조선시대 허난설헌에 대한 제가의 평은 시에 대한 논평, 표절과 위작시비, 와전된 기록에 대한 수정으로 정리된다. 중국까지 널리 알려져 있던 만큼 허난설헌 시는 높은 평가를 받았으나 여성의 문학 창작 활동에 대한 부정적 인식을 기반으로 표절과 위작시비나 인품에 대한 폄하도 이루어져 왔다. 따라서 시 외적인 측면에서의 부당한 평가로 인해 문학적 성취에 준하는 평가를 받지 못하였다.
연민 이가원의 『옥류산장시화』는 저자 자신의 평가에 따른 산삭이 이루어진 전통적인 시화집으로 총 787칙으로 이루어져 있다. 이 가운데 허난설헌 관련 시화는 25칙에 이르러, 여타 문인보다 많은 주목도를 보인다. 그런데 『옥류산장시화』는 증명할 수 없는 부분은 채택하지 않는 산삭의 태도를 취하는 동시에 허난설헌에 대한 부정적인 평가는 전문을 실어, 폄훼에 가까울 수 있는 정보는 누락시키고 독자가 객관적으로 판단할 수 있도록 정확한 정보를 제공한다. 이후 이 시화들은 『조선문학사』에 대부분 수용되어, 허난설헌을 평가하는 기초자료로 활용되었다. 그와 동시에 기존 오류를 교정하고 잘못된 평가를 바로잡았으며, 외적인 평가를 제거한 상태에서 허난설헌의 시풍을 고찰하였다. 생애와 작품, 기존의 평을 정리하는 것에 그친 근대 초기의 연구를 뛰어넘어 허난설헌을 시인으로 재조명하고 문학사적 위치를 자리매김한 것이다.
『옥류산장시화』는 ‘서언-본론-결어’라는 근대의 논문형식을 차용하였으나 전통적인 시화의 형식을 따르는 저작이고, 『조선문학사』는 연민의 만년에 저술된 문학사 연구가 집대성된 학술서이다. 『옥류산장시화』을 분기점으로 허난설헌의 기존 시화가 다시 정리되었고 『조선문학사』에서 실증적인 평가가 이루어졌다. 연민에 이르러 허난설헌이 재발굴되어 조선을 대표하는 시인으로서 문학적 위상이 재정립된 것이다.
This paper examines Sir Yeonmin Lee Ga-won’s acceptance of poetry related to Heo Nanseolheon, who was cited in Okryusanjangsihwa(玉溜山莊詩話) and The History of Joseon Literature(朝鮮文學史), authored by Yeonmin, and looks at opinions regarding her literary and historical status. The content of Okryusanjangsihwa is consistent with that of a traditional poetry collection. However, its format of “preface-main body-conclusion” is known as the modern thesis form. On average, each literary person covers about 5 rules, whereas in the case of Heo Nanseolheon, 25 rules are included. This part gives us a glimpse at Yeonmin’s interest in Heo Nanseolheon, and this can be seen as a distinct aspect considering that not much significance was given to female poets in the preexisting poetic history. “The History of Joseon Literature” is a scholarly book in which the literary and historical research published by Yeonmin in his later years is compiled. It contains poems related to Heo Nanseolheon, which are included in the Okryusanjangsihwa, and a more direct assessment of the same is included. The poems related to Heo Nanseolheon quoted in Okryusanjangsihwa were all reviewed by Yeonmin with an empirical attitude, and he withheld or excluded judgments about them from the poetry in cases where there was no clear evidence. This empirical attitude was also seen in The History of Joseon Literature. Yeonmin reviewed Heo Nanseolheon’s poems as “Danpung’” (morale) by including his judgments in his previous work Okryusanjangsihwa, followed up by The History of Joseon Literature, and positioned her as an outstanding poet of Joseon, regardless of her gender. Modern evaluations of Heo Nanseolheon have the limitations of being restricted to her life and works and organizing the preexisting reviews. However, as a fundamental source of data, Yeonmin organized the poetry regarding Heo Nanseolheon and reestablished that she was a prominent poet of Joseon with important literary and historical status, regardless of her gender.
This paper examines Sir Yeonmin Lee Ga-won’s acceptance of poetry related to Heo Nanseolheon, who was cited in Okryusanjangsihwa(玉溜山莊詩話) and The History of Joseon Literature(朝鮮文學史), authored by Yeonmin, and looks at opinions regarding her literary and historical status. The content of Okryusanjangsihwa is consistent with that of a traditional poetry collection. However, its format of “preface-main body-conclusion” is known as the modern thesis form. On average, each literary person covers about 5 rules, whereas in the case of Heo Nanseolheon, 25 rules are included. This part gives us a glimpse at Yeonmin’s interest in Heo Nanseolheon, and this can be seen as a distinct aspect considering that not much significance was given to female poets in the preexisting poetic history. “The History of Joseon Literature” is a scholarly book in which the literary and historical research published by Yeonmin in his later years is compiled. It contains poems related to Heo Nanseolheon, which are included in the Okryusanjangsihwa, and a more direct assessment of the same is included. The poems related to Heo Nanseolheon quoted in Okryusanjangsihwa were all reviewed by Yeonmin with an empirical attitude, and he withheld or excluded judgments about them from the poetry in cases where there was no clear evidence. This empirical attitude was also seen in The History of Joseon Literature. Yeonmin reviewed Heo Nanseolheon’s poems as “Danpung’” (morale) by including his judgments in his previous work Okryusanjangsihwa, followed up by The History of Joseon Literature, and positioned her as an outstanding poet of Joseon, regardless of her gender. Modern evaluations of Heo Nanseolheon have the limitations of being restricted to her life and works and organizing the preexisting reviews. However, as a fundamental source of data, Yeonmin organized the poetry regarding Heo Nanseolheon and reestablished that she was a prominent poet of Joseon with important literary and historical status, regardless of her gender.
