자크 랑시에르의 문학의 정치의 재맥락화: 진은영의 문제제기를 중심으로 = Jacques Ranciere`s “The Politics of Literature” Re-contextualized: With a Focus on Eunyong Jin`s Inquiries

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Eunyoung Jin`s “The Re-distribution of the Sensible: On Poetry of the 2000s,” which was published in the journal “Creation and Criticism (Winter, 2008)” caused a great stir in Korean literature and triggered various follow-up discussions. In this piece, Eunyoung Jin made references mostly from “Politics of Aesthetics: The Distribution of the Sensible” by Jacques Ranciere, a French scholar of politics and aesthetics. Her referential focus was to newly consider the relationship between literature and politics. Even afterwards, Eunyoung Jin had drawn from Ranciere new thoughts that could turn a dichotomously contrasting relationship between a poet’s participation in reality and poetry’s artistic value into a (more) productive interactional relationship. In order to plan and practice a reformation of senses and thoughts whose literary and artistic creativity are based on social customs and on a larger scale, a new reformation of the society’s political geography, Eunyong Jin underwent various activities to re-contextualize Ranciere’s argument on constant reformation of “The Aesthetic Regime of Art” for situations in Korea. Writers who actively engaged in situations such as the Yongsan disaster and the Duriban struggle, while choosing to share various poetic tendencies and texts that hover between a so-called dichotomy of art and society are one good example. Ensuring that poetry and literature will maintain a continuous openness toward fluid and complex realities of the society, thereby giving the sensibility of a poet himor herself new artistic and political motives and reset the relationship between literature and politics above a new horizon was the position held by and practiced by Eunyoung Jin. Looking back at Eunyoung Jin’s work from a socio-economic context, her work is interlocked with the need to fundamentally change the way of thinking in respect of Korean society and the current economic system based on capitalism and a series of domestic and foreign situations such as the 2008 Candlelight Protest (in South Korea), the Financial crisis of 2008 that originated in the U.S. subprime mortgage crisis and the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers and later spread worldwide and the Yongsan disaster in the beginning of 2009. These situations provided an opportunity to newly refresh in mind the Korean literature’s history of rapid advancement along with the modernization process of and also of rapid decline in the 1990s, i.e., the memory of literature`s revolutionary tendency. However, this memory is also connected with the evils of thought and practice that treat literature as a tool for revolutionary movement(s). Literary practice to confront the socio-economic contradiction that was structural and fixed from an abstract social-scientific perspective often simplified the reality of society where more diverse, complex and foreign situations coexisted and interpenetrated one another. In this regard, the reason Eunyoung Jin actively accepted Jacques Ranciere’s argument that emphasized the independent and creative confrontation of literary works, at least to overcome the abovementioned issue, rather than obsessing over the socio-economic foundation and the structural contradiction can be understood. In the end, regardless of the different socio-economic contexts between France and Korea, (it is clear that) the main idea for both Jacques Ranciere and Eunyoung Jin is the study and practice of possibilities. Eunyoung Jin is faithful to Ranciere’s fundamental principle that there is no pre-determined truth. Therefore, although the task of critically reviewing Eunyoung Jin`s understanding of Ranciere from a perspective of theoretical accuracy is necessary and has meaning, but is not without limitations as the focus of the problem is the study and practice of possibilities.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 자크 랑시에르정치적인 것의 가장자리에서, "정치적인 것의 가장자리에서" 길 2008

2 진은영, "우리는 매일매일" 문학과지성사 2008

3 김춘식, "우리 문학의 이전과 이후: 2000년대 이전과 이후의 우리 시,『사이버문학광장 웹진』2010년 1월호"

4 신형철, "아름답고 정치적인 은유의 코뮌 : 진은영의 『우리는 매일매일』읽기" (58) : 396-415, 2009

5 이장욱, "시, 정치 그리고 성애학" (143) : 294-314, 2009

6 백낙청, "문학이 무엇인지 다시 묻는 일" (142) : 14-40, 2008

7 문성욱, "문학의 정치, 텍스트의 정치" (110) : 496-527, 2015

8 유재홍, "문학의 정치" 인간사랑 2011

9 진은영, "문학의 아토포스" 그린비 2014

10 자크 랑시에르, "무지한 스승 : 지적 해방에 대한 다섯 가지 교훈" 도서출판 궁리 2008

11 자크 랑시에르 감성의 분할 : 미학과 정치, "감성의 분할 : 미학과 정치" 도서출판 b 2008

12 신형철, "가능한 불가능 : 최근 ‘시와 정치’ 논의에 부쳐" (147) : 369-386, 2010

13 심보선, "‘촛불’은 질문이다" (56) : 25-52, 2008

14 이경진, "‘아토포스’라는 아직 알려지지 않은 아방가르드" (167) : 254-273, 2015

15 Jacques Rancière, "Politique de la littérature" Galilée 2007

16 Jacques Rancière, "Le Partage dusensible. Esthétique et politique" La Fabrique 2000

17 Jacques Rancière, "Le Maître ignorant. Cinq leçons sur l’émancipation intellectuelle" Fayard 1987

18 Jacques Rancière, "La Nuit des prolétaires. Archives du rêve ouvrier" Fayard 1981

19 Jacques Rancière, "La Méthode de l’égalité" Bayard 2012

20 Jacques Rancière, "La Leçon d’Althusser" Gallimard 1974

21 Gilles Deleuze, "Kafka-Pour une littérature mineure" Minuit 1975

22 Jacques Rancière, "Aux bords du politique" La Fabrique 1998

23 백지은, "'문학과 정치' 담론의 행방과 향방- 2000년대 중후반의 비평 담론을 중심으로" 한국비평문학회 (36) : 103-127, 2010