畫師, 名士 그리고 人文主義者 ―鄭板橋의 삶

백광준 ( Baek Kwang-joon ) 한국중국어문학회 2022 中國文學 Vol.111 No.-

이 글은 鄭板橋라는 인물과 그의 삶을 이해해보려는 시도이다. 그는 서화에 그리 마음을 두지 않았고 오히려 현실 참여에 뜻을 두며 名士의 지향을 품었고, 또 한편으로 大丈夫의 삶을 지향하였다. 秀才에 대한 그의 무차별한 비판 역시 스스로 가진 지식인의 책무의식에서 발양된 현실 참여의 소산이라고 말할 수 있다. 그러나 그가 비판만을 일삼았던 것은 아니며, 삶 속에서는 남녀노소, 신분, 동물 등 관계에 대해 차등적 시선을 품지 않았고, 어려운 백성들의 처지를 이해하고 함께하려는 人文主義者로서의 모습을 보여주었다. 사람을 먼저 생각하고 경계를 넘어 타자를 대할 줄 아는 인문주의자로서 손색이 없는 그의 모습들을 하나하나 만나다 보면, 그가 평생을 들여 완성한, 우리에게 남긴 최고의 작품은 바로 그가 삶에서 보여주었던 따스한 행적들 그 자체라고 말할 수 있을 것이다. Banqiao Zheng(鄭板橋) is one of Eight Eccentric Masters of Yangzhou(揚州八怪), a painter who has a talent in painting on orchids and bamboo, and is known for his odd appearance. As a result, many studies on him so far have focused mainly on his paintings or on individual subjects. As a result, it was not easy to look at the entire character, Banqiao Zheng. This article is an attempt to understand the character and life of Banqiao Zheng. Banqiao Zheng was highly regarded in calligraphy at the time and now, but ironically, he did not pay much attention to calligraphy. Also, he did not give high praise for the act of painting. And he talked about senior painters who excelled in previous generations, but rather pointed out that they lacked in actual participation, so they were only painters. Through this, we can infer that Banqiao Zheng should have the intention of notables, not as a calligrapher and a painter, so that he himself tried to maintain the participatory intention considering calligraphy and painting secondary. At the same time, what he aimed for was the life of a celebrated scholar. In this context, what draws attention is that he was enthusiastic to criticize the brilliant men. He was attacked a lot, but he did not hesitate to criticize their behavior. Such his behavior is not easy to understand without considering his usual intention to the celebrated scholar. Isn't his indiscriminate criticism of the brilliant men the participatory intention, which is cultivated by the intellectuals' own sense of responsibility? This, on the one hand, makes us understand the reason why he had challenged the civil service examination in spite of his proficiency in painting and had the aspirations of a farmer after leaving office. What we should not miss here is that he has made ruthless criticisms of those who are dissatisfied, but that does not mean that he lived so rough and wild. Rather, he did not have a differential view of the relationship between adult and child, master and servant, man and animal in life. He sought to embrace the warmly difficult people and showed himself as a humanist who understood their situation. Most importantly, many values in his life and his thoughts are still meaningful problem consciousness today. Looking at him as a humanist who thinks of people first and then crosses the borders and treats others, we can say that the best pictures he has ever left for us are the warm things he has shown in life.

後期桐城派의 ‘三江’ 論爭

백광준(Baek, Kwang-Joon) 중국문화연구학회 2019 중국문화연구 Vol.0 No.43

This study explores an argument between Wu, Rulun(1840~1903) and Zhang, Yuzhao(1823~1894). It is mainly about the “Three Rivers” issue in “Shang Shu·Yu Gong”, which was carried out intermittently from 1887 to 1888. This argument began with an article by Zhang Yuzhao, which was the “Contemplation on “three rivers” in Yu Gong”. In this article, he mainly pointed out that Ban, Gu was inevitably wrong in “Hanshu Dilizhi”, and then advocated that there is another Nanjiang River other than the Beijiang River and the Zhongjiang River associated with the Yangtze River. This is simply an unprecedented insight, because the Sanjiang theory has always referred to three parts of the Yangtze River or three Rivers diverted from the Yangtze River. As far as the theoretical structure is concerned, Zhang, Yuzhao is mainly based on Guo, Pu’s Sanjiang theory: Lijiang, Songjiang, and Zhejiang, which led to the new proposition that Nanjiang is a river. Wu, Rulun verified it in all aspects, and Zhang, Yuzhao refuted it. In the debate, they involve a wide range of academics, sometimes classics, sometimes texts, lexicons, geography, and so on. This shows that they are also well-versed in many academic fields. At the same time, it is commendable that they strive to put the above academic methods and attitudes into education. The “Contemplation on “three rivers” in Yu Gong” mentioned at the beginning is written for the purpose of education. By examining the beginning and end of the debate, although it is impossible to determine who wins or loses, it is estimated that Zhang, Yuzhao’s claim cannot be successfully recognized by Wu, Rulun. However, regardless of the outcome, this controversy makes sense, that is, they absorb new knowledge at the end of the 19th century and boldly challenge academic stereotypes, which are valuable in themselves, especially their profound knowledge of geography. In fact, this is the main background that touches the debate.

청말, 한족 표상의 구축

백광준 ( Kwang Joon Baek ) 한양대학교 동아시아문화연구소(구 한양대학교 한국학연구소) 2014 동아시아 문화연구 Vol.58 No.-

한족은 사실상 중국을 대표하는 거대 민족이다. 이 글에서는 중국을 이해하기 위한 일환으로 민족이 근대시기에 만들어진 것이라는 점에 착안하여 청말의 시기를 주목하였다. 곧 당시한족 스스로가 자신들을 어떻게 표상하고 있는지를 통해 한족의 정체성에 대한 이해를 구하는데 초점을 두었다. 당시 혁명파는 청조 정부를 전복시키기 위한 정치적 목적을 가지고 만주족과의 대비 속에서 한족의 정체성을 모색하였다. 이를 통해 한족과 만주족의 경계는 명확해져갔고, 한족의 표상 역시 구체화되어갔다. 그들에 의해 당시 한족의 표상으로 가장 뚜렷이 내세워진 것은 노예와 황제라는 상징이었다. 노예라는 상징은 상황에 순응하는 근성과 독립 의지가 결여되어있다 는 점에서 자주 호출되었으며, 황제는 한족의 시조로서, 종족의 시원이 만주족과는 전혀 다른 것임을 드러내기 위해 표방되었다. 이를 위해 당시 서구로부터 유입된 근대지를 바탕으로 한민족에 대한 계보적 구성이 과학적 색채를 띠며 제시되었고, 더불어 오랑캐에 대한 등차적 시선을 바탕으로 구축된 중화의식을 부각시키며 문명 대국이라는 점을 강화시키는 기능을 하였다. 곧 각기 부정과 긍정의 욕망을 수반하는, 이 두 표상이 가지는 상반성은 전통적 화이론과 서구 문명에 대한 우호적 시선 그리고 진화론 등이 연계된 등차적 시선들과 결부되면서 빚어진 것으로, 이를 통해서 당시 혁명파들은 둘의 표상을 동시적으로 받아들였고 이로써 두 표상은 거대한 간극에서 오는 긴장을 수반하면서 긴밀히 연동되었고, 이를 통해 한족의 정체성은 극적으로 구성되어갔다. 이러한 청말의 표상은 신해혁명과 함께 변화의 요구에 직면하지만, 배타적 한족 표상은 혈통을 내세운 ‘염황자손’이라는 표현이 지금껏 유행하고 있는 상황에서 보듯, 배타적 한족 표상은 근대로부터 지금까지 여전히 지속되고 있다고 하겠다. In fact, the Han Chinese(漢族) in all Chinese nationalities is the powerful majority group which is representative of China. Based on the theory that the idea or concept of nationality was made in modern age, this study especially paid attention to the last period of Qing dynasty(淸朝), because I believe this help us to understand how the Han Chinese represent their national identity by themselves. In those days, the revolutionaries had tried to find the way how their nationality could be indentified, contrasting it and Manchu people for the political purpose to overset Qing dynasty, this made it clear that the boundary of the Han Chinese and Manchu people, and the representation of the Han Chinese was gradually considered as a substantial concept. In particularly, they claimed to stand for the representation of themselves with “slave” and “Huangdi(黃帝)”. Because they recognized the Han Chinese has the serious faults pleased to follow the spirit of the times, and lacks spirit of independence, so the symbolic representation of “slave” was frequently aroused, and “Huangdi” was put forward to distinguish between the origin of the Han Chinese and Manchu people’s on account that he was the progenitor of the Han Chinese. For this, genealogical construction about nationality based on the modern knowledge imported from the western civilization were presented on the printed media in those days with the color of scientific civilization, this simultaneously highlighted the spirit of Great Chinese nation based on the discriminative recognition about barbarian, therefore resulted in strengthening the point of the great power of civilization. The contradiction that consists in these two symbols were caused by the discriminatory practices resulted from the traditional racial segregation, the friendly attitude for the western civilization, and the theory of social evolution, this made the revolutionaries agree two symbols at the same time, and the identity of Han chinese also was dramatically constructed. As the Revolution of 1911 had succeeded, this exclusive representation of the Han Chinese in the last period of Qing dynasty was faced with the demands of the times asking to change, but has been basically exerting big influence ever since it was constructed in modern ages, as you can see the concept words such as “The descendants of Yandi(炎帝) and Huangdi” prevail in Chinese society now, they are just emphasizing its lineage.

19세기 초 서양 근대 지식의 중국 전파―`Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge in China`를 중심으로―

백광준 ( Baek Kwang-joon ) 한국중국어문학회 2017 中國文學 Vol.91 No.-

1834년, 中國 廣州에서 결성된 `Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge in China`는 광저우 일대에서 활동하는 상인들과 선교사들을 주요 구성원으로 하였다. 이 협회는 앞선 1827년에 영국에서 결성된 모(母) 협회의 목적을 기본적으로 계승하였고, 문명의 보급과 종교적 축복의 전파를 위한 지식 보급에 노력하며, 그 일환으로 중국 지식지형의 조사, 그리고 출판물의 기획, 간행, 배포 등의 사업을 진행하였다. 그러나 지식보급회가 갖는 의의는 오히려 청조의 봉쇄에 직면하여 지식과 축복의 전파라는 `聖戰`을 전개하며 중영전쟁까지의 공백을 메우는 가교로서의 역할에서 찾아져야 하며, 이는 그를 뒷받침한 The Chinese Repository가 매체로서 뿐만 아니라 당시 西勢東漸을 위한 전략적 교두보로 기능했다는 사실을 보여준다는 점에서 주목할 필요가 있다.

后期桐城派的“三江”论争 - 以吴汝纶、张裕钊为中心

白光俊(Baek, Kwang-Joon) 한국중어중문학회 2020 한국중어중문학회 우수논문집 Vol.- No.-

This study explores an argument between Wu, Rulun(1840-1903) and Zhang, Yuzhao(1823-1894)。It is mainly about the “Three Rivers” issue in “Shang Shu·Yu Gong”, which was carried out intermittently from 1887 to 1888. This argument began with an article by Zhang Yuzhao, which was the “Contemplation on “three rivers”in Yu Gong”。In this article, he mainly pointed out that Ban, Gu was inevitably wrong in “Hanshu Dilizhi”, and then advocated that there is another Nanjiang River other than the Beijiang River and the Zhongjiang River associated with the Yangtze River。This is simply an unprecedented insight, because the Sanjiang theory has always referred to three parts of the Yangtze River or three Rivers diverted from the Yangtze River. As far as the theoretical structure is concerned, Zhang, Yuzhao is mainly based on Guo, Pu’s Sanjiang theory: Lijiang, Songjiang, and Zhejiang, which led to the new proposition that Nanjiang is a river。Wu, Rulun verified it in all aspects, and Zhang, Yuzhao refuted it。In the debate, they involve a wide range of academics, sometimes classics, sometimes texts, lexicons, geography, and so on。This shows that they are also well-versed in many academic fields. At the same time, it is commendable that they strive to put the above academic methods and attitudes into education。The “Contemplation on “three rivers”in Yu Gong” mentioned at the beginning is written for the purpose of education. By examining the beginning and end of the debate, although it is impossible to determine who wins or loses, it is estimated that Zhang, Yuzhao’s claim cannot be successfully recognized by Wu, Rulun。However, regardless of the outcome, this controversy makes sense, that is, they absorb new knowledge at the end of the 19th century and boldly challenge academic stereotypes, which are valuable in themselves, especially their profound knowledge of geography。In fact, this is the main background that touches the debate。

청말(淸末) 주일공사(駐日公使) 여서창(黎庶昌)의 ‘시회(詩會)’ 외교(外交)

백광준 ( Baek Kwang-joon ) 한국중국어문학회 2021 中國文學 Vol.106 No.-

LI Shuchang(1837-1898) served as ambassador to Japan from 1881 to 1890. While in Japan, he had extensive exchanges with Japanese intellectuals, where he held regular meetings every year. Unlike his predecessor, LI Shuchang settled the exchange of poetry and prose as the main program of his meeting. His poetry club was taking the form of private exchange, but it shows the original form of the network of intellectuals in East Asia. What firmly mediates this network of intellectuals was that ‘the same script’. What is learned here is a common perception among intellectuals of the same culture. In other words, they are not the beings trapped within the boundaries of the state, but show bonds among intellectuals who share the same culture. In addition, it is also worth noting that Japanese society at the time was the academic and ideological flow that merged Sinicizing with modernization as a demand for a new era. However, even with this situation in mind, this is not the main reason why LI Shuchang held the banquet. This is because it is possible to develop business such as academic and cultural exchange. In this respect, it should not be overlooked that he had a very deliberate intention in bringing private exchange forward. In short, he deliberately selected his personal area and promoted academic and cultural exchange. This can be an effective way to break the boundaries of a country. The fact that the private exchanges rather accomplished that public diplomacy had not been able to accomplish, suggests a course of action on the path that we should take. to our, or academics or intellectuals, in today's hegemony-oriented world.

The Chinese Repository, 3권 3호(1834) <The Chinese Classics> 역주 및 해제

白光俊(Kwang-Joon Baek) 중국어문논역학회 2017 中國語文論譯叢刊 Vol.0 No.41

이 글은 The Chinese Repository 3권 3호(1834)에 실린 글로, 칼 귀츨라프(Karl Friedrich August Gützlaff, 1803-1851)가 쓴 <중국 고전>에 대한 역주와 해제이다. The Chinese Repository는 당시 광주와 마카오를 중심으로 활동하던 개신교 선교사들이 주축이 되어 발간한 것으로, 이들은 이전 예수회의 각종 보고서가 가진 한계를 절감하고, 보다 실증적이고 신빙성 있는 중국 관련 보고서를 유럽에 제공하는 데 주안점을 두었다. 이 글은 사서오경의 고전들 각각에 대한 소개를 담고 있으며, 그간 중국 고전에 대해서는 유럽에 그다지 많이 소개되지 않았다는 점에서, 중국 고전에 대한 서양의 시선을 대변한다고 볼 수 있다. 또한 17, 18세기에 중국학이 유럽에 크게 유행하였고, 중국 철학, 특히 공자의 사상은 계몽주의자들에게 하나의 이상적 모델로 상정되며 큰 영향을 미쳤다는 점에서, 이 글에 담긴 공자에 대한 인식과 평가는 19세기 초 공자에 대한 서양인들의 인식을 반영한다는 점에서 의의가 있다. 글 전체로 볼 때, 공자에 대한 시선은 우호적이지 않으며, 이러한 시선의 배경에는 기독교적 세계관이 자리를 잡고 있다. 그들의 시선은 “우리는 유일신에 대한 그의 신념의 흔적을 찾기 위해 노력했으나 헛수고였다. 그런 관념은 그의 신념에서 자리를 잡지 못한 것으로 보인다. 그는 모든 선과 완벽한 선물을 내려주시는 신에 대한 인식과 경배를 전혀 주장하지 않았고, 유물론(materialism)의 총체적 체계 하에 파묻혀 결코 조물주의 창조물로 서고자 하지 않았다.”는 언급으로 집약될 수 있다. 또한 한 가지 언급할 점은, 공자의 여성관에 대한 비판이다. 이 글에서는 여성에 대해 종속적인 존재로 간주하는 차등적 시선에 대해 매섭게 질타하고 있는데, 19세기 초 영국 사회 역시 여성 문제에 관한 한 여러 한계를 노정하고 있었다는 점에서 이러한 간극을 어떻게 이해해야 할지는 문제적이라고 하겠다. This is the translation followed by commentary for work in The Chinese Repository volume three No.3 (1834). The Chinese Repository was published by Protestant missionaries who had been worked mainly in Guangzhou(廣州) and Macao(奧門) at the time. Being deeply aware of the defects of previous reports on China written by Jesuits, They focused on providing more empirical and credible reports to Europe. This article contains an introduction to each of the classics of Four Books and Five Classics, and it can be said that it represents the western view of Chinese classics in that the Chinese classics have not been introduced much to Europe. Also, in the 17th and 18th centuries, sinology including chinoiserie was prevalent in Europe, and Chinese philosophy, especially Confucius thought, was considered to be an ideal model for the illuminati and had a great impact. And this has significance in that it reflects Westerners’ perception of Confucius at the beginning of the 19th century. In the whole of the text, the view for Confucius is not favorable, the Christian view of the world is in the background of this view. Their view might be summarized as following citation: “We have endeavored in vain to find traces of his belief in one God; such an idea seems not to have found a place in his creed. Knowledge and adoration of that Being, from whom every good and perfect gift descends, found in him uo advocate; he buried himself under the gross system of materialism, and never rose from the creature to the Creator.” One final word to mention is the criticism of Confucius’s view of womanhood. In this article, it is harshly criticized upon the discriminative view to consider women as dependent, and it is still questionable how we could understand the gap between the view in this text and British society in those days, because Britain society in the early nineteenth century still have lots of limitation on a view of womanhood.

園林과 公園의 사이에서 ― 19세기 중국인의 公園 유람

백광준 ( Baek Kwang-joon ) 한국중국어문학회 2023 中國文學 Vol.115 No.0

19세기 중후반에 유럽을 찾은 중국인들은 유럽의 선진 문명에 관심을 가지는 한편으로 공원에도 많은 관심을 가졌다. 이는 무엇보다 스스로 가진 문인사대부로서의 문화적 취향에서 비롯한 것이었으며, 이러한 인식은 그들의 표현에도 반영되어, ‘園林’이나 ‘∼園’, ‘∼囿’ 등 전통적인 명명법으로 공원을 지칭하고 있었다. 결국 그들에게 공원은 원림으로 상상되는 익숙한 장소이면서 동시에 낯설고 새로운 장소라는 이중적 성격을 동시에 지니고 있었던 바, 그들 역시 원림과 달리 공원이 가지는 공공성에 주목하였고, 열악한 주거환경을 보완하는 공공위생의 기능 또한 인지하였다. 하지만 그 이면에 산업화로 인해 도시로 밀려든 노동자들의 통제를 위한 방편이거나 혹독한 노동을 충전하는 공간으로 활용된 점 등은 간과하였으며, 특히 유럽 사절단이라는 정체성은 유럽 사회를 깊이 이해하도록 그들 자신을 끝없이 독려하였지만, 동시에 그들이 머무는 곳, 볼 수 있는 시야 등을 일정 범위로 제약함으로써 전면적인 이해로 나아가지 못하게 하였다. Chinese travellers to Europe in the mid-to-late 19th century, both officially and unofficially, were deeply interested in Europe’s advanced science, technology, and especially military weaponry, but they were also very interested in its parks. This article seeks to answer that question by focusing on the travelogues of the envoys who visited in the 80s and 90s, starting with Wang Tao. Their enjoyment of the park may have been due to their own cultural tastes as celebrated scholar. They sought out parks when looking for accommodation in Europe, and in their writings, they described their excursions in the sense of a traditional travelogue. This way of perceiving the park was also reflected in the conceptual language they used. The expressions they mainly used followed the traditional nomenclature, such as ‘park’, ‘∼en’, ‘∼囿’, etc. They also used the term ‘公園’, but it was extremely rare, so it seems that the park was still an unfamiliar and universal concept. In this way, it can be said that for them, the park had a dual character of being both a familiar place imagined as the traditional garden and an unfamiliar and new place at the same time. On the one hand, the park was a place to be enjoyed, but on the other hand, it was also a place to be explored and examined. Therefore, unlike the traditional garden, they paid attention to the publicness of the park and recognised the function of public hygiene to compensate for the poor living conditions. However, behind the scenes, the fact that parks and promenades were designed as a way to control the workers who were pushed into the city due to industrialisation, and the fact that they were used as a space to recharge from hard labour, were outside their vision. Moreover, the identity of a European mission encouraged them to push themselves to understand European society in depth, but at the same time, by limiting where they could stay and what they could see to a certain extent, it prevented them from advancing to a comprehensive understanding, and in particular, the records of the first writer acted as a guide in another aspect and served as a framework that prevented them from recognising new problems.