문학 비평에서 동일성과 차이의 쟁점에 관한 연구

초록

I analyze historical criticism, reception aesthetics, and sociological poetics in the framework of identity and difference. Although it synthesizes subjectivity and objectivity, historical criticism constructs the author’s identity, deduces the author’s intention accordingly, and identifies it with the meaning of the work. Furthermore, it identifies the background and social context of the work’s creation, and the reader’s reaction or reception. Thus, this criticism erases the differences between the infinite aesthetic experiences and meanings that readers receive, interpret, appreciate, and feel. From now on, historical criticism needs to broaden the horizon of interpretation by considering authors with different identities that change depending on the society of the time, the other, the context, and the reader. Reception aesthetics deconstructs the author’s identity free from the author’s constraints. It restores the myriad differences readers realize in their interpretations and aesthetic experiences through the fusion of horizons. However, reception aesthetics returns the reader to the territory of identity by positing the notion of implied reader, informed reader, or super reader. Reception aesthetics should focus more on empowering all readers equally and on the fusion of horizons through the reader’s constant hermeneutic circulation. Sociological poetics deconstructs the identities of the author and reader. This theory seeks to reveal the social nature of literature from an internal analysis of texts, seeking a dialogue between author and reader, text and socio-cultural context, and allowing different characters to speak in different voices according to their worldviews, and chronotopes. However, while it seeks dialogue, it is also substantive in its thinking, giving room for analysis, interpretation, and aesthetic evaluation to be reduced to identity. In the 21st century, sociological poetics should be based on the idea that goes beyond both dichotomies and substantialism, such as Hwaejaeng Buddhist thought, and oriented toward the difference while bringing together author and reader, author and context, theory, and textual criticism into one. In that case, it will be a theory that truly synthesizes formalist and Marxist criticism.

키워드