2023/07/14

Wilfred Cantwell Smith - Wikipedia

Wilfred Cantwell Smith - Wikipedia

Wilfred Cantwell Smith

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wilfred Cantwell Smith

Born21 July 1916
TorontoOntario, Canada
Died7 February 2000 (aged 83)
TorontoOntario, Canada
Other namesW. C. Smith[1]
Spouse
Muriel Struthers
 
(m. 1939)
[2]
Children
Ecclesiastical career
ReligionChristianity (Presbyterian)
Church
Ordained1944[3]
Academic background
Alma mater
ThesisThe Azhar Journal: Analysis and Critique[5] (1948)
Doctoral advisorPhilip K. Hitti[3]
Other advisors
Influences
Academic work
DisciplineReligious studies
Sub-discipline
Institutions
Main interestsReligious pluralism
Notable worksThe Meaning and End of Religion (1961)
Influenced

Wilfred Cantwell Smith OC FRSC[15] (July 21, 1916 – February 7, 2000) was a Canadian Islamicistcomparative religion scholar,[16] and Presbyterian minister.[17] He was the founder of the Institute of Islamic Studies at McGill University in Quebec and later the director of Harvard University's Center for the Study of World Religions. The Harvard University Gazette said he was one of the field's most influential figures of the past century.[18] In his 1962 work The Meaning and End of Religion he notably questioned the modern sectarian concept of religion.[19]

Early life and career[edit]

Smith was born on 21 July 1916 in TorontoOntario, to parents Victor Arnold Smith and Sarah Cory Cantwell.[20] He was the younger brother of Arnold Smith[21] and the father of Brian Cantwell Smith.[2] He primarily received his secondary education at Upper Canada College.[6]

Smith studied at University College, Toronto,[22] receiving a Bachelor of Arts degree with honours in oriental languages circa 1938.[23] 

After his thesis was rejected by the University of Cambridge,[24] supposedly for its Marxist critique of the British Raj, he and his wife Muriel Mackenzie Struthers spent seven years in pre-independence India (1940–1946), during which he taught Indian and Islamic history at Forman Christian College in Lahore.

In 1948 he obtained a Doctor of Philosophy degree in oriental languages at Princeton University, after which he taught at McGill, founding in 1952 the university's Institute of Islamic Studies.[3] From 1964 to 1973 Smith taught at Harvard Divinity School.[25] He left Harvard for Dalhousie University in HalifaxNova Scotia, where he founded the Department of Religion.[25] He was also among the original editorial advisors of the scholarly journal Dionysius.[citation needed] In 1978 he returned to Harvard.[25] In 1979 he received an honorary doctorate from Concordia University.[26] After his retirement from Harvard in 1984,[25] he was appointed a senior research associate in the Faculty of Divinity at Trinity College, University of Toronto, in 1985.[27]

Death and legacy[edit]

Smith died on 7 February 2000 in Toronto.[17] His papers are preserved in Special Collections and Archives at the University Library at California State University, Northridge.[28]

Views on religion[edit]

In his best known and most controversial work,[citation needed] The Meaning and End of Religion: A New Approach to the Religious Traditions of Mankind (1962),[16] Smith examines the concept of "religion" in the sense of "a systematic religious entity, conceptually identifiable and characterizing a distinct community".[29] He concludes that it is a misleading term for both the practitioners and observers and it should be abandoned in favour of other concepts.[16] The reasons for the objection are that the word 'religion' is "not definable" and its noun form ('religion' as opposed to the adjectival form 'religious') "distorts reality". Moreover, the term is unique to the Western civilization; there are no terms in the languages of other civilizations that correspond to it. Smith also notes that it "begets bigotry" and can "kill piety". He regards the term as having outlived its purpose.[30]

Smith contends that the concept of religion, rather than being a universally valid category as is generally supposed, is a peculiarly European construct of recent origin. Religion, he argues, is a static concept that does not adequately address the complexity and flux of religious lives. Instead of the concept of religion, Smith proffers a new conceptual apparatus: the dynamic dialectic between cumulative tradition (all historically observable rituals, art, music, theologies, etc.) and personal faith.[31]

Smith sets out chapter by chapter to demonstrate that none of the founders or followers of the world's major religions had any understanding that they were engaging in a defined system called religion. The major exception to this rule, Smith points out, is Islam which he describes as "the most entity-like."[32] In a chapter titled "The Special Case of Islam", Smith points out that the term Islam appears in the Qur'an, making it the only religion not named in opposition to or by another tradition.[33] Other than the prophet Mani, only the prophet Muhammad was conscious of the establishment of a religion.[34] Smith points out that the Arabic language does not have a word for religion, strictly speaking: he details how the word din, customarily translated as such, differs in significant important respects from the European concept.

The terms for major world religions today, including Hinduism, Buddhism, and Shintoism, did not exist until the 19th century. Smith suggests that practitioners of any given faith do not historically come to regard what they do as religion until they have developed a degree of cultural self-regard, causing them to see their collective spiritual practices and beliefs as in some way significantly different from the other. Religion in the contemporary sense of the word is for Smith the product of both identity politics and apologetics:

One's own "religion" may be piety and faith, obedience, worship, and a vision of God. An alien "religion" is a system of beliefs or rituals, an abstract and impersonal pattern of observables.

A dialectic ensues, however. If one's own "religion" is attacked, by unbelievers who necessarily conceptualize it schematically, or all religion is, by the indifferent, one tends to leap to the defence of what is attacked, so that presently participants of a faith – especially those most involved in argument – are using the term in the same externalist and theoretical sense as their opponents. Religion as a systematic entity, as it emerged in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, is a concept of polemics and apologetics.[35]

By way of an etymological study of religion (religio, in Latin), Smith further contends that the term, which at first and for most of the centuries denoted an attitude towards a relationship between God and man,[36] has through conceptual slippage come to mean a "system of observances or beliefs",[37] a historical tradition which has been institutionalized through a process of reification. Whereas religio denoted personal pietyreligion came to refer to an abstract entity (or transcendental signifier) which, Smith says, does not exist.

He argues that the term as found in Lucretius and Cicero was internalized by the Catholic Church through Lactantius and Augustine of Hippo. During the Middle Ages it was superseded by the term faith, which Smith favours by contrast. In the Renaissance, via the Christian Platonist Marsilio Ficinoreligio becomes popular again, retaining its original emphasis on personal practice, even in John Calvin's Christianae Religionis Institutio (1536). During 17th-century debates between Catholics and Protestants, religion begins to refer to an abstract system of beliefs, especially when describing an oppositional structure. Through the Enlightenment this concept is further reified, so that by the nineteenth century G. W. F. Hegel defines religion as Begriff, "a self-subsisting transcendent idea that unfolds itself in dynamic expression in the course of ever-changing history ... something real in itself, a great entity with which man has to reckon, a something that precedes all its historical manifestation".[38]

Smith concludes by arguing that the term religion has now acquired four distinct senses:[39]

  1. personal piety (e.g. as meant by the phrase "he is more religious than he was ten years ago");
  2. an overt system of beliefs, practices and values, related to a particular community manifesting itself as the ideal religion that the theologian tries to formulate, but which he knows transcends him (e.g. 'true Christianity');
  3. an overt system of beliefs, practices and values, related to a particular community manifesting itself as the empirical phenomenon, historical and sociological (e.g. the Christianity of history);
  4. a generic summation or universal category, i.e. religion in general.

The Meaning and End of Religion remains Smith's most influential work. The anthropologist of religion and postcolonial scholar[citation needed] Talal Asad has said that the book is a modern classic and a masterpiece.[40]

Works[edit]

  • Modern Islam in India: A Social Analysis (1943, 1946, 1963), Victor Gollancz, London, ISBN 0-8364-1338-5
  • The Muslim League, 1942–1945 (1945) Minerva Book Shop, 57 p.
  • Pakistan as an Islamic State: Preliminary Draft (1954), Shaikh Muhammad Ashraf, 114 p.
  • Islam in Modern History: The tension between Faith and History in the Islamic World (1957), Princeton University Press 1977 paperback: ISBN 0-691-01991-6
  • The Meaning and End of Religion: A New Approach to the Religious Traditions of Mankind (Macmillan, 1962), Fortress Press 1991 paperback: ISBN 0-8006-2475-0
  • The Faith of Other Men (1963), Dutton, ISBN 0-453-00004-5. from seven CBC Radio talks
  • Questions of Religious Truth (1967), Scribner
  • Religious Diversity: Essays (1976), HarperCollins paperback: ISBN 0-06-067464-4
  • Belief and History (1977), University of Virginia Press 1986 paperback: ISBN 0-8139-1086-2
  • On Understanding Islam: Selected Studies editor, (1981), The Hague: Mouton Publishers: ISBN 90-279-3448-7, Walter De Gruyter Inc. hardcover: ISBN 90-279-3448-7, paperback: ISBN 3-11-010020-7, 2000 reprint: ISBN 3-11-013498-5
  • Scripture: Issues as Seen by a Comparative Religionist (1985) Claremont Graduate School, 22 p., no ISBN
  • Towards a World Theology: Faith and the Comparative History of Religion (1989) Macmillan paperback: ISBN 0-333-52272-9, Orbis Books 1990 paperback: ISBN 0-88344-646-4
  • What Is Scripture? A Comparative Approach, Fortress Press 1993: ISBN 0-8006-2608-7
  • Patterns of Faith Around the World, Oneworld Publications 1998: ISBN 1-85168-164-7
  • Faith and Belief, Princeton University Press 1979: ISBN 0-691-02040-X, Oneworld Publications 1998: ISBN 1-85168-165-5
  • Believing, Oneworld Publications 1998: ISBN 1-85168-166-3
  • Wilfred Cantwell Smith Reader (2001), Kenneth Cracknell editor, Oneworld Publications, ISBN 1-85168-249-X
  • "Wilfred Cantwell Smith. A Chronological Bibliography", compiled by Russell T. McCutcheon, in Michel Despland, Gerard Vallée (eds.), Religion in History. The Word, the Idea, the Reality, Waterloo, Ontario, Wilfrid Laurier University Press 1992, pp. 243–252.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

Footnotes[edit]

  1. ^ Asad 2001, p. 205.
  2. Jump up to:a b c Ferahian 1997, p. 27.
  3. Jump up to:a b c d Ferahian 1997, p. 28.
  4. ^ Ferahian 1997, p. 33.
  5. ^ Ferahian 1997, p. 28; Stevens 1985, p. 10.
  6. Jump up to:a b Cameron 1997, p. 10.
  7. ^ Cameron 1997, pp. 10, 35.
  8. ^ Cameron 1997, pp. 35, 38.
  9. ^ Cameron 1997, pp. 32, 38.
  10. ^ Cameron 1997, p. 14.
  11. ^ Cameron 1997, pp. 23, 38.
  12. ^ Cameron 1997, pp. 28, 38.
  13. ^ Eck 2017, pp. 22–23.
  14. ^ Bhargava, Rajeev (29 November 2016). "How the Secular Diversity of India Informed the Philosophy of Charles Taylor"Newslaundry. Retrieved 3 November 2020.
  15. ^ "Deaths". The Globe and Mail. Toronto. 9 February 2000. p. A18.
  16. Jump up to:a b c Fallers 1967, p. 120.
  17. Jump up to:a b Shook 2016, p. 905.
  18. ^ Putnam, HilaryEck, Diana; Carman, John; Tu Wei-Ming; Graham, William (29 November 2001). "Wilfred Cantwell Smith: In Memoriam"Harvard University Gazette. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University. Archived from the original on 7 October 2009. Retrieved 4 February 2010.
  19. ^ Smith 1991.
  20. ^ Ferahian 1997, p. 27; Kessler 2012, p. 148.
  21. ^ Graham 2017, p. 86.
  22. ^ Cameron 1997, p. 21.
  23. ^ Cameron 1997, p. 10; Ferahian 1997, p. 27; Stevens 1985, p. 10.
  24. ^ Aitken & Sharma 2017, p. 1.
  25. Jump up to:a b c d Petersen 2014, p. 94.
  26. ^ Davis, Charles (1979). "Honorary Degree Citation – Wilfred Cantwell Smith". Montreal: Concordia University. Archived from the original on 2 October 2015. Retrieved 11 April 2016.
  27. ^ Aitken & Sharma 2017, p. 2.
  28. ^ "Guide to the Wilfred Cantwell Smith Papers" (PDF). Online Archive of California. 2020. Retrieved 14 November 2022.
  29. ^ Smith, Wilfred Cantwell (1962). The Meaning and End of Religion: A New Approach to the Religious Traditions of Mankind. New York: Macmillan. p. 119. Quoted in Fallers 1967, p. 120.
  30. ^ Rahbar 1964, pp. 275–276.
  31. ^ Smith 1991, p. 194.
  32. ^ Smith 1991, p. 85.
  33. ^ Smith 1991, p. 80.
  34. ^ Smith 1991, p. 106.
  35. ^ Smith 1991, p. 43.
  36. ^ Smith 1991, p. 26.
  37. ^ Smith 1991, p. 29.
  38. ^ Smith 1991, p. 47.
  39. ^ Smith 1991, pp. 48–49.
  40. ^ Asad 2001, pp. 205–206.

Bibliography[edit]

Further reading[edit]

  • Bae, Kuk-Won (2003). Homo Fidei: A Critical Understanding of Faith in the Writings of Wilfred Cantwell Smith and Its Implications for the Study of Religion. New York: Peter Lang. ISBN 978-0-8204-5112-1.
  • Gilkey, Langdon (1981). "A Theological Voyage with Wilfred Cantwell Smith". Religious Studies Review7 (4): 298–306. doi:10.1111/j.1748-0922.1981.tb00185.xISSN 1748-0922.
  • Hughes, Edward J. (1986). Wilfred Cantwell Smith: A Theology for the World. London: SCM Press. ISBN 978-0-334-02333-3.
  • Mæland, Bård (2003). Rewarding Encounters: Islam and the Comparative Theologies of Kenneth Cragg and Wilfred Cantwell Smith. London: Melisende. ISBN 978-1-901764-24-6.

External links[edit]

The Meaning and End of Religion : Smith, Wilfred Cantwell

The Meaning and End of Religion : Smith, Wilfred Cantwell: Amazon.com.au: Books

https://archive.org/details/meaningendofreli0000smit/page/n7/mode/2up




The Meaning and End of Religion Paperback – 1 October 1990
by Wilfred Cantwell Smith (Author)
4.3 out of 5 stars 26 ratings

Wilfred Cantwell Smith, maintained in this vastly important work that Westerners have misperceived religious life by making "religion" into one thing. He shows the inadequacy of "religion" to capture the living, endlessly variable ways and traditions in which religious faith presents itself in the world.

Report incorrect product information.


Print length

356 pages
Language

English
Publisher

AUGSBURG BOOKS
Publication date

1 October 1990


Product description

From the Publisher
Wilfred Cantwell Smith is professor Emeritus of the Comparative History of Religion, Harvard University, where he also served for nine years as Director of the Center for the Study of World Religions and then as chair of the Committee on the Study of Religion.
About the Author
Wilfred Cantwell Smith is professor Emeritus of the Comparative History of Religion, Harvard University, where he also served for nine years as Director of the Center for the Study of World Religions and then as chair of the Committee on the Study of Religion.

Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ 0800624750
Publisher ‏ : ‎ AUGSBURG BOOKS (1 October 1990)
Language ‏ : ‎ English
Paperback ‏ : ‎ 356 pages
ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 9780800624750
ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-0800624750
Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 14 x 2.02 x 21.6 cmBest Sellers Rank: 1,084,426 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)6,327 in Philosophy of Religion
32,035 in Theology (Books)
966,049 in Textbooks & Study GuidesCustomer Reviews:
4.3 out of 5 stars 26 ratings





Top reviews

Top reviews from Australia

There are 0 reviews and 0 ratings from Australia


Top reviews from other countries

Jeff
5.0 out of 5 stars wonderful bookReviewed in Canada 🇨🇦 on 11 August 2018
Verified Purchase

A thoroughly researched and well- written book with no bias( as it should be) would recommended it if you are interested in theology.
Report

John in Orlando
4.0 out of 5 stars Dated, but essential reading for those interested in the problem of definitionReviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on 11 July 2011
Verified Purchase

This classic work is a study of the evolution of "religion" as a reified, essentialist concept in modern intellectual history. Religion, as Cantwell Smith persuasively argues, is--when understood either as designating an absolute "thing" in human experience ("religion in general") or as indicating a particular instantiation of that thing ("the Christian religion" or "the Buddhist religion")--purely a modern intellectualist construct, one that has no parallel in pre-modern Western thought or in the ideas of non-Western cultures that have not come under decisive Western influence. Cantwell Smith further argues that the term "religion" and the concept that it communicates create barriers to true scholarly understanding of human religiousness.

The methodology proposed by Cantwell Smith involves recognizing what we have called "religions" as being, in fact, nexuses of "cumulative traditions" (the historically-observable data of religious life in history--artworks, buildings, rituals, communities) and "faith" (the inner encounter between the individual and what Cantwell Smith calls "transcendence"--presumably comparable to Otto's Heilige or Eliade's "the sacred," and similarly susceptible to the charge that it is simply a smuggled-in God-concept).

The Meaning and End of Religion is now nearly half a century old, and it shows its age. While the historical survey is very compelling, and the case Cantwell Smith makes in this portion of the book is persuasive, much of the rest of the work takes a decisively theological turn that reveals the author's largely uncritical mid-twentieth-century liberal-Protestant worldview. When Cantwell Smith writes that "Men of different religious communities are going to have to collaborate to construct jointly and deliberately the kind of world of which men of different religious communities can jointly approve, as well as one in which they can jointly participate" (location 2421 in the Kindle edition), it's hard for this not to sound like the culturally-imperialist fantasy of white, affluent, first-world liberals like the author.

In spite of these reservations, The Meaning and End of Religion is a work of real erudition and one which has helped to establish important themes in the methodological and theoretical study of religion over the past five decades.
Read less

20 people found this helpfulReport

Don Burger
5.0 out of 5 stars A classic of Spiritual Thought.Reviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on 14 December 2013
Verified Purchase

It is not surprising that this book, THE MEANING AND END of RELIGION, has become an authoratative source for students and scholars in their study of religion and spiritual matters.

Because of the limited, restricted and narrowing thought that is imposed upon us by embracing our own religion, whether it is Christian, Hindu, Baptist, Lutheran, or any other sect the author suggests that we discontinue using the term "religion" itself, and replace it with a Universal conception of God that embraces all of humanity, not of just one separate religious sect. The author questions why the loving father of all humankind favors only the Christians,the Methodists, the Baptists, the Jews, or any others, as his "chosen few".

The importance of learning about the History of other religions, as well as our own, is strongly recommended by the author. The chapter "The Special Case of Islam" opened my eyes to my own narrow, prejudiced conception of "those other guys".

The chapter on "Faith" is thoughtful enough to have been written in a book by itself.

"THE MEANING AND THE END OF RELIGION" is a classic in the area of spiritual thought. It will undoubtedly remain a classic for many years to come.
Read less

7 people found this helpfulReport

John Randall
4.0 out of 5 stars It's not necessarily great recreational readingReviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on 4 June 2015
Verified Purchase

Used this for a World Religions class. It was a bit heavy, but really stresses the failure of Western cultures to recognize religions of other cultures accurately or fairly. It's not necessarily great recreational reading, but for those seeking to have a clearer perspective about religions of non-western cultures, it is an important prerequisite for religious studies. In a nutshell, Smith's findings lead to the truth that we really cannot understand another culture's religion since we are not living in that culture or practicing that religion. It helps one to gain a real sensitivity to other culture's religious practices and avoid harsh judgments. I recommend it for the world religions student.

6 people found this helpfulReport

George M. Plasterer
5.0 out of 5 stars Classic workReviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on 3 January 2015
Verified Purchase

I have found the book quite helpful, especially as he separates faith commitment from cumulative faith traditions. He is able to show that "religion" has a mixed history and can hardly find definition, so he breaks his study in this way. It balances the personal dimension of all faith traditions with the corporate and historical nature of cumulative faith traditions. His insight that given the historical nature of the tradition, even within the tradition, what would be a heresy in the past may be quite acceptable today is quite good.

3 people found this helpfulReport
See all reviews

2023/07/13

Taechang Kim | 일본인의 종교의식

(2) Taechang Kim | Facebook



Taechang Kim
soopnetSdrtl92aihm75l15g1m7ic181ia0m1788798h4it6950tif5i211m ·



All reactions:5柳生真 and 4 others

Taechang Kim

著者の 'はじめに' の次の文言に共感するところがあって、読み終えた. 更ななる思考発展に示唆を受けた.

"宗教に関する書物を読む際には、各著者が最終的にどのようなスタンスをとっているのか、これを承知しておくのも大切なことです.
広い意味での宗教は、知識のみならず、死生観、人生観、世界観、宇宙観を含むからです.

 《日本人はなぜ無宗教なのか》(ちくま新書、1996年)の著者阿満利麿は1939年生まれの日本思想史専攻の大学教授(執筆当時)です. 
《無宗教こそ日本人の宗教である》(角川ONEテーマ21、2009年) の著者島田裕巳は、1953年生まれの宗教学専攻の大学教授(執筆当時) であり、本書を通して無宗教の立場を表明しています. ただしこの <無宗教> の意味内容は、最後まで明らかにされず、それを読み解くには、少し忍耐が必要です. 

最終的には《般若心経》の世界に近づいているようです. 三番目に取り上げる《日本の宗教はどこへいくのか》(角川選書、2011年)の著者山折哲雄は、1931年生まれの宗教学者であり、日本的仏教の立場に立っています. そしてこれらを読み解こうとしている筆者は、キリスト教に属しています.
したがってゆっくり読むならば、本書を通じて、無宗教、神道、仏教、儒教、そしてキリスト教の世界観の異同を味わうことができるはずです."
( p. 11 )

"종교에 관한 책을 읽을 때는 각 저자가 궁극적으로 어떤 자세를 취하고 있는지 이것을 알고 있는 것도 중요하다. 넓은 의미에서의 종교는 지식뿐만 아니라 , 사생관, 인생관, 세계관, 우주관을 포함하기 때문입니다. 

"일본인은 왜 무종교인가" (글쓰기 당시)입니다. 《무종교야말로 일본인의 종교이다》(카도카와 ONE 테마 21, 2009년)의 저자 시마다 유히토는, 1953년생의 종교학 전공의 대학 교수(집필 당시)이며, 본서 를 통해 무종교의 입장을 표명하고 있습니다. 

그러나 이 [무종교>의 의미 내용은 끝까지 밝혀지지 않고 그것을 읽으려면 조금 인내가 필요합니다.

궁극적으로 '반약 심경'의 세계에 접근하는 것 같습니다.

세 번째로 다루는 "일본 종교는 어디로 갈 것인가"(카도 카와 선서, 2011)의 저자 야마오리 테츠오는 1931 년생의 종교 학자이며 일본 불교의 입장에 서 있습니다.
그리고 이것을 읽으려고하는 필자는 기독교에 속합니다.
따라서 천천히 읽으면이 책을 통해 무종교, 신도, 불교, 유교 및 기독교 세계관의 변화를 맛볼 수 있어야합니다. "(p. 11)

2023/07/12

시 (영화) - 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전

시 (영화) - 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전

시 (영화)

위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전.

Picto infobox cinema.png

Poetry
영화 시 포스터.jpg
영화 시 포스터
감독이창동
각본이창동
제작이준동
이동하
출연윤정희
김희라
안내상
촬영김현석
편집김현
제작사파인 하우스 필름
개봉일
  • 2010년 5월 13일
시간2시간 19분
국가대한민국의 기 대한민국
언어한국어

》(Poetry)는 이창동 감독이 5번째로 연출한, 2010년 개봉된 영화다. 뛰어난 작품성으로 인해 대한민국과 세계적으로 17개의 상을 수상하였으나, 관객수는 22만에 그쳤다.[1]

줄거리[편집]

양미자는 중학생 외손자 종욱과 같이 살고 있는 60대 중반의 여성이다. 국가 보조금을 받아 생활하고 있을 정도로 형편이 어려우며, 중풍이 걸린 강 노인의 수발을 들어주는 것으로 돈을 벌고 있는 것이 수입의 전부이다.

미자는 근처 문화센터에서 시를 쓰는 수업을 모집하는 것을 보고 수업을 듣기 시작한다. 강사인 시인 김용탁은 시를 쓰는 것은 사물을 제대로 보는 것이라면서, 수강자들에게 마지막 수업 날까지 시를 한 편씩 써오라고 부탁한다. 부산에 있는 딸은 전화로 미자에게 ‘꽃을 좋아하고, 엉뚱한 소리를 잘 하기 때문에’ 미자가 시인 같다고 말한다. 미자는 작은 노트를 가지고 다니면서 말이 떠오를 때마다 적어두기 시작한다.

어느 날, 미자는 외손자 종욱이 친구 5명과 함께 몇 달에 걸쳐 같은 학교 여학생 성폭행에 가담했으며, 며칠 전 강에 투신자살한 여중생이 그 피해자였음을 알게 된다. 친구 다섯 명의 아버지들은 이 사건이 자신들과 선생 몇 명밖에 모르는 일이므로, ‘아이들의 미래를 위해’ 피해자의 홀어머니와 합의를 하고 이 사실을 묻어버리자고 회의를 하지만, 500만원씩을 부담해야 한다는 말에 미자는 딴청을 피운다.

미자는 피해자인 희진에게 죄책감을 느끼고 외손자 종욱을 다그치려고 하지만, 종욱은 자신의 잘못으로부터 도피하려고만 하고 외할머니를 무시한다. 더군다나 스스로 몸도 씻지 못하는 강 노인이 미자에게 성관계를 요구하자, 화가 난 미자는 일을 그만둔다.

미자는 큰 병원에서 알츠하이머 진단을 받는다. 딸과 통화하면서, 미자는 돈에 대한 것도 치매에 대한 것도 말을 못 한다. 학부모들이 미자에게 나이든 어머니로서 희진 어머니와 합의를 보라고 떠맡겨지지만, 정작 희진 어머니와 만나자 그런 얘기를 해야 한다는 사실 자체를 잊어버리고 농사에 관한 잡담만 하다가, 뒤돌아서서 그것을 잊어버렸다는 사실을 떠올리고는 두려워한다. 미자는 기범의 아버지에게 합의금으로 쓸 500만원을 빌려보려고 하지만 거절당한다. 절망한 미자는 비를 맞은 모습으로 강 노인의 집으로 가서 강 노인과 관계를 가진다.

학부모들은 합의를 마무리하기 위해 모인다. 돈을 아직 준비하지 못한 미자는 희진 어머니의 얼굴과 다시 마주치자 자리에서 바로 나가서, 강 노인의 집에 들어가 강 노인의 가족이 모인 자리에서 글을 써서 500만원을 달라고 부탁한다. 받아낸 500만원을 기범 아버지에게 건내면서, 미자는 신고를 하지 않으면 가해자 학생들이 처벌을 받지 않는다는 얘기를 듣는다.

미자는 종욱에게 비싼 음식을 사주고, 다음 날에 엄마가 오니까 용모를 단정히 해야 한다며 몸을 씻게 하고 손발톱을 깎아준다. 그날 밤 둘이 밖에서 배드민턴을 치고 있을 때 경찰이 찾아와 종욱을 데려가고, 대신 시 낭송회에서 안면이 있는 다른 경찰이 미자의 배드민턴 상대가 되어 준다.

다음 날, 시 강좌 마지막 시간에 미자는 꽃다발과 시 한 편을 남겨놓고 사라진다. 시의 제목은 자살한 희진의 세례명을 딴 ‘아녜스의 노래’이고, 처음엔 미자의 목소리로, 그 뒤로는 희진의 목소리로 낭송이 된다. 희진이 강에 몸을 던지기 전 강물을 내려다보는 장면으로 영화가 끝난다.

캐스팅[편집]

제작[편집]

이 영화는 이창동 감독과는 영화 《오아시스》로 연관이 있는 유니 코리아가 투자와 펀딩을 맡으며 이 감독 자신의 제작사 파인 하우스필름에서 제작하였다.

뒷얘기[편집]

  • 영화의 마지막에 등장하는 시 '아네스의 노래'는 노무현 전 대통령이 서거할 당시 이창동이 쓴 각본으로 노무현 전 대통령에게 보내는 것이 아니냐는 질문이 제기되기도 했다. 이창동은 그 당시 충격과 상황을 이야기 하며 "부정할 수 없다"고 말했다.[2] 이창동은 칸 영화제 각본상을 수상하고 나서 노무현 전 대통령의 묘소에 참배를 하였다.[3]
  • 뉴욕타임스는 칸 영화제 각본상을 수상한 《시》에 대해서 비중있게 보도했다. 뉴욕타임스는 극중 미자가 문학 교실에서 시를 가르치는 강사와의 대화를 통해 "시는 작가의 치열한 자기 탐구에서 나오는 것"이라고 설명했다.[4]
  • 《시》는 2010년 대한민국 영화인들이 뽑은 최고의 작품 1위로 선정됐다. 명지대 김영진 교수는 "예술을 한다는 것이 아름다움과 기쁨뿐만 아니라 고통까지 껴안을 수 있는가라는 문제에 대해 지극한 탐색을 하는 영화"라고 평가했다.[5]
  • 《시》는 2010년 대한민국 영화 담당 기자들이 뽑은 최고의 영화로도 선정됐다.[6]
  • 대한민국 영화진흥위원회는 해외 영화제에서 수상할만한 작품에 대해 제작비를 지원하는 사업을 하고 있는데, 지원할 영화를 선정하는 과정에서 《시》가 심사위원 조희문으로부터 0점을 받아 논란을 불러일으켰다. 규정에 의하면 최하점수는 0점을 줄 수없도록 되어 있었으며, 조희문은 또한 이전에도 알 수 없는 이유로 0점을 준 적이 있었다. 조희문의 0점 채점으로 인해 《시》는 영진위의 지원을 받지 못하게 되었다. 그럼에도 조희문은 영진위에서 계속 활동하고 있다. 《시》는 칸 영화제에서 각본상을 수상했음에도 조희문은 자신의 채점에 대한 잘못을 인식하지 못하고 있었으며, 이창동이 노무현 정부에서 장관직을 수행했다는 사실 등 정치적인 이유가 고려된것이 아니냐는 의혹이 제기되기도 했다.[7]또한 영진위는 이창동을 지원하지 않기 위해 의도적으로 규정을 바꾼 정황도 드러났다.[8] 이때문에 영진위에 대한 신뢰는 날로 하락하고 있다.[9]프랑스에서도 개봉한 《시》는 프랑스에서 더 많은 관심을 받고있다. 《르 몽드》지는 "이 영화가 한국영화진흥위원회의 시나리오 평가에서 0점을 맞았으나 칸 국제영화제에서는 각본상을 받았다"며 영진위를 비꼬았다.[10]
  • 2010년 《시》는 프랑스에서도 개봉했다. 《밀양》의 첫날 관객수인 1,000여명보다 두 배 이상 많은 2,782명의 관객수를 기록했다.[11]

수상[편집]

각주[편집]

  1.  이창동 감독 '시' 17번째 수상 스포츠조선 2011년 3월 28일
  2.  이창동의 '시'中 시, "노무현 생각하고 쓴 것? 부인할 순 없다 마이데일리 2010년 5월 27일
  3.  이창동 감독 "故 노무현 전 대통령 묘역 참배, 도리 다하기 위해서" osen 2010년
  4.  이창동 윤정희의 ‘시’ NYT 대서특필 뉴시스
  5.  영화, 올 최고의 작품은 이창동 감독의 '시' 한국일보 2010년 12월 13일
  6.  기자들이 뽑은 올해의 영화, 이창동 감독의 '시' 한국경제 2011년 1월 27일
  7.  영화진흥위원회는 아는가 영화인들이 왜 불신하는지 중앙일보 2010년 6월 18일
  8.  빗나간 '0'점 논란 한국일보 2010년 6월 16일
  9.  조희문 영진위원장 버티기 ‘믿는 구석’ 있나 경향신문 2010년 6월 14일
  10.  지금 프랑스는 이창동의 ‘시’를 읊는다 헤럴드경제 2010년 8월 26일
  11.  이창동의 '시', 한국 보다 프랑스서 '터졌다' osen 2010년 8월 27일
  12.  이창동 감독 '시', 칸 영화제 각본상 수상 MBC
  13.  시' 이창동 감독, 대종상영화제 시나리오상 수상 스포츠투데이
  14.  이창동 '시', 대한민국영화대상 최우수작품상..3관왕 영예 OSEN
  15.  이창동 감독 `시` 프리부르국제영화제 `대상` 이데일리
  16.  2010년 영화 시상식에 무슨 일이? 세계일보
  17.  윤정희·수애, 청룡영화상 여우주연상 공동수상 스타뉴스
  18.  시' 이창동 감독, 아태영화상 감독상 수상 아시아경제
  19.  이창동 '시', 아시안필름어워드 2관왕(종합) 연합뉴스

외부 링크[편집]


===


===