도(Choi, Kyong-do),윤희억(Yoon, Hee-oyck) 한국외국어대학교 외국문학연구소 2007 외국문학연구 Vol.- No.26

이 글은 19세기의 미국작가 콘스탄스 페니모어 울슨과 헨리 제임스의 문학적 관계를 전기적 시각에서 규명하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 자신의 문학적 재능과 동시대의 미국 여성문학에서 그녀가 차지한 위치에도 불구하고 콘스탄스 페니모어 울슨은 미국문학에서 흔히 잊혀진 작가로 간주되고 있는데, 여기에 대한 이유는 두 가지로 설명될 수 있다. 먼저 울슨은 미국 여성문학에서 자신의 작품들을 기억될 만한 것으로 남기려는 의도적인 노력을 하지 않았으며, 또한 그녀를 특출한 작가의 대열로 올려놓을 유능한 전기 작가들이 존재하지 않았다. 작가로서 울슨의 운명은 특히 그녀와 깊은 개인적, 문학적 관계를 맺은 헨리 제임스와 구별된다. 울슨과 달리 제임스는 미국과 유럽 모두에서 널리 알려지게 되었으며, 그의 명성은 소설에서 많은 실험을 구사했던 작가로서의 업적뿐만 아니라, 그의 개인적 매력이 작용했다. 유럽에 거주하는 국적이탈의 작가로서 울슨과 제임스는 친밀한 관계를 이루었고, 이것은 두 작가 서로 간에 문학적 기법을 교환할 수 있는 호혜적 성격으로 발전되었다. 그러나 울슨의 죽음은 비평가들 사이에서 이들이 맺은 길고도 불가사의한 관계로부터 과연 어느 작가가 더 혜택을 입게 되었는가라는 논쟁을 불러 일으켰다. 여기서 울슨이 더 혜택을 입었다는 주장에도 불구하고, 전기연구에서 나온 결론은 울슨의 존재가 곧 제임스의 예술적 비전을 일깨운 경로가 되었다는 점이다. 이러한 관점에서 본다면, 울슨과 제임스의 관계에 대한 전기연구는 미국문학에서 크게 간과되었던 울슨의 문학적 위치를 새롭게 볼 수 있는 통찰을 제공한다. 예컨대, 제임스로 하여금 ‘믿을 수 없는 화자’와 같은 새로운 문학기법을 사용하도록 한 인물이 울슨이었기 때문이다. 따라서 제임스의 시각에서 울슨을 보거나 울슨의 시각에서 제임스를 보는 것은 개별 작가에 대한 연구뿐만 아니라, 이들의 문학을 전체적으로 탐색하는 데 활용될 수 있는 실험적 방법이 된다. 울슨과 제임스의 해석에 대한 유용한 접근법으로, 여기에서 시도한 전기연구는 궁극적으로 제임스와 비교하여 진정한 미국 여성작가로서 위상이 정립되어야 할 울슨을 다시 평가할 수 있는 기초를 마련한다. This paper aims to explore the literary relationship between Constance Fenimore Woolson and Henry James in the biographical perspective. Despite her literary talent and the position she occupied in the contemporary American women writings, Constance Fenimore Woolson was often regarded as a forgotten writer in American literature, and the cause for this neglection can be explained in two aspects. First, she did not strive herself to make her works memorable in American women writings. Second, there have been no major biographers who could bring her up to the level of distinctive writers. Her fate as a writer was especially differentiated from another American author who had a deep personal and literary relationship with her: Henry James. Unlike Woolson, James became widely known both in America and Europe, and his fame is attributed to his achievement as a writer who exercised many experiments in the novel as well as to his personal magnetism. As expatriate writers living in Europe, Woolson and James formed an intimate relationship that turned out to be reciprocal since both writers learned something of a literary skill from each other. The death of Woolson, however, brought about a debate among critics, which led to the controversy about which writer benefitted more from their long and mysterious relationship. Despite an argument that Woolson was the one who learned more, a conclusion from the biographical study is that she became a vehicle through which James was awakened to the vision in his art. Viewed in this respect, the biographical study of the Woolson and James relationship brings a new insight into the literary position of Woolson who was much ignored in American literature. It was Woolson who made it possible for James to adopt a new literary skill such as ‘unreliable narrator.’ To see Woolson in terms of James and to see James in terms of Woolson becomes an experimental method that can be applied not only to the study of each writer but also to the study of their work as a whole. As a useful approach to the interpretation of both Woolson and James, the biographical study intended here would further lay a foundation for the re-canonizing of Woolson in the sense that in comparison with James, her status as an authentic American woman writer needs to be rebuilt.

T. S. 엘리엇 시에 나타난 헨리 제임스의 영향:여인의 초상을 중심으로

한현숙 한국T.S.엘리엇학회 2005 T.S. 엘리엇 연구 Vol.15 No.2

This paper purports to read “Portrait of a Lady” in terms of Henry James’ influence. Unlike the influence of French Symbolist poets, H. James’s influence has not drawn many critical attentions. Eliot is greatly indebted to H. James in many ways. First of all, it is James from whom Eliot had learned that poetry ought to be as well written as prose. Also, as Eliot himself said, he was stimulated by the method to make a place real not descriptively but by something happening there and to let a situation, a relation, and an atmosphere give only what the writer wants in James’s stories. Under the inspiration of James, Eliot can cultivate his gift for dramatic verse. So, we can say the dramatic quality of Eliot’s poetry which is no less than in James’s stories, is not irrelevant to the Jamesian method. Considering such influence of James, this paper aims at comparing Eliot’s “Portrait of a Lady” and James’s The Portrait of a Lady and “The Beast in the Jungle”, in the light of the character’s failure and frustration. Especially, Eliot’s “Portrait of a Lady” and James’s “The Beast in the Jungle” portray a man who fails in having relations with a woman in common. In both of works, each man is distinctively selfish. We can investigate more concretely in what ways “the egotism of a man” is expressed and presented as a hindrance in human relations in both works.

The Cosmopolitan Interpretation of Hawthorne`s Mode of Romance in Henry James`s Novels-Centered on The Blithedale Romance and The Bostonians

( Yeon Jin Hahm ) 한국비교문학회 2012 比較文學 Vol.56 No.-

Hawthorne was of crucial importance as the only previous writer of stature James knew of who had shown how American psychological experience could be treated in imaginative literature. Hawthorne was as important to James as he had been earlier to Melville, even though the novels of James and Melville have extremely different orientations. In his critical biography Hawthorne, James makes an implicit comparison between himself and Hawthorne, whose notation of the actual world around him was vague because he was not absorbed by it, as James was. James`s relationship to Hawthorne was thus complex and many-sided and involved both close kinship and essential conflict, affinity and dissent, agreement and disavowal, the psychological chords struck by Hawthorne are sounded again by James. The individual`s selfhood has unusual importance in Hawthorne, as it does again in James. As American writers, Hawthorne and James have many similarities; their fiction, continually interested in moral problems, has an extraordinary delicacy. Especially in assimilating The Bilthedale Romance into The Bostonians, to underscore themes he shared with Hawthorne, James also made Hawthorne`s material reflect his own more worldly attitudes-his sense of the limitations of the New England mind, his concern with manners, and the possibilities of aesthetic enrichment represented for him much more by Italy than by Boston. The difference between Hawthorne`s novel and James`s, however, is the difference between Hawthorne`s “shadows and confusions” and James`s lucid social relationships, which have been made possible by exposure to a larger culture than Hawthorne had at his disposal, In conclusion, the altered form of literary traditionality reflects James`s inauguration of not just a different way of writing but a different way of thinking about the kind of work. The historical drama of James`s career, as I read it, lies in his reconstruction, eventually of the practice of the novelist`s work. Especially I suggest that in the course of James`s reorganization of influence his pride and prejudice strongly and repeatedly intervene in his consciousness and cosmopolitan mind formation. The reaction of James`s cosmopolitan intelligence upon Hawthorne`s powerfully archetypal mind eventually helps to demonstrate how the American psychological tradition came into being in the nineteenth-century.

1870년대 헨리 제임스의 영국 수용과 주간지 『런던』 - W. E. 헨리 써클의 개성주의, 『프랑스 시인과 소설가들』과 ‘미국’ 소설 -

윤미선 ( Yun Misun ) 세계문학비교학회(구 한국세계문학비교학회) 2020 世界文學比較硏究 Vol.71 No.-

본 연구는 1870년대 후반 영국의 비평 주간지로 그 존재가 잊혀진 『런던』(London, 1877-79)이 미국 소설가인 헨리 제임스(Henry James)를 누구보다 앞서 수용하고 그의 작품 세계에 영향을 끼친 과정을 탐구한다. 이 연구는 19세기 영미문학 생산에서 정기간행물이라는 매체와 이를 둘러 싼 담론 생산자들의 실천이 ‘문학’ 생산 과정에서 가지는 중요성을 널리 알리려는 연구의 일환으로, 『런던』이 독특한 이데올로기적, 미학적 실천을 통해 이후 영국 문학장이 자율적 가치를 지닌 영역으로 형성되는 과정에 큰 기여를 했다는 사실에 주목한다. ‘대항유미주의’(counter-aestheticism)적 입장이 그것이다. 제임스가 『런던』의 편집자 윌리엄 어니스트 헨리(William Ernest Henley)가 이끄는 비평가 그룹과 조우한 과정은 이들이 프랑스 문학과 소설 장르에 대한 전문성을 주장함으로써 직업적 저자 및 비평가로 정체성을 확립한 하나의 새로운 문필가 세대였음을 보여준다. 제임스의 비평집 『프랑스 시인과 소설가들』(1878)은 이 사실을 드러내는 중요한 증거로, 본 논문은 특히 제임스가 투르게네프와 발자크를 둘러싸고 헨리의 젠더 이분법적 소설관과 대립하며 자신의 리얼리즘론을 발전시켰다는 사실을 밝힌다. 결론적으로, 제임스는 기대주이자 통제의 대상이었던 ‘미국’ 소설가로서 『런던』비평가 그룹과의 경쟁 속에서 그의 초기 대표 소설들을 생산했음이 드러날 것이다. This study investigates the key role of the largely neglected Conservative weekly entitled London (1877-1879) in the British reception of the American novelist Henry James (1843-1916) in the late 1870s. The London’s editor William Ernest Henley (1849-1903) and contributors George Saintsbury (1845-1933), Andrew Lang (1844-1912), and Robert Louis Stevenson (1850-1894) belonged to a new generation of critics, like James himself, that professionalized ‘literary’ criticism as a realm distinguished from the more traditional, ‘general,’ Victorian periodical criticism. I argue that James’s rivalry with them catalyzed the production of the collection of criticism French Poets and Novelists as his first book published in London. The London critics were unusual in their attention to James for the publication of The American in the United States. However, in their gendered perspective of fiction that ultimately championed romance, James could be easily associated with aesthetes whom they found ‘feminine’ and second-rate in the lack of power in the narrative control and lack of strong individuality as the core of art. Henley showed a unique understanding of James regarding James’s Turgenev-style “impartiality” as a type of narrative mastery. Henley nevertheless also persuaded James to take on board the lesson of Balzac whom he found a genuine master among the realists for his empowering the narrative with a ‘masculine’ passion. Henley proposed, problematizing James’s authority on the European theme, that James should write a story about America to be truly masterful in his narrative world. James challenged the binary, ‘counter-aesthetic’ perspective of these London critics in his subsequent works. However, he did so by answering their demand for the “stronger” narrative by the uniquely engaged dramatization, beyond the expected measure and of the other gender, of the American character in the conflicts between the old and the new values whom Henley suggested James focus more on.

The Cosmopolitan Interpretation of Hawthorne’s Mode of Romance in Henry James’s Novels — Centered on The Blithedale Romance and The Bostonians

함연진 한국비교문학회 2012 比較文學 Vol.0 No.56

Hawthorne was of crucial importance as the only previous writer of stature James knew of who had shown how American psychological experience could be treated in imaginative literature. Hawthorne was as important to James as he had been earlier to Melville, even though the novels of James and Melville have extremely different orientations. In his critical biography Hawthorne, James makes an implicit comparison between himself and Hawthorne, whose notation of the actual world around him was vague because he was not absorbed by it, as James was. James's relationship to Hawthorne was thus complex and many-sided and involved both close kinship and essential conflict, affinity and dissent, agreement and disavowal. The psychological chords struck by Hawthorne are sounded again by James. The individual's selfhood has unusual importance in Hawthorne, as it does again in James. As American writers, Hawthorne and James have many similarities; their fiction, continually interested in moral problems, has an extraordinary delicacy. Especially in assimilating The Bilthedale Romance into The Bostonians, to underscore themes he shared with Hawthorne, James also made Hawthorne's material reflect his own more worldly attitudes—his sense of the limitations of the New England mind, his concern with manners, and the possibilities of aesthetic enrichment represented for him much more by Italy than by Boston. The difference between Hawthorne's novel and James's, however, is the difference between Hawthorne's "shadows and confusions" and James's lucid social relationships, which have been made possible by exposure to a larger culture than Hawthorne had at his disposal. In conclusion, the altered form of literary traditionality reflects James’s inauguration of not just a different way of writing but a different way of thinking about the kind of work. The historical drama of James’s career, as I read it, lies in his reconstruction, eventually of the practice of the novelist’s work. Especially I suggest that in the course of James’s reorganization of influence his pride and prejudice strongly and repeatedly intervene in his consciousness and cosmopolitan mind formation. The reaction of James's cosmopolitan intelligence upon Hawthorne's powerfully archetypal mind eventually helps to demonstrate how the American psychological tradition came into being in the nineteenth-century.

제임스 가의 문화 정체성 형성의지

김춘희 ( Choon Hee Kim ) 한국영어영문학회 2012 영어 영문학 Vol.58 No.4

This paper attempts to look at how the question of cultural identity can be discussed in terms of which "a family of the minds" as a unit can be given meaningful form of interpretation. I found its real possibility in the James family, especially in Henry James Senior, William James, and Henry James Junior since they represent important cultural context reflecting their European relationship in terms of American cultural consciousness. This research is divided in two parts; the first part of this study consisted of the elder James`s role as a source of moral aesthetic consciousness for the two children, the second part consisted of showing different aspects of inter-relationships between father and sons and between brothers in the process of identity construction. I examine different aspects of the identity formation process of William James and Henry James Junior by arguing different ways of making relationship with their father`s philosophy to illuminate how they reflect and represent American cultural consciousness, and to define the meaning of the Jamesian mind in American cultural history.

Henry James연구

최상규 공주교육대학교 초등연구원 1966 公州敎大論叢 Vol.3 No.-

.