이문열 소설의 식민과 탈식민 연구 : 『시인』, 『영웅시대』, 『변경』을 중심으로 = (The) research of colonialism and anti-colonialism of Lee Moon Yeol's novels : in the center of Poet, The Age of Hero, and The Border

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This thesis is based on the critical mind that 'The writer should be elucidated by the work.' The major premise of the thesis is that there is no work like those of Lee Moon yeol whose works are misunderstood by the external logics of the literature. The background of his works being presented not on the space of literature but on the journal is the tragic of Korean history whose people risk their lives on the ideology. More or less these days Korean society is not held by ideology. However, in the sense that the literature of Lee Moon yeol started from his father and for himself, the existence of father is after all ideology. To neglect the part of ideology in Lee's literature make it unable to catch hold of his true character. In this point of the time, it is needed to analyse Lee's ideology in the field of the literature.
This thesis is based on the three related novels, which are Poet-The age of Hero-Border and put this diagram into three generations 'Grandfather→father→children' and 'individual→family→nation and history' analysing their ideological reponses. This thesis focused on that each step is repeated as 'colonialism→anti-colonialism→reversion of colonialism' identically. The story about people who lost their elitism by absurd power, the continuity of wondering, the dualism of every relationships as the ruling and the ruled. All of these supports that three novels can be elucidated by 'ruling→ruled→reversion of ruling relationship,' or 'colonialism→anti-colonialism→reversion of colonialism'.
For this, the thesis used ideology of Althusser, the discourse of identification and anti-identification of Pcheux, the theory of anti-colonialism of Frantz Fanon, Homi bahbah, Edward Said, Gayatri Spivak based on the major premise of ideology. The ideology of Althusser and the discourse of identification and anti-identification of Pcheux were used to discuss the problem of personal subject of Kim Byung Yeon of Poet. The process of calling out nervelessly and opposing against the ruling system were explained responding to the process of changing of the subject. The theory of anti-colonialism was used to analyze the problem of familism and nation of The age of Hero and The border respectively. The aspect of the imitation and submission of the ruled upon the elite goal of the ruler was from the theory of Fanon. It was useful for explaining that even though the neglected tried to hide themselves with the white mask of education, the ruled could never be accepted like the ruler equally. The orientalism of Said was good for explaining that the image of the suffering people who are exiled by the power is a selfish reorganized system of discourse of the ruler for ruling the colony. The concept of the sub-subject of Spivak was proper for explaining ruined families as lower classes which are seceded from the normal class. Spivak's theory was useful for proving that lower class is not given naturally but constructed by the discourse.
In ‘The dominion and subordination inherited in individual and family', through the problem of individual subject and familism in Poet and The age of Hero, the inside of Lee Moon-yeol was concluded as inseperability of individual and groups. In Poet, the ideology of ruling is just the power, and in this thesis, through various medium, I looked around the substance of ideology of the writer. The process of Kim Byung-yeon's changes from 'social subject to resistant subject to fictional subject are corresponded to 'literature→the people→the tale'. However, through this, it is shown the pessimism of the writer that human being is feeble in any circumstances who can not help but being subordinated in any forms.
The age of Hero shows that it gives all power to the family, which is, the logic of a group. Even though there had not been a time that family had existed as a whole form, Lee Moon yeol shows the supremacy of the family which tries to find the individual life in the completion of the family. This kind of inseperability of individual and group justifies the monopolistic power of heroic patriarch. For this, as Lee changes the humanism and nationalism into the concept of blood relation, he restores the familism of The age of hero into the order of dominion and subordination.
In 'Colony and anti-colony extended into the history and society', the logic of dominion and subordination of Lee Moon yeol is extended into more comprehensive aspect. Lee overlapped the political situation of the 1960s which depended on the assistance from USA and the tragedy of Myeung hoon's family in the same pace in The Border. The writer shows the situations of the border in two aspect through the theory of border of Kim Shi hyung and the revolutionism of Hwang Seok hyun. The theory of border is about the colony and the revolutionsim the anti colonial attitude.
'Ⅳ-1. Self-denial and aiming the identifier', Lee Moon yeol emphasized that life is not possible without being subordinated in the imperialism through the theory of the border which stresses the conditional logic of the 1960s. He captures that thorough self-denial and intense aiming of the identifier through the theory of the border that the revolution is only possible in the center. That is to point out the limit of theory of the border and the aspect of colonialization.
It can be considered fairly that in the extremely despairing reality, it is an inevitable result. However, it should be reconsider that not all unhappiness and poverty leads to colonial subordination through the theory of border of Kim Shi hyung. They became colonialized not because of the unhappiness but because of the logic of the colonialism.
In 'Ⅳ-2. the change from silent other into speaking subject', the theory of the revolution is presented as the point of the anti-colonialism against the theory of the border. As Whang Shuck hyun identified the people as the democratic subject, the narration of The border is changed from silent other into the speaking subject. This will is actualized by anticolonial efforts which resists against the concocted memory and reconstruct the new reality through the literature of the peripheral class. This also can be seen through showing the consciousness of orphan which escapes from the adapted son of the power and become a head of family by himself. Even if this positive meaning, the anti-colonial will of The border has the limit to be related with the desires to rule the others. The colonial ruling which was put upon them is revealed in themselves as copied persona by suppressing their own brothers and sisters unconsciously.
In ‘Ⅳ-3. the revival of the consciousness of the colonial and the return into the center', the most crucial limit of The border was pointed out. In-cheul returned into the literature after long wandering. It, however, is merely announcement without detailed contents. So, after all, it gives a evil spell for being interpreted as colonialism. In sense that literature is a new ruling medium with various accessibility and unlimitedness, the literature of In-cheol revealed thoroughly the spirit of the theory of the border. This aspect is shown widely. The setting up of sign of unhappiness inductively, or elite sight of the writer who put the story into the past tense humiliated every character in The border. By doing this, Lee concludes every logic into the theory of the border. Putting a significance just for showing the struggle of anti-colonialism proves that it is not out of the logic of dominion and subordination. Through that even the most aspiring character, In-cheol in this novel surrendered, Lee presents pessimistic conclusion that human being lives still colonial life despite of all kinds of colonial struggles. In ‘Ⅴ. The significance and limit of literature of Lee Moon yeol', first of all, the resemblances between his literature and Korean society were emphasized. Lee showed the peculiarity of Korean history like it is in three novels, Poet, The age of hero, The border which cannot be explained simply by letting revolution and adjustment, despair and hope coexist which cannot be. In the individual aspect, irony of peripheral individual of Poet, in the familial aspect, the irony of peripheral family in The age of Hero, in the historical aspect, the irony of peripheral nation in The border are captured exquisitely. This also means that Lee shows people very well who live and move severly adhered to the reality closely.
In spite of this significance, the works of Lee are so much ideological that shows the limits that it tends to have the significance in the discourse rather than completion of aesthetics of Poet, The age of Hero, The Border. If the ideology is taken for granted, the singly meaning of the work is changed into the ideology so that it is hard to escape the critic of being illiberality. In Poet, the individual subject is called into the social subject being overwhelmed by the ruling ideology. In The age of Hero, individual is depressed into the family. In The border, it is leaded into pessimism that the reversion of the center is impossible by recognizing the border as the peripheral of the center. This leads into the aesthetic, philosophical limits of Lee's works.
However, the significance and the limits of these three novels should be contemplated in the comprehensive aspect of Korean literature. By not consenting the power, these three novels have the substituent significance to the 1980s realistic literature which clang to discourse power. These three works of Lee can be distinguished clearly from the 1980s realistic literature which understood the ideology in the aspect of the truth. The literature of Lee 'supplemented the limit of 80s' realistic literature' by consenting the fact outspokenly that all ideology is false. In this respect, through Poet, The age of Hero, The border, Lee takes the significant place revealing the falsity of 1980s realism literature or the antithesis about 1980s realism literature. That is the import of the significance and limit of Lee's literature shown in Poet, The age of Hero, The border in history of Korean literature.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본고는 이문열의 소설에 나타나는 식민과 탈식민의 양상에 주목하였다. 이문열의 소설이 한국사회를 검증하는 지표로 인식될 수 있었던 것은 이문열이 언제나 한국사회에서 가장 민감한 이데올로기 문제를 내장하고 있기 때문이다. [시인], [영웅시대], [변경]은 이념을 통해 작가의식과 한국사회의 집단무의식을 포착할 수 있게 해준다. 이를 위해 본고는 ‘[시인]→[영웅시대]→[변경]’을 계기적 관계로 파악하여, 여기에 ‘할아버지→아버지→자녀 세대’, 그리고 ‘개인→가족→국가와 역사’의 단계로 각각 대응시켜 이데올로기에 반응하는 양상을 살펴보았다. 물론 각 단계마다 ‘식민주의→탈식민주의→식민주의로의 복귀’라는 과정을 반복하는 사실을 논점화 하였다. 이를 위해 본고는 이데올로기 문제라는 대전제 하에서 알튀세르의 이데올로기론, 페쇠의 동일화 반동일화 담론, 그리고 파농, 바바, 사이드, 스피박의 탈식민주의이론을 근거로 활용하였다. [시인]에서는 개인이 ‘식민적 주체→저항적 주체→허구적 주체’로 변모하는 과정이 ‘문학→민중→설화’라는 매개의 변모 과정과 상관관계에 있음을 알 수 있다. 이를 통해 인간은 어떤 형태로든 체제에 종속될 수밖에 없는 무기력한 존재라는 작가의 비관론이 포착된다. [영웅시대]는 가족이라는 집단 논리에 모든 권위를 부여한다. 한 번도 가족이 온전한 형태로 존재한 적이 없음에도 불구하고, 이문열은 개개인의 삶을 가족의 완성에서 찾으려는 가족지상주의를 보여준다. 이러한 개인과 집단의 비분리성은 영웅적 가장의 독점적 권위를 정당화한다. 이를 위해 이문열은 휴머니즘과 민족주의를 혈연의 개념으로 바꾸어 놓음으로써 [영웅시대]의 가족주의를 지배와 종속의 질서로 환원한다. [변경]에서는 주변부 국가의 비극을 김시형의 변경론과 황석현의 혁명론이라는 두 시선으로 해명하였다. 1960년대 상황논리를 강조하는 변경론은 식민지 지식인의 철저한 자기 부정과 강렬한 동일자 지향성을 보여준다. 변경론을 비판하며 등장한 혁명론은 탈식민의 저항이라는 점에서 의미가 있다. 하지만 민족을 민중 주체와 동일시하면서 침묵하는 타자에서 발언하는 주체로 전환시키려는 혁명론은 김시형의 변경론에 포섭되면서 제한적인 것이 되고 만다. 인철이 도달한 문학은 김시형보다 더욱 철저하게 변경론의 정신을 구현하면서 󰡔변경󰡕은 다시 식민주의로 회귀한다. 물론 두 사람의 논리는 여러 인물의 삶 속에서 기억의 문제, 아버지와의 관계, 문학의 기능에 대한 해석 등으로 구체화 된다. 식민과 탈식민의 연구를 통해 볼 때, 세 작품은 저항과 순응처럼 공존할 수 없는 개념을 공존시킴으로써 소설을 보다 역동적으로 만들어주고 있다. 이러한 의의에도 불구하고 이문열의 작품은 미학적 완결성보다는 담론적 무게를 중시하는 한계를 보여준다. 하지만 세 작품의 의의는 한국문학이라는 전체적 시각에서 고찰해야 한다. [시인], [영웅시대], [변경]은 권력을 승인하지 않는 방식으로 담론 권력에 집착하는 80년대 리얼리즘 문학에 대한 대타적 의미를 갖는다. 이문열의 문학은 모든 이데올로기는 결국 허위라는 사실을 노골적으로 인정함으로써 80년대 리얼리즘 문학의 한계를 보완한다.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론 1
• 1. 연구목적 1
• 2. 연구사 및 연구 대상 4
• Ⅱ. 식민과 탈식민주의의 이론적 준거 15
• Ⅲ. 개인과 가족에 내재된 종속성 27
• 1. 체제에 결박당하는 무기력한 개인 주체 27
• 1) 식민적 주체의 재구성과 그에 내재된 종속성 28
• 2) 저항적 주체에 내재된 제한적 의의 34
• 3) 허구적 주체, 자발적 무장해제라는 새로운 종속 40
• 2. 탈식민의 징후로서 가족주의 47
• 1) 영웅주의에 내재된 가부장제의 함정 48
• 2) 가족이데올로기에 대한 새로운 자각 54
• 3) 혈연의 강조로 인한 가족주의의 부활 59
• Ⅳ. 역사와 사회로 확장된 탈식민의식과 종속성 68
• 1. 식민지 지식인의 자기 부정과 동일자 지향 69
• 1) 중심을 향한 과도한 열망 69
• 2) 조작된 기억에 내재된 식민적 욕망 75
• 3) 제국을 향한 열망과 양자의식 83
• 2. 침묵하는 타자에서 발언하는 주체로 전환 89
• 1) 민족주의에 내재된 변혁의 가능성 89
• 2) 기억의 허구성에 대한 자기반성 95
• 3) 새로운 가장의 탄생과 고아의식 101
• 3. 식민의식의 부활, 중심으로 회귀 107
• 1) 문학의 재발견, 고품격의 새로운 지배 양식 107
• 2) 불길한 예감과 기억에 내재된 결정론적 태도 116
• 3) 도달 불가능한 지향의 중단과 떠돌이의식 122
• Ⅴ. 이문열 문학의 의의 및 한계 131
• 1. 절망과 희망의 기묘한 공존, 역동적 세계 인식 131
• 2. 이데올로기라는 최종 심급, 연역적 발상의 한계 134
• Ⅵ. 결론 139
• 참고문헌 143
• 영문초록 153