초록 열기/닫기 버튼

조선후기 秋史의 중인층제자들이 제기한 ‘有我’론과 申緯가 제기한 ‘詩中須有人’론은 청대 비평사에 주요한 쟁점이었던 ‘詩中須有人’론에 연원을 두고 있다. 명말청초 錢謙益, 黃宗羲, 吳喬등은 격심한 동란기 속에서 시 또한 역사의 증인이 되어야 한다는 詩史설을 지지하며, 작가의 신분이나 처지 등 현실적 존재를 시에 반영해야한다는 ‘詩中須有人’론을 제기하였다. 이후 趙執信은 王士禎의 神韻說을 비판하는 이론으로 정립시켰고, 翁方綱은 고증학적 관점의 현실반영론과 문학적 개성을 통일시킨 ‘詩中有我’론으로 심화시켰다. ‘시중유아’론은 妙悟說을 반대하며 言志說을 지지하는 계보를 형성하였는데, 신운설을 지지한 추사는 독창성을 중시하면서도 ‘시중유아’론을 직접 거론하지 않은 반면. 신위는 조집신의 이론을 수용하여 신운설을 극복하려는 의식을 표명하여 상반된 입장을 보였다.


The theory of "the writer exisiting in the poetry[有我論] presented by Chusa(秋史)'s disciples, especially from middle class, and the theory of the presonality existing in the poetry[詩中須有人論] presented by Shinwi(申緯) in the latter period of the Chosun Dynasty originated from a serious question in the history of criticism of Qing, i.e. the theory of the presonality existing in the poetry[詩中須有人論]. Experiencing the turbulence around late Ming(明) and early Qing(淸), Qian Qianyi (錢謙益), Huang Zongxi (黃宗羲) and Wu Qiao (吳喬) supported the theory arguing poety to be historical witness [詩史說] and they presented a theory, "the personality to be existing in the poetry"[詩中須有人論] which may allow the poetry to reflect the social position and agony of the poet. Later, Zhao Jixin(趙執信) developed this theory into a theory, while criticizing the Wang Shizhen (王士禎)'s Shenyun shuo (神韻說), and Weng Fanggang(翁方綱) explored it in depth with a philological method consequently to elaborate a theory of "the writer existing in the poetry"[詩中有我論], which was a unification of the reality in society and poet's literary identity. The theory of writer existing in the poetry[詩中有我論] caused a network of scholars who supported Yanshi shuo(言志說) and rejected Miaowu shuo(妙悟說). Chusa(秋史), while deeply agreeing with Shenyun shuo(神韻說), did not mention the theory of the writer existing in the poetry, but Sin Wi (申緯) tried to rule out Shenyun shuo(神韻說) through incorporating the theory presented by Zhao Jixin (趙執信).