동아시아에서 독해된 제국의 휴머니즘 : 1930년대 행동주의 문학론과 조선, 일본, 그리고 베트남

가게모토츠요시 ( Kagemoto Tsuyoshi ) 민족문학사학회·민족문학사연구소 2021 민족문학사연구 Vol.76 No.-

본 논문은 1930년대 한국문학에서 논의된 행동주의문학론을 프랑스-일본-조선이라는 문학론 유입의 일방적 흐름이 아니라 아시아적 관점에서 보고자 하는 것이다. 행동주의문학론은 파시즘에 경도되어 가는 프랑스에서 시작하여 곧바로 일본에서 소개된다. 그와 동시기에 행동주의문학론은 식민지 조선에서도 논의되기 시작한다. 그것은 인민전선노선이나 사회주의리얼리즘론과 함께 30년대 문단의 한 주제였다. 본 논문은 우선 행동주의가 식민지 조선에서 어떻게 논의되었는지를 확인한다. 다음으로 일본에 행동주의를 소개한 고마츠 기요시(小松清)가 파리 체류 시절에 호치민과 교류한 사실을 논의하고 40년대 전반에 베트남에 머물면서 문학적 실천을 했다는 것을 확인한다. 행동주의문학론은 프랑스 제국에서 시작하였으나 조선이나 베트남이라는 관점을 통해 볼 때 다르게 읽을 수 있다는 것이다. 식민지에서의 휴머니즘은 탈식민의 상상력을 밀고나가지 못했다. 그러나 식민지 조선에서의 문학론을 아시아에서의 휴머니즘의 모색으로까지 확장하며 논의함으로써 논자들의 상상력의 폭을 확인할 수 있다. This paper examines the activist literature discussed by Korean literature in the 1930s from an Asian perspective. Activist literary theory began in France, just before fascism. It was soon introduced in Japan. It was also introduced in Korea. Activist literary theory, along with the Popular Front and Socialist Realism, was the subject of the 1930s. This paper first confirms how activism was discussed in colonial Korea. Second, I will discuss Kiyoshi Komatsu, who introduced activist literature to Japan. He met Ho Chi Minh when he lived in Paris. He worked in Vietnam in the 1940s. Activist literature began in France, but we can reread from the perspective of Korea and Vietnam. Colonial humanism did not reach the imagination of decolonization. However, by confirming its imagination from Asia, it is possible to confirm the potential of the imagination of Korean literature in the 1930s.

전쟁기 휴머니즘 비평의 논리와 한계

장은영(Jang, Eun-Young) 우리문학회 2018 우리文學硏究 Vol.0 No.59

본고는 전쟁과 한국사회의 정치적 환경 그리고, 우익 문단의 정착이라는 조건들 속에서 등장한 휴머니즘 비평의 논리와 한계를 성찰적으로 재조명해보고자 한다. 전쟁기 휴머니즘 비평의 양상을 보면 첫째, 인간과 반인간이라는 이원구도 위에서 인간의 본질을 구현하는 순수문학의 또 다른 기표로 사용되었다. 인간의 영역에 휴머니즘, 순수문학, 민족문학을 위치시킴으로써 사회주의 문학을 비롯한 정치적 참여 문학을 반인간으로 치부한 김동리는 전쟁이 발발하자 문학이 전쟁을 위한 정신의 무기가 되어야 한다는 모순적 주장을 펼치기도 했다. 인간과 반인간의 이원 구도는 전쟁의 무기를 자처하는 문학마저도 휴머니즘적인 순수 문학으로 간주하는 무차별적 선별조건으로 작동했다. 둘째, 행동적 휴머니즘은 전쟁 동원과 선전을 자처하며, 인간성을 배제와 포섭의 대상으로 삼았다. 곽종원 등이 주장한 행동적 휴머니즘은 반인간적인 것에 대항하는 실천과 행동이 곧 전쟁 승리라는 도식을 설정함으로써 휴머니즘을 도구화하고 전체주의적 논리로 나아갔다. 또한 내셔널리즘적 인간상을 새로운 인간형으로 내세움으로써 인간성을 개조의 대상으로 삼는 인공적 휴머니즘론으로 나아갔다. 셋째, 냉전질서를 세계체제의 보편적 이념으로 수용하는 매개로 등장했다. 미국 주도의 냉전체제가 내세운 휴머니즘을 여과없이 받아들여 공산주의를 견제하는 냉전 시대의 휴머니즘을 보편적 가치로 수용했다. 비평가들은 냉전의 질서를 따름으로써 한국사회가 보다 현대적인 면모를 갖추리라 기대했을 뿐 냉전체제 하 휴머니즘의 편향성을 직시하지는 못했다. 전쟁기 휴머니즘 비평은 전쟁이 초래한 반인간적 폭력에 대항하지 못하고 전쟁을 방관했기 때문에 전시체제의 도구라는 평가를 받는다. 그러나 그 한계의 이면에는 인간을 말살하는 전쟁이라는 실존의 위기가 있다. 이 위기에 대한 두려움은 적과 나를 이원화하고 적을 반휴머니즘적, 반인간적인 괴물로 수사화하여 인간의 범주에서 배제시키는 결과를 초래했다. 그럼에도 전쟁기 휴머니즘 비평이 전시의 충격 속에서 문학의 역할과 정신적 출구를 찾고자 한 시도임을 부인할 수는 없다. 결과적으로는 전쟁기 휴머니즘 비평은 전쟁기 문학장의 굴절상을 보여주는 한국 문학의 유산으로써 전쟁이 문학의 자율성을 통제했으며 인간과 인간성마저 왜곡했음을 보여준다. Modern Korean literature has developed a focus on humanism. Humanism is a concept that has many meanings in the history of Korean literature. This research examined aspects of the criticism of humanity during the war. There are three aspects of the criticism of humanity during the Korean war that relevant to this study. First, Humanism was used as another signifier of pure literature. Kim Dong-ri written on humanity, pure literature, and national literature in the field of humanity. As a result, socialist literature was considered anti-human and he made a quantum claim that literature should be ‘weapon of spirit’ for war. The two-way structure that is both human and anti-human was a criterion that considered literature, which had fallen into use as a weapon of war, as a purely humanist form of literature. Second, behavioral humanism justified the propaganda of war mobilization and used humanity as a target of both exclusion and inclusion. Behavioral humanism claimed that action against anti-humanitarianism is a product of war. Therefore it became the tool of humanity and was characterized by totalitarian logic. Third, some critics accepted the Cold War order as a universal ideology of the global system. They accepted the Cold War’s humanist spirit of acknowledging communism as a universal value. During the war, humanismcriticism failed to show anti-war sentiment and could not resist anti-human violence. Thus, the humanism-criticism during the Korean war is often criticized. Nevertheless, the humanism-criticism during the Korean war period is an attempt to find an outlet for oneself as well as literature amid the shock of war. It is a part of our literary heritage which reflect the reflexibility of our wartime literary field during times of war.

"사회"의 문학,반행동주의,아카데미즘: 1950년대 『사상계』의 문학성 인식과 최재서의 전략

정영진 ( Yeong Jin Jeong ) 민족문학사학회.민족문학사연구소 2012 민족문학사연구 Vol.48 No.-

Jae-seo Choi did not published his works in other literary magazines but continuously did in <Sasanggye (World of Thoughts)> mainly on the literary theory in terms of a theory. The college students majoring in literature in the 1950`s were influenced by the trend of the time that studied literature as the ``knowledge and idea`` in the academic aspect which is based on the distrust toward the literary circles. Choi emphasized the ``ideas`` in the literature by emphasizing the characteristic of the anti- activist and introspective ``intelligence`` and the sense of identity of literary people and intellects. He hoped literature to realize the complete humanity capable of overcoming the crisis of the times and comprehensive humanity. His literary theory of order and integration suggested the humanism as critical spirit or the anti-activist humanism rather than activist humanism. Choi`s academic literary theory supported the awareness of ``literary values`` which was thought out through the cultural strategy of <Sasanggye>, the educational magazine for intellects that pursued the modernization in all aspects, as the intra-literary principle. The autonomy of literature when he pursued the complete literature of integration and order and the literature as the humanism that aims for comprehensive and complete humanity indicates the integration of the literature itself into the society rather than the liberation from the society. In other words, Choi summarized the aesthetic norms of the literature which achieves the idea he regarded through <Sasanggye> or the zeitgeist and it was the response to the awareness of ``literary values`` in <Sasanggye> that emphasized the role of literature as the faculty in charge of humanity. The emphasis is placed on the aspect that the theoretical literary theory of Choi which supported the awareness of literary value in <Sasanggye> occupied a contrasting position against the collusion of the authority of the literary circles and literary knowledge centering on literary magazines. The academic literary theory of Choi indirectly revealed the closedness of the literary group by showing whether the literature can establish a relationship with the social reality as a unique system. This is the reason Choi could compromise with the strategy of <Sasanggye> of inducing intelligent public into modernization and social integration project through literature.

한흑구 시에 나타난 ‘자유’의 의미 연구 - 미국 체험을 통한 근대 전환기 담론의 전유를 중심으로

박성준 한국문학연구학회 2023 현대문학의 연구 Vol.- No.79

Han Hek-gu is well known as a prose writer, but before his involvement in the Suyangdongwoo incident, he was more active as a poet. Unlike the majority of the literary figures of the time who studied English literature in Japan and dominated the media of colonial Korea in the 1930s, Han had a unique background of studying English literature in the United States for about 6 years. Therefore, the liberalism he experienced through the United States became a major pathway to understanding the literary achievements of his early poetry. In his critiques “The American Character in Literature,” “Humanism in Literature Theory,” and “The Integrity of American Literature,” the issues of English literature and liberalism that he dealt with are closely related to contemporary discourses such as neo-humanism, humanisme de l`action progressivism, and advocate of intelligence that were vibrant in colonial Korea at the time. Through these critiques, Han analyzed the way American society cheaply accepted capitalism and freedom, and sought to explore the true meaning of ‘freedom’. For example, the “freedom” in his early poems such as “On the Deck,” “Inside the Night Train,” “Nature and Life,” and “Freedom” are characterized by being linked to class conflicts. These poems can be seen as depicting the lives of the people who are becoming increasingly degraded due to the distorted acceptance of capitalistic imperialism. Han did not try to differentiate freedom and equality as separate values, but rather recognized them both as concepts that lead to true democracy in modern Western thought. Similarly, as neo-humanism and progressivism were recognized as new ideological breakthroughs in American society during the transition to modernity, he sought to explore similar ideological contexts in his poetry in colonial Korea, and further hoped for resistance against the Japanese occupation and the establishment of Korea as a modern nation. 한흑구는 수필가로 잘 알려져 있지만, 수양동우회 사건에 연루되기 이전까지 시인으로서의 활동이 더 활발했던 문학인이다. 당대 해외문학파 일군 대다수가 일본에서 영문학을 전공하여 1930년대에 접어들면서 식민지 조선의 미디어를 장악해간 것에 반해, 한흑구는 도미(渡美) 이후 약 6년간 미국에 체류하면서 미국 본토에서 영문학을 전공한 특수한 이력을 가지고 있었다. 그 때문에 미국을 통해 추체험 된 자유주의는 그의 초기 시의 문학적 성과를 가늠하는 데 주요한 통로가 된다. 그의 비평 「문학상으로 본 미국인의 성격」, 「휴머니즘 문학론」, 「미국문학의 眞髓」 등에서 전유한 영문학과 자유주의의 문제는 당대 조선에서 활력을 띠고 있었던 네오휴머니즘, 행동주의, 지성 옹호 등과 같은 근대 전환기 담론들과 관련이 깊다. 한흑구는 이 비평문들을 통해 미국 사회가 자본주의와 자유를 저속하게 수용한 양상들을 분석하면서, ‘자유’의 참뜻에 관해 탐구하려고 했다. 가령, 초기 시 <甲板 우에서>, <밤 電車 안에서>, <自然·人生>, <자유> 등에서의 “자유”는 계급적 모순 상황과 연동하여 사유하는 특징을 가진다. 이는 배금주의로 경도된 자본주의의 그릇된 수용으로 인해 피폐해져 가는 민중들의 삶의 현장을 형상화하고 있는 시편이라 평가할 수 있다. 한흑구는 자유와 평등을 서로 다른 가치로 구분하려 했던 것이 아니라, 두 가치 모두가 진정한 민주주의에 다다르는 근대 서구의 사상이라고 인지한 것이다. 아울러 미국 사회에서 신휴머니즘이나 프래그머티즘이 근대를 전환하는 새로운 사상적 돌파구로 인지됐듯이, 조선에 현실에서도 전유할 사상적 맥락을 자신의 시를 통해 모색하고자 했으며, 더 나아가 일제에 항거하여 조선이 근대 국가로 존립하기를 희망했다.

해방기 식민기억과 청춘론

이행선(Lee, Haeng Seon) 동악어문학회 2014 동악어문학 Vol.63 No.-

해방기는 전국민의 건국 사업 참여가 요구된 ‘행동’의 시대였다. 여론조사와 선거 제도가 도입되면서 ‘인민’의 정치 참여의 길이 열리기 시작했다. 특히 청년이 새시대의 주역이었다. 이들의 행동은 범람했고 사회는 요동쳤다. 시대가 급변할 때면 기성세대는 사회구성원에게 사회의 안정을 얘기한다. 이 당시도 예외가 아니다. 그러나 기성세대는 식민지 시대의 청년이었고 그 시대의 역사에 책임이 있다. 따라서 이들이 새로운 청년세대에게 계몽적 언설을 하기 위해서는 먼저 선배의 권위를 인정받아야 했다. 그러나 주지하듯 사회의 중견이 된 지식계급은 ‘식민지시대와 그 세대’를 부정하려는 청년세대와 맞부딪치게 된다. 새로운 ‘건국세대’의 지지를 받기 위해 30대 후반에서 40대에 이르는 장년세대는 기성세대만의 가치를 내세울 필요가 있었고, (자존감의 차원에서라도) 식민경험을 특권화해야 했다. 이러한 맥락에서 해방기는 민족과 국가의 역사를 (재)구축하기 위한 각종 기억이 분투하는 장이자 세대간의 경쟁이 심화된 시기이기도 했다. 이를 상기한다면 식민지기를 거쳐 장년에 이른 문인이 과거 기억을 역사화 하여 민족의 수난사를 특정 계급 및 이념의 것으로 특권화 하는 국면에 주목해야 한다. 특히 해방기 청년이 새시대 주역이긴 했지만 이들 역시 식민지 시대에서 교육을 받고 총력전기에 다양하게 동원되거나 스스로 지원했다는 점에서 대일협력에 저항한 기성세대가 말할 수 있는 ‘틈새’가 열린다. 이 글에서는 장년의 ‘언론인-작가’인 설정식의 식민기억과 행동 및 청춘론을 통해 자전적이고 세대론적인 글쓰기의 성격과, 이념과 행동의 관계, 식민유산의 청산 문제를 분석하여 설정식의 정치사상사적 지향을 가늠하고자 했다. The Liberation Period are required to participate in all the people who make this country was the era of action. “Polls and electoral systems” with the introduction of the people were able to participate in politics. In particular, the leading role of the young man was a new era. Their behavior was escalating, the society is hit bumps. When it comes the changing times, the older generation to members of the community to talk about the stability of the society. This time is no exception. However, the older generation has a responsibility to its colonial history. Therefore, they first had to be admitted to the senior authority in order to enlighten the new generation of youth. However, the young man denied a senior generation. The older generation is created and the value of their own colonial experience had to be privileged. The Liberation Period in this context of the history of the nation and the state (re)building was a time for a variety of competing memories. In addition, the time between the generations was also a fierce competition. Considering these points, we remember senior writers in the past by selecting the particular history of the nation as a particular class or ideology should focus on privileged situation. In particular, the young protagonist of this new era is right. However, they are also trained in the colonial period. They also vary the end of the colonial mobilization or self supported. In this regard, the seniors are entitled to speak to juniors is made. In this article, the authors have memories of the colonial era, the discourse act, the youth looked discourse. This allows intergenerational writing, ‘behavior and memory’ of the problem, issue, saying the liquidation of the colonial heritage sought.

『文学案内』誌 研究 : 行動主義文学論議を中心に

海老原豊(Ebihara Yutaka) 동북아시아문화학회 2011 동북아 문화연구 Vol.1 No.28

〈Bungaku Annai〉 magazine published in July, 1935. This magazine(the chief editor: Kishi Yamaji) was an expression of his belief after conversion, for the purpose of construction of new literature by the working masses. However this magazine has planed tie-up with activist workers in the early times. Therefore, this magazine was different from before Marxists. This paper aims for analyzing the point of contact between 〈Bungaku Annai〉 magazine and Literary of Activism in japan. First of all, I will examine of the literary argument of activism in japan on 1930’, the following part, examining how was it developed the literary argument of activism on 〈Bungaku Annai〉 magazine in the last stage of it’s argument. Through this study, I think what is the point of contact between 〈Bungaku Annai〉 magazine and literary of activism workers.

兪鎮午「金講師とT教授」日本語改作本研究 - 行動主義文學と関連して -

海老原豊 동북아시아문화학회 2012 동북아 문화연구 Vol.1 No.31

The study of <Teacher Kim & Professor T>by Yoo,Jin-O, adapted into japanese in 1937. -in relation to literary argument of Activism. Ebihara Yutaka Yoo, Jin-O stopped creative activity since he published <Teacher Kim & Professor T> in <Shindonga>magazine in January, 1935. And he suddenly published japanese adaptation <Teacher Kim & Professor T> in <Bunngaku Annai>magazine two years later. As a matter of fact, during that time the literary argument of activism was unfolded ardently at Japan and Korea. And the literature of activism was attempted to create at Korea in same time. These short stories was published in <Dancheung>magazine from 1937 to 1938. Therefore this paper aims for analyzing whether literary argument of activism on 1930' was connected with japanese adaptation <Teacher Kim & Professor T> or not. First of all, I will examine of literary argument of activism at Japan and Korea on 1930', the following part, examining short stories of <Dancheung>magazine from 1937 to 1938. Because of these short stories of <Dancheung>magazine are appearing for many constituents of <literature of activism> in Korea. and Lastly, I will analyze japanese adaptation <Teacher Kim & Professor T> by using constituents of <literature of Activism> as yardstick .

해방 이후 곽종원 비평의 주체성 모색

서승희 한국문학이론과비평학회 2010 한국문학이론과 비평 Vol.49 No.-

In this study, the logic and features of criticism of Gwak, Jong-won in the period through liberation to Korean War around the 『Research of new human kindness』(1955), the critiques of Gwak, Jong-won. As a member of 'Chosun Association of Youth Writers', which was the avant-garde group of the right wing literary world in the period of liberation, Gwak, Jong-won stood in the main axis forming the argument on 'pure literature' along with Kim, Dong-ri, Cho, Yeon-hyeon, etc. Those members of Chosun Association of Youth Writers emphasized on the freedom of literature and the characters of creating subjects against the left wing literature world, and Gwak Jong-won developed unique argument through formation of 'neo-idealism' and the 'new human kindness' which would realize that. It was the argument supporting the national establishment only of south Korea in literature, and in the face of that, the criticism of Gwak, Jong-won might be the highly political literature theory. After the Korean War, the theory of 'new human kindness' in Gwak, Jong-won's criticism was modified with its internal meaning from the subject of national establishment to the subject recovering the national crisis, and stressed the duty of literature in the period of war through the theory of 'behaviorism humanism'. But his theory of literature which focused on the individual sacrifice for all lost its position in the post-war literature world where was full of devastated human kindness. It was the forewarning for the introduction of new criticism which would fill in for the theory of 'pure literature' which had been established through the confrontation of theory and the exclusion of others.

문예비평의 네오휴머니즘과 행동주의

박미령 용인대학교 1998 용인대학교 논문집 Vol.15 No.-

이헌구 비평 연구

최윤정 ( Yun Jung Choi ) 국제비교한국학회 2014 비교한국학 Comparative Korean Studies Vol.22 No.1

This paper grasp that implies the national discourse in Lee Heon Gu``s criticism. But this variety of discourse go between the Proletarian Literature and that of Nationalistic Literature. The evaluations about Lee Heon Gu was leaning on the KAPF``s assessment. Take a deep look inside itself, Lee Heon Gu``s criticism, we understand that his discourse overcome the limitations of Proletarian literature and Nationalistic Literature during the colonial period. He criticized on Proletarian Literary tradition wrong and Nationalistic Literary non-proletarian inclination, and advocated Behaviorism, which could overcome them. He emphasized the sociological role of literature as a nation. And at the same time, he commented on Nationalistic Literary the traditional regression. He presented a new Genealogy writing for tradition. In addition, he fulfilled the translation tasks independently from Japanese imperialism. Also he even world literatur-oriented, mind the uniqueness of Chosun. Moreover, he warned escapism in terms of sociological criticism. Consequently Lee Heon Gu presented an independent direction of our literature from different angles.