기억의 정치와스토리텔링 통일독일 수도 베를린의 발명 -도시공간의 형성과 기억의 도구화에 관하여-

전진성 ( Jin Sung Chun ) 대구사학회 2012 대구사학 Vol.106 No.-

Inventing the Capital of the reunified Germany, Berlin -The formation of urban space and the instrumentalization of memory- Chun, Jin-sung [Abstract] A Space is to be invented by the process of differentiating itself from other spaces. Berlin, the Capital of the reunified Germany, is the arena of contesting identities, while the new Berlin`s city planners have appealed to alleged lost tradition. What distinguishes Berlin from other western metropolises is her extreme imbalance between remembering and forgetting, so that Berlin never comes to a collective memory in accord and only turns out to be lieux de memoire, the artificially created sites of memory. Although the so-called Berlin Republic has staked much of her administration on a policy of national unity, her most representative lieux de memoire such as Potsdamer Platz, the upcoming Berlin City Palace, and Reichstag cannot hide the unmasterable disparity between outward self-display and conflict at home, between selective memory and traumatic disturbances. This issue is getting more acute in the Holocaust memorial sites which have much more flourished since the reunification. Whereas the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe in the heart of Berlin is facing the dangers of using German people`s mourning for the victims for claiming their own moral superiority, the Topography of Terror has the merit of galvanizing the campaign against forgetting historical responsibility of the so-called perpetrator nation. So the case of Berlin helps to understand that modern city holds diverse identities, and therefore that the domination of a particular memory is always accompanied by the repression of other memories.

한국의 기념비 문화에 끼친 독일 반(反)기념비의 영향 : 기념비적 역사에서 민주적 기억문화로

전진성(Jin-Sung Chun) 한국독일사학회 2020 독일연구 Vol.- No.44

이 글은 독일에서 연원한 반기념비가 한국사회 기억문화의 지형에 일으키고 있는 변화상을 소개하고 그 성격을 규명한다. 소위 기념비적 역사를 가장 전형적으로 체현하는 매체인 기념비의 매체적 한계를 극복하기 위한 대안으로 등장한 반기념비는 과거의 특정한 사건이나 사실보다는 기억하는 행위 그 자체를 재현하는 기념비다. 민족적 영광이 아니라 오히려 죄업을 기억하는 ‘경고비석’이라는 특유의 기념비 유형을 발전시킨 독일 현지에서도 기념비가 지닌 특유의 물화 를 극복하기 힘들다는 점은 베를린 중심부에 자리잡은 신위병소의 사례에서 드러난다. 국내의 <평화의 소녀상>과 <베트남 피에타>도 <4월 학생혁명 기념탑>과 <수호자상>으로 대표되는 한국의 파시즘적 기념비 문화를 넘어서고는 있지만 평화의 통속적 알레고리를 넘어서지 못한다. 한국형 반기념비의 맹아적 형태인 제주 4 · 3 평화기념관의 백비, 건축가 조성룡이 광주의 콜박스 사거리에 설치한 <기억의 현재>, 그리고 설치미술가 원지호의 <미리 지어진 전쟁기념물>은 보다 민주적인 기억문화의 장을 열고 있다. This article deals with the dynamic changes in the Korean monument culture and their historical significance. The German countermonument arising from the critical awareness of the monument’s inherent monumentalilty is the catalyst for that change. As the case of the Neue Wache in the heart of Berlin proves, a monument can hardly escape the danger of reification, even if it is not intended to glorify the national past. It seems much more difficult to imagine a non-reified monument in the Republic of Korea, having a strong tradition of fascist monuments like the April Student Revolution Memorial Tower and Guardian statue in the April 19th National Cemetery. Even pacifist monuments like Girl of Peace cannot avoid being reified with its abstract and nearly religious implications such as suffering and resurrection. In recent years, however, the new Korean monuments that were directly and indirectly influenced by the German countermonument open the horizon. Whereas the Unnamed Monument at the Jeju 4·3 Peace Memorial Hall reflects the unfinished political conflicts resulting from the violent history of the anti-communist wars in Korea, Thresholds for Intimate Recollections designed by senior Korean architect Joh Sung-Yong and Prepared War Memorial by young installation artist Won Jiho open a new space for a more democratic and universal memory culture. These fresh monuments in Korea are designed to rediscover experiences and memories that cannot be reduced to an unilateral, complacent narrative and thereby to reappropriate them as future assets. That is the very legacy of the German countermonuments.

특집논문 : 이와쿠라사절단과 서양도시 체험 ; 비스마르크의 환대: 『미구회람실기』에 나타나는 근대 일본의 자기모색과 프로이센

전진성 ( Jin Sung Chun ) 고려대학교 역사연구소(구 역사학연구회) 2013 사총 Vol.80 No.-

“The Iwakura embassy, 1871-73” can be read as a sort of the Japanese grammar book aiming at mastering the foreign language of the name of “modern Western civilization,” almost all aspects of which, like technologies, economical principles, social institutions, positive laws, artistic modes, geographical knowledges, and each national histories, are extensively and intensively recorded in these volumes. What this magnum opus also documents, is, more significantly, the discontinuous processes, in which modern Japan designed her peculiar “imaginative geography” of the modern world, and in which her own subjectivity and status were granted. This paper is based on the hypothesis that the crucial significance of “The Iwakura embassy, 1871-73” for the political development of future Japan was the rediscovery of Prussia, not of England, much less of France. The three main points help to elucidate the position. First, the description of Prussia in the third volume is distinguished by its well-poised, quite affective approach, rather than by an over-and-underestimation. Such an attitude gives an indication of an unbashful gaze into other`s eyes, a more positive response to the other`s hospitality. Second, in regard to the discursive formation Prussia takes an intermediate position in the global imaginative geography, a focal point in which modern Japan managed to fix her own vista and to objectify modern Western civilization. Third, the Prussian imagery of Japan is here only revealed through the Japanese gaze and so the both sides are supposed to have a contrapuntal relationship. In this respect, “Prussia” can be defined as a discursive formation which gave birth to the modern Japanese subjectivity and simultaneously brought about her structural deficiency leading to Japan`s self-imposition on the East Asia, after all. These three points in all confirm that the Japanese “German turn” was prefigured by the political aspirations of the Iwakura mission.

우울에서 애도로 : 안젤름 키퍼의 작품에 나타나는 역사적 트라우마

전진성(Chun Jin-sung) 현대미술사학회 2007 현대미술사연구 Vol.22 No.-

Anselm Kiefer is acknowledged as one of the most distinguished and polemical German artist since the Second World War. Huge catalogues of his artworks place themselves in the context of the peculiar memory culture of Germany which was primarily shaped by traumatic war experiences and political catastrophe. Originating from the psychoanalytical theories, this paper argues that Kiefer’s artworks both functioned as a symptom and a remedy of the historical trauma. Kiefer, as a postwar artist, explored the German image-reservoir and attempted to monumentalize it in his own fashion. Such provocation resulted in opening the Pandora’s box of postwar German psyche, which was familiar with repressing its traumatic past and also impregnated with the process of self-dissociation. Kiefer’s dealing of fascist icons is not necessarily linked to his preoccupation with fascism but should be interpreted as a compulsion to repeat the trauma. His art-world specifically represents an artist’s pendulum that swings between “acting-out” and self-reflection, where the term “aesthetics of the sublime” symbolizes the swing. The absolute negativity in Kiefer’s works was intended to represent the unpresentable trauma, since the aesthetics of the sublime refuses any “sublimation” of irredeemable loss and any facile replacement of “melancholy” by the “mourning.” A true mourning, in the eyes of Kiefer, never precludes an earnest confrontation with the melancholy, but rather presupposes it. This paper contrived to follow his artistic trajectory, which circulates from melancholy to mourning. From the rude performances over the monumental melancholy to the selfdistancing mourning works, Kiefer’s art-world figured out a way to represent and forget the intractable trauma. Through the multi-medial uses and misuses of the hybrid historical images, Kiefer finally reaches the “sublime objects” in the sense of Lacan and Zizek which tends to represent the trauma in the form of a “thing(das Ding),” whose “gaze” plays a role in awakening spectator’s self and his/her traumatic past. In Kiefer’s work it appears in the motif of artist’s palette.

역사학 고전 다시 읽기 : 유럽중심주의를 위한 변명 -헤겔의 『역사철학 강의』-

전진성 ( Jin Sung Chun ) 한국서양사학회 2012 西洋史論 Vol.0 No.114

This paper is aimed at reappraising G. W. F. Hegel`s philosophy of history as a progressive political discourse for global freedom and emancipation, rather than as a conservative state ideology. To achieve this, the current critical debates on Hegel`s Eurocentrism need to be reviewed. The opponents of Eurocentrism agree on the crucial point that the formalistic teleology and the padlocked self-centered view of world history ? la Hegel resulted from the estrangement of non-European "others" from history. Hegel`s own idea of history, however, was not called for to merely legitimize European domination of the world, but was predicated on his confrontation of modernity. This paper points out that Hegel`s world history was designed to overcome fatal dissociation of past and present, the crucial problem of modernity, and that he appealed to the logic of dialectics which pursued not a vindication, but rather a subversion of the existing reality. In world history Hegel found a dialectical movement from mutual recognition of individuals to the formation of a universal value system. Whatever the dialectics being referred to - either the political revolutions across European borders or the modern civil society inside Europe, Hegel`s philosophy of history was designed to elucidate the modern political reality. At the crossroads of going forward to the universal value of human freedom and going backward to developmental teleology, Hegel opted for the latter. A critique of this regression would rather accuse Hegel of suspending his basic dialectical logic than of the Eurocentric implication of his philosophical system. Starting from where Hegel`s dialectics come to a standstill, a new critique of Hegel ought to look for a clue to the very universal history which is supposed to take issue with the relations of the individuals and the community in the modern world and with its political future.

베를린 공동주택단지에 반영된 모더니즘 건축의 냉전적 변용 -1920년대 후프아이젠지들룽에서 인터바우 1957까지-

전진성 ( Chun Jin-sung ) 한국서양사학회 2021 西洋史論 Vol.- No.149

냉전기 최전방 도시 베를린은 전후복구의 사회적 필요성뿐만 아니라 체제경쟁의 일환으로 대규모 공동주택단지의 유산을 남겼다. 특히 서베를린이 창조해낸 주택 유형인 사회주택은 바이마르공화국의 공익형 임대주택이 표방했던 진보적 주택정책과 모더니즘 건축의 유산을 선별적으로 계승한 것으로, 전후 재개된 건축박람회인 인터바우 1957을 통해 서베를린의 한자 지구에 대대적으로 실현되었다. 모든 시민에게 해방된 주거를 약속했던 1920년대의 신건축 운동은 19세기 베를린을 지배했던 막사식 셋집의 꽉 막힌 블록형 구조를 타파하고 개방적이며 기능적인 공동주택단지를 선보였으며 베를린 외곽에 건설된 브루노 타우트 설계의 후프아이젠지들룽이야말로 그 백미였다. 그 이후 전쟁의 폐허 위에 재건되던 냉전기 서베를린은 민족전통을 되살리는 고밀도 도시를 건설하던 사회주의 동독에 맞서 분절되고 이완된 도시를 지향했지만 동서 양측은 모두 대규모 공동주택단지 건설로 나아갔으며 스탈린가로와 한자 지구는 한결 같이 과잉된 이념과 역사적, 사회적 현실 간의 괴리를 빚었다. 자유진영이 내세운 도시풍경과 근린주구 등의 원리도 실은 현대도시에 대한 대안을 모색하던 나치의 유산으로서 20세기 독일 건축 및 도시계획 계보에 대한 선택적 망각의 소산이었다. 서베를린에서 개화한 전후 모더니즘은 바이마르공화국에서 일찍 꽃 핀 고전 모더니즘의 냉전적 변용이었던 셈이다. Dual Berlin in the forefront of the global Cold War left a legacy of the large-scale housing estates as a reminder of the competitions between the East and West. In particular, social housing as a West Berlin’s invention selectively inherited the progressive legacy of nonprofit housing and modernist architecture from the Weimar Republic. The Neues Bauen movement of the 1920s, which promised an emancipated housing to all citizens, attempted to break the century-old perimeter block made up of barrack-like tenement houses and introduce open, suburban housing estates called Siedlung. The Hufeisensiedlung on the outskirts of Berlin designed by the modernist architect Bruno Taut was the highlight of that period. Later, during the Cold War, the Hansaviertel in West Berlin, which was the venue for the international architectural exhibition Interbau 1957, showcased a large sample of apartment complex. In Opposition to Stalinallee in East Berlin, which advocated a high-density city to revive the national cultural tradition, its western counterpart aimed to be a dispersed and structured city. Both sides, however, shared a gap between excessive ideology and historical-social reality. The spatial ideas for propagating the free world such as urban landscape and neighborhood unit were in fact the legacies of Nazism and reveal a distorted lineage of the 20th-century German architecture and urban planning. Thus, moderate modernism in postwar West Berlin was none other than the Cold War transformation of classical modernism bloomed early in Weimar Berlin. (Busan National University of Education / jsc77@bnue.ac.kr)

어떻게 부담스런 과거와 대면할 것인가?

전진성(Jin Sung Chun) 한국독일사학회 2003 독일연구 Vol.- No.6

Die vorliegende Abhandlung geht von einer Infragestellung der gängigen koreanischen Geschichtskultur aus, die sich durch die Idee der sogenannten “Schadenabwicklung der Vergangenheit” auszeichnet. Diese für südkoreanische Verhältnisse signifikante Ideenvorgabe ergab sich aus den unbewältigten Erben der japanischen Kolonialherrschaft. Sie nimmt zwar eine Enthüllung der bisher verschleierten “Wahrheit” in Aussicht, zieht aber letztlich einem weiteren Umgang mit der Vergangenheit feste Schranken. Wohlverstanden, die Vergangenheit ist, wie belastet auch immer, nicht fertig abzurechnen, sondern unablässig aufzuarbeiten. Hierbei liefert der sich in der alten Bundesrepublik herausgebildete Begriff der “Vergangenheitsbewaltigung” ein lehrreiches Vorbild, obwohl er spezifisch auf die NS-Vergangenheit angelegt war. Er erweist sich namlich als ein multikomplexes Handlungsgeflecht, jeder teil dessen sich als inkommensurabel bekundet: Verdrängung, strafliches Verfahren, Rehabilitierung, Entschädigung und letztlich die “Aufarbeitung der Vergangenheit” im Sinne von Theodor Adorno. Diese letzte Option ist zumal in den koreanischen Verhältnissen von groβem Belang, denn es fehlt hierzulande die Einsicht, daβ sowohl Schuld als auch Opfer immer wieder durch ein neues politisches, künstlerisches und wissenschftliches Medium in Erinnerung gebracht werden und damit sich nachhaltig zur Konstitution von Identität unserer Gesellschaft beitragen sollen. Ansonsten würde die an sich stumme Vergangenheit leicht politischer Instrumentalisierung aussetzt. Wie die Begriffsgeschichte der “Vergangenheitsbewältigung” in der alten Bundesrepublik belehrt, wird die Last der Vergangenheit mit Hilfe mühseliger Aufarbeitung langsam “bewaltigt” und letzten Endes kann ihr negatives Erbe unverkennbar in eine positives Identitätsvorgabe umgewandelt werden.

기억과 역사 : 새로운 역사.문화이론의 정립을 위하여

전진성(Jin-Sung Chun) 한국사학사학회 2003 韓國史學史學報 Vol.0 No.8

The increasing interests in memory refers to the decreasing interest in ‘History’ which has lost the former privileged status in the works of representation of the past and been dependent on the vagaries of “heritage -industry.” While historicity and continuity, two basic schemes of the modern historical thought, lost their relevance to the human life, memory is commonly accounted as an alternative mode of representation. Usually were addressed the very substantial differences between memory and history: The former depends on vivid experiences of the individuals and is characterized by subjectivity, informality, emotionality, plurality, concreteness. The later one oppositely depends on intellectual works and characterized by objectivity, formality, rationality, singularity, abstractness. These apparently contradictory strands made historians hitherto inhospitable to paying close attention to the confines of memory. Currently, however, such a conventional idea has been coming into questions. The new theories of ‘collective memory’ address the issue that memory results not only from the communications of closed social groups but also from their ‘cultural’ acts constructing the lasting images of the past. Itmight be a pressing point regarding this issue that the enmity between memory and history traces back to the different formative principles: the spatial and temporal schemes. This assumption is in line with the issues pertaining to the mediums of memory. Stimulated by the abrupt experiences of electronic mass media, all the modes of representation fall into discredit, then the prevailing conception of history should be relativized. Now it could be said that ‘history’ changed the modes of representation from repetition to recollection and this tendency depended on the rising print culture which used to ‘textualize’ vivid images of the past. So the difference between memory and history in no way precludes their common ground. The issue concerning oblivion and identity incidentally inform us about the constructive character of memory-it puts an end to its enmity against history. The remarked theory of memory foreshadows some of the main issues concerning our historical science. Today's historians are ready to blame theirselves on the absence of historical consciousness: They used to treat the past as the pure cognitive object and thereby played a decisive role in petrifying organic relations of present and past. The historians now in earnest strive to place the domain of history within the broad scope of memory. This new tendency can be well illustrated by the methodological concepts like “historical culture” as well as “Erinnerungskultur(memorialculture).”

서독 '구조사' 서술의 지적 배경과 성격 - 근대성 비판과 방법론적 혁신의 상호관련을 중심으로 -

전진성 (Jin Sung Chun) 한국서양사학회 1999 西洋史論 Vol.61 No.1

The intellectual origin of the German Strukturgeschichte can be found in Jungkonservatismus of the Weimar period, not in the ideology of Nazis. The proponents of this intellectual stream shared an extreme antimodernist mode of thought. However, in comparison with the traditional Altkonservativen, they have never intended to return to the premodern world, but to reorganize the modern world by their own Geist. This ambivalent attitude toward Modernity has been the cause of historiographical paradox, a paradox between the extreme antimodernism and methodological innovation. The forerunners of the German Strukturgeschichte are not the French Annales school, but the historians of the German Volksgeschichte of 1920s-1940s. The jungkonservative historians like Hans Rothfels and Hermann Aubin, who have rejected all modern political-ethical values, were free from the traditional etatistic concept of history. They accepted the new paradigm of Volk and started to research the anonymous and collective structure of premodern peasant societies. In this scientific milieu grew up a new generation of historians like Werner Conze, Theodor Schieder and Otto Brunner. They have been the projector of the German Strukturgeschichte. The Strukturgeschichte, compared to the Volksgeschichte, has taken the modern world, particularly industrial society, as the central theme of historical studies. But both share the ambivalent thought of Modernity. Under the influence of neoconservative social theories, especially that of Hans Freyer`s, the historians of the Strukturgeschichte critically diagnosed technocentric, functionalistic, and posthistoric features of technisch-industrielles Zeitalter. The Strukturgeschichte has made an epoch in the history of German historiography with its ambivalent attitude toward Modernity and its own methodological instruments.

역사와 기억 - 기억의 터 에 대한 최근 독일에서의 논의

전진성(Jin Sung Chun) 한국서양사학회 2002 西洋史論 Vol.0 No.72

N/A