Confucius: The Man and the Myth 1949 by H G Creel
---
1] 1,000 단어 요점+평론 써주세요.
2] 1949년에 써진 이 책이 현재에 읽을 가치가 있을까요?
Herrlee G. Creel | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Born | January 19, 1905 Chicago, Illinois, United States | ||
| Died | June 1, 1994 (aged 89) Palos Park, Illinois, United States | ||
| Alma mater | University of Chicago | ||
| Scientific career | |||
| Fields | Chinese philosophy, history | ||
| Institutions | University of Chicago | ||
| Chinese name | |||
| Traditional Chinese | 顧理雅 | ||
| Simplified Chinese | 顾理雅 | ||
| |||
Herrlee Glessner Creel (January 19, 1905 – June 1, 1994) was an American Sinologist and philosopher who specialized in Chinese philosophy and history, and was a professor of Chinese at the University of Chicago for nearly 40 years. On his retirement, Creel was praised by his colleagues as an innovative pioneer on early Chinese civilization and as one who could write both for specialists and for the interested general public with cogency, lucidity, and grace.[1]
Herrlee G. Creel was born on January 19, 1905, in Chicago, Illinois. He attended the University of Chicago as an undergraduate, graduating with a Ph.B. degree in 1926. He then continued on at Chicago as a graduate student studying Chinese philosophy, earning an AM in 1927, followed by a PhD in 1929 with a dissertation entitled "Sinism: A Study of the Evolution of the Chinese World-view".[2] He began his postdoctoral career as an assistant professor of psychology at Lombard College from 1929 to 1930. He was awarded fellowships by the American Council of Learned Societies (1930–1933), the Harvard-Yenching Institute (1931–1935) and the Rockefeller Foundation (1936, 1945 –1946). In 1936 he accepted a post at the University of Chicago, where he was an instructor in Chinese history and language until he was appointed assistant professor of early Chinese literature and institutions in 1937.
Creel was one of the founders of the university's Far Eastern studies program in the 1930s and had a major role in building its Far Eastern Library. He ordered some 5,000 books a year from dealers in China, then, in 1939, with support from the Rockefeller Foundation he returned to China, then in the grips of the Second Sino-Japanese War and the city of Beiping (Beijing) was occupied by the Japanese Army. He bought more than 75,000 volumes for the library, especially those dealing with the pre-modern period. [3]
Creel was promoted to the rank of associate professor in 1941 and full Professor in 1949. He served as a Lieutenant Colonel of military intelligence in the United States Army from 1943 to 1945 during the Second World War. He remained as a professor until 1964, when he became the Martin A. Ryerson Distinguished Service Professor of Chinese History until 1974.
Creel was a member of the Committee on Chinese Studies of the American Council of Learned Societies, a member of its Committee on Far Eastern Studies, and the President of the American Oriental Society. He was also a member of the Association for Asian Studies as well as a member of the American Philosophical Society. The most influential of Creel’s books include The Birth of China (1936), the first detailed account of the significance of the archaeological excavations at Anyang, which quickly attracted global interest; Studies in Early Chinese Culture (1937) which was an influential collection of monographic essays; Literary Chinese by the Inductive Method, vols. I–III (1938–52), a groundbreaking and controversial attempt to teach literary Chinese through carefully glossed excerpts of standard classical texts; Newspaper Chinese by the Inductive Method (1943), an effort to apply identical pedagogical techniques to the analysis of Chinese newspapers; Confucius, the Man and the Myth (1949), a critical analysis of the philosopher Confucius; Chinese Thought from Confucius to Mao Tse-tung (1953), a survey of Chinese thought; The Origins of Statecraft in China, Vol. 1: The Western Chou Empire (University of Chicago Press, 1970), a judicial account of the polity of the Western Zhou dynasty; What is Taoism? and Other Studies in Chinese Cultural History (University of Chicago Press, 1970) and Shen Pu-hai: A Chinese Political Philosophy of the Fourth Century B.C. (1974), a monograph on Shen Buhai, an early Chinese specialist on administrative technique.
He is especially known for Confucius: The Man and the Myth (1949), which argued that Confucius had been misunderstood because legend had obscured the facts of his life and his ideas.
Creel held that Confucius was a reformer and an individualist, as well as a democratic and revolutionary teacher.[3]
From the start of his career in the 1930s, Creel was an outspoken proponent of the theory that Chinese characters are inherently ideographic in nature.[4]
Creel was opposed by sinologists Peter A. Boodberg and Paul Pelliot, who believed that phonetic principles played a large role in the early history of Chinese characters.[5] The debate has continued many decades later without either side being able to discredit the other.[6]
Creel died at his home in Palos Park, Illinois, after a long illness, on June 1, 1994, at the age of 89.

H. G. Creel의 <Confucius: The Man and the Myth>(1949)은 제목 그대로,
“성인(聖人)으로 신격화된 공자”가 아니라 “춘추시대의 한 인간·교사·정치사상가로서의 공자”를 복원하겠다는 야심찬 기획입니다. 핵심 전략은 두 가지입니다.
(1) 공자에 관한 전승(사마천의 <사기> 등)과 후대의 성인화 서사를 그대로 믿지 않고,
(2) 상대적으로 ‘가까운’ 자료(특히 <논어>)를 어떻게 읽어야 하는지—진위, 층위, 편집의 흔적—를 따져서, 공자와 초기 유가 공동체의 현실적인 윤곽을 잡는 것입니다.
책의 구성 자체가 이 목표를 드러내는데,
그리고 <논어의 진위>라는 부록으로 “공자의 사상과 공자 이후의 역사”를 한 흐름으로 묶습니다. Routledge+1
이 책에서 가장 논쟁적인 대목은 Creel이 그려내는 공자의 성격입니다.
그는 공자를 “보수적 전통주의의 상징”이라기보다, 당시의 예(禮)와 질서를 재해석해 사회를 다시 세우려는 <개혁가>로 읽고, 개인의 수양과 학습을 강조하는 <개인주의적> 면모를 크게 부각합니다.
또한 공자의 교육을 특정 혈통의 특권이 아니라 “배울 의지가 있는 사람”에게 열려 있는 것으로 보고(물론 역사적 현실은 복잡하지만), 공자의 정치관도 단순한 왕권 옹호가 아니라 “도덕과 책임을 지는 통치”를 통해 공동체의 정당성을 세우려는 시도로 해석합니다.
이런 방향에서 Creel은 공자의 이미지를 상당히 “근대적”으로 번역해 제시합니다.
실제로 Creel이 공자를 <민주적·혁명적 교사>에 가깝게 읽었다는 평가는 그의 학문적 ‘스타일과 유산’으로 널리 회자됩니다. en.wikipedia.org+1
그 연장선에서 유명한 장이 <Confucianism and Western Democracy>입니다. 여기서 Creel은 공자의 정치·윤리적 직관이 서구의 공화주의·민주주의적 이상과 접점이 있다고 강하게 주장합니다(예: 덕치, 공공선, 권력의 도덕적 정당화).
이 논지는 “공자를 낯선 동양 성인”이 아니라 “현대 정치의 대화 상대”로 만들려는 의도와 맞물리며, 당대(1949년) 미국 독자층에게는 상당히 설득력 있게 들릴 수 있습니다. eNotes+1