李德懋의 金昌協 비평 수용 연구 - 李奎報에 대한 비평을 중심으로 -

김경 민족어문학회 2016 어문논집 Vol.- No.78

This paper aims to grasp the influential relationship with Kim Changhyeop in a development of Lee Deokmu's literary criticism. In other word, it investigates questions about how Lee Deokmu encounters Kim Changhyeop's critical perspectives and why he tries to accept it actively. To this end, I verified in which way Lee Deokmu accepted for Kim Changhyeop's literary criticism and comparatively analyzed Kim's Number 25 of 「JapJiOePyeon」 and Lee's 「LeeChunGyeong」. Firstly, Lee Deokmu had associated particularly with disciples of Lee Jae among the line of NongAm because of his wife's family. This explains in which way Lee Deokmu accepted for Kim's literary criticism. Among these disciples, Kim Jonghu and Kim Yonggyeom had interacted with Lee Deokmu directly. Especially Kim Yonggyeom had the greatest impact in a process of his reception for the literary spirit of Kim Changhyeop. Secondly, I comparatively analyzed Kim's Number 25 of 「JapJiOePyeon」 and Lee's 「LeeChunGyeong」. Lee Deokmu focuses on Kim Changhyeop's literary criticism in two points. Lee concentrates on Kim's precise literary criticism and his critical attitude of accepting the criticisms of previous generations. And Lee focuses on his attitude of writing and his emphasis on a inner cultivation. I confirmed that they were similar in their stances, which was flexible toward literature even though it was based on the neo-Confucianism. I also assured that Lee Deokmu's such attitude toward criticism was closely linked to Kim Changhyeop. However, Lee Deokmu gave his priority to writer's attitude of writing over his inner condition in creative writing. That is a reinterpretation to Kim Changhyeop' literary criticism. Consequently, it can be said that Lee Deokmu is not a mere imitator but an active accepter of Kim Changhyeop by focusing on his critical and academic attitudes. 본고는 李德懋의 비평형성에 있어서 金昌協과의 영향관계를 파악하고자 하는것이다. 즉 이덕무가 어떤 경로로 김창협의 비평관을 접하게 되었고, 무엇 때문에 김창협을 적극적으로 수용하려 하였는가라는 의문을 구명한 것이다. 이를 위해 李奎報 漢詩에 대한 비평에 한정하여 김창협의 『雜識外篇』25칙과 이덕무의 『李春卿』을 비교분석하였다. 먼저 이덕무가 유독 農巖系 문인들 중 李縡의 문하생들과 교유양상을 보여주는 것은 처가의 영향이라 할 수 있다. 또한 이들 문하생 중 이덕무와 직접적인 교류를 보인 인물은 金鍾厚와 金用謙인데, 특히 김용겸은 이덕무가 김창협의 문풍을 수용하는 과정에 있어 가장 큰 영향을 준 인물이었다. 다음으로는 이규보 한시에 대한 비평인 김창협의 「 잡지외편」25칙과 이덕무의 「이춘경」을 비교분석하였다. 이덕무가 김창협의 비평에서 주목한 점은 첫째는 치밀한 비평과 전대 비평에 대한 비판적 수용태도이고, 둘째는 창작 태도와 관련된 작가에게 요구되는 내적수양의 중시였다. 이덕무와 김창협은 주자학을 바탕으로 하면서도 문예영역에서 유연한 자세를 보인다는 측면에서 유사한 면모를 확인하였고, 이를 통해 이덕무의 이러한 비평태도가 김창협과 연계되어 있다는 점 역시 알 수있었다. 하지만 창작에 있어서 이덕무는 작가의 내적조건보다 창작태도를 우선시하였는데, 이는 김창협의 비평을 재해석하려는 태도였다. 따라서 이덕무는 김창협 비평에 대해 모방이 아니라, 무엇보다 그의 비평태도와 학문적 자세에 주목하여 적극적인 수용 자세를 보였고 비평에서도 이에 상응하는 모습을 보인 것이다.

高麗時期的“東坡熱”與李奎報詩歌

柳素?(Liu Sojin) 서울대학교 동아문화연구소 2012 東亞文化 Vol.50 No.-

Su Shi (蘇軾,1036-1101)was one of the most distinguished poets in the Northern Song (北宋) Dynasty (960-1127), until now most of his poems are very influential, and he occupies important position in the history of Chinese literature. The Goryeo (高麗) Dynasty (918–1392) has maintained friendly relationship with the Northern Song Dynasty for ages, and the two countries have promoted the exchange of culture, in result Su Shi’s poems were introduced into Goryeo during his lifetime. After that, his poems were widely read by the poets of Goryeo, and several poets of Goryeo liked to recite his poems, in a short time, he gained a great reputation in the literary circle of Goryeo. Even a phenomenon called ‘Dongpo syndrome (東坡熱)’ was formed, and it never disappeared until the latter period of Choseon (朝鮮) Dynasty (1392-1910). First of all, this study considered a phenomenon called ‘Dongpo syndrome’ in all aspects. It shows us how deep ancient Korean poets’ admire for Su Shi was, and it also helps us to infer how big Su Shi’s influence in the literary circle of Goryeo and Choseon was. Generally speaking, since Su Shi’s poems were first introduced into Korea in the middle of the Goryeo Dynasty, almost every ancient Korean poet was influenced by Su Shi. However, among them, Lee Gyubo (李奎報,1168-1241) who was one of the most famous poets in Goryeo seems to be most deeply influenced by Su Shi. So, in this study I gave a careful consideration to how Su Shi had effected on Lee Gyubo’s poems. First, he often used Su Shi’s rhyming words when he wrote poems, it means he deeply admired Su Shi, and it also shows us his will to study Su Shi’s poetry. Secondly, when he wrote poems, he exploited many sources which were related with Su Shi or many phrases from Su Shi’s poems. Thirdly, when he described someone in poem, he used to apply sources of historical figure who had the same surname as him, it is one of the characteristic features shown in the Su Shi’s poems, therefore we can suppose it was the influence of Su Shi. In writing style of poem, Lee Gyubo’s is very similar to Su Shi’s. Many critics agree that magnanimity and generosity, humor and satire, ideological and philosophical description were the most distinguishing features of Su Shi’s poetry. Through this study, I found that Lee Gyubo’s poems also have these features, and it seems to be Su Shi’s influence. Like these, Lee Gyubo’s poems were greatly influenced by Su Shi in many aspects. But we have to notice that unlike other poets of Goryeo who were simply imitating Su Shi’s poems, Lee Gyubo insisted on a poetic theory called ‘Xinyilun (新意論)’, which was highly regarding a poet’s individuality and the originality of poems. Finally, he succeeded in creating his own poetic style.

이덕무(李德懋)의 김창협(金昌協)비평 수용 연구 -이규보(李奎報)에 대한 비평을 중심으로-

김경 ( Kim Kyung ) 민족어문학회 2016 어문논집 Vol.- No.78

본고는 李德懋의 비평형성에 있어서 金昌協과의 영향관계를 파악하고자 하는 것이다. 즉 이덕무가 어떤 경로로 김창협의 비평관을 접하게 되었고, 무엇 때문에 김창협을 적극적으로 수용하려 하였는가라는 의문을 구명한 것이다. 이를 위해 李奎報 漢詩에 대한 비평에 한정하여 김창협의 「雜識外篇」 25칙과이덕무의 「李春卿」을 비교분석하였다. 먼저 이덕무가 유독 農巖系 문인들 중 李縡의 문하생들과 교유양상을 보여주는 것은 처가의 영향이라 할 수 있다. 또한 이들 문하생 중 이덕무와 직접적인 교류를 보인 인물은 金鍾厚와 金用謙인데, 특히 김용겸은 이덕무가 김창협의 문풍을 수용하는 과정에 있어 가장 큰영향을 준 인물이었다. 다음으로는 이규보 한시에 대한 비평인 김창협의 「잡지외편」 25칙과 이덕무의 「이춘경」을 비교분석하였다. 이덕무가 김창협의 비평에서 주목한 점은 첫째는 치밀한 비평과 전대 비평에 대한 비판적 수용태도이고, 둘째는 창작 태도와 관련된 작가에게 요구되는 내적수양의 중시였다. 이덕무와 김창협은 주자학을 바탕으로 하면서도 문예영역에서 유연한 자세를 보인다는 측면에서 유사한 면모를 확인하였고, 이를 통해 이덕무의 이러한 비평태도가 김창협과 연계되어 있다는 점 역시 알 수 있었다. 하지만, 창작에 있어서 이덕무는 작가의 내적조건보다 창작태도를 우선시 하였는데, 이는 김창협의 비평을 재해석하려는 태도였다. 따라서 이덕무는 김창협 비평에 대해 모방이 아니라, 무엇보다 그의 비평태도와 학문적 자세에 주목하여 적극적인 수용 자세를 보였고 비평에서도 이에 상응하는 모습을 보인 것이다. This paper aims to grasp the influential relationship with Kim Changhyeop in a development of Lee Deokmu`s literary criticism. In other word, it investigates questions about how Lee Deokmu encounters Kim Changhyeop`s critical perspectives and why he tries to accept it actively. To this end, I verified in which way Lee Deokmu accepted for Kim Changhyeop`s literary criticism and comparatively analyzed Kim`s Number 25 of 「JapJiOePyeon」 and Lee`s 「LeeChunGyeong」. Firstly, Lee Deokmu had associated particularly with disciples of Lee Jae among the line of NongAm because of his wife`s family. This explains in which way Lee Deokmu accepted for Kim`s literary criticism. Among these disciples, Kim Jonghu and Kim Yonggyeom had interacted with Lee Deokmu directly. Especially Kim Yonggyeom had the greatest impact in a process of his reception for the literary spirit of Kim Changhyeop. Secondly, I comparatively analyzed Kim`s Number 25 of 「JapJiOePyeon」 and Lee`s 「LeeChunGyeong」. Lee Deokmu focuses on Kim Changhyeop`s literary criticism in two points. Lee concentrates on Kim`s precise literary criticism and his critical attitude of accepting the criticisms of previous generations. And Lee focuses on his attitude of writing and his emphasis on a inner cultivation. I confirmed that they were similar in their stances, which was flexible toward literature even though it was based on the neo-Confucianism. I also assured that Lee Deokmu`s such attitude toward criticism was closely linked to Kim Changhyeop. However, Lee Deokmu gave his priority to writer`s attitude of writing over his inner condition in creative writing. That is a reinterpretation to Kim Changhyeop` literary criticism. Consequently, it can be said that Lee Deokmu is not a mere imitator but an active accepter of Kim Changhyeop by focusing on his critical and academic attitudes.

포조의 「尺蠖賦」 와 이규보의 「放蟬賦」 내용 비교 -현실인식에 따른 처세관을 중심으로-

윤혜지 ( Yun Hye-ji ) 한국외국어대학교 중국연구소 2016 中國硏究 Vol.68 No.-

This research investigated the worldly wisdom view of Baozhao and Lee, gyubo on reality cognition in their works, focusing on 「Chihuofu(尺蠖賦)」 of Baozhao(鮑照)`s Cifu(辭賦)and Lee, gyubo(李奎報)`s 「Bangseonbu(放蟬賦)」, who wrote Fu(賦) the most in early Goryeo period Chinese classics. Both of them were the talented persons(奇才) of ill-timed Hwejaebulwoo(懷才不遇), who intended to live their period by selecting the method of adaptation to the period. Baozhao`s 「Chihuofu」 and Lee, gyubo`s 「Bangseonbu」 are the works that well show their way of life, through which their external worldly wise view and their inner worry through it could be imagined. Common ground of their works revealed the worldly wisdom to act by viewing the period and penetrating the others, also, revealed their inner conflict that talked about seclusion as the ideal worldly wise in the dark era, while revealing their inner conflict regarding they couldn`t. Due to such contradictory recognition on reality, they came to have the values of Anbunjijok(安分知足) as a way of self-protection(保身), telling moderation and self-control as a behavior pattern. Lastly, they talked about the nature of life that they perceived by suggesting `Gongsim(空心)` as a way of living the turbulent age. Different points were, first, rather than Baozhao, Lee, gyubo thoroughly put his worldly wise into the practical action, in respect of the object of life, Baozhao reflected himself completely on `an inchworm`, however Lee, gyubo considered cicada as the ideal object that he couldn`t reach. Lastly, while Baozhao concentrated on expression his own emotion(情感), however Lee, gyubo emphasized lessons in his works.

이규보의 <南行月日記>에 나타난 고대사 사료검토 -普德, 元曉, 眞表 관련 기록을 중심으로-

조법종 (사)한국인물사연구회 2010 한국인물사연구 Vol.13 No.-

Lee GyuBo's journey in south region(南行月日記) described Jeonju territory and include many ancient records about unique things and special buddhist monk. His main interest is un-precedented phenomenon, so he watch with deep concern to unique things, especially Boduk(普德), Wonhyo(元曉), Jinpyo(眞表). Boduk fleed from his own country, Koguryo(高句麗) for religious persecution to Jeonju(全州) in Baekje(百濟) territory. His exile is by flying small Buddhist temple(飛來方丈), so it became know to miraculously thing. Then, Lee GyuBo visit that temple and write about that. When he visited to Beonsan(邊山), he seek for Wonhyobang(元曉房), which Wonhyo(元曉) and Sabok(蛇福) dwelling. Wonhyo(元曉) and Sabok(蛇福) stand as a symbol for the guidance of afterlife in Shilla(新羅). For this reason, I think that their presence in Beonsan connected to Baekje resistance. He also went on a visit to Jinpyo(眞表)'s Buddhist hermitage, it named miraculous hermitage(不思義方丈). It posited very highly the edge of precipice. so Lee GyuBo climb up a ladder. He also write about Jinpyo(眞表)'s portrait, and so on. In his write about three Buddhist monk, Boduk(普德), Wonhyo(元曉), Jinpyo(眞表) had unique record and described another points. And he visited dolmen in Gumma(金馬) and decribed that it made by pre historical age people and it represent holy site. So his writings are not only account of a trip but also historical record about Korean ancient history.

이규보의 <南行月日記>에 나타난 고대사 사료검토 : 普德 元曉 眞表 관련 기록을 중심으로

조법종(Cho Bup-Jong) 한국인물사연구소 2010 한국인물사연구 Vol.13 No.-

Lee GyuBo's journey in south region(南行月日記) described Jeonju territory and include many ancient records about unique things and special buddhist monk. His main interest is un-precedented phenomenon, so he watch with deep concern to unique things, especially Boduk(普德), Wonhyo(元曉), Jinpyo(眞表). Boduk fleed from his own country, Koguryo(高句麗) for religious persecution to Jeonju(全州) in Baekje(百濟) territory. His exile is by flying small Buddhist temple(飛來方丈), so it became know to miraculously thing. Then, Lee GyuBo visit that temple and write about that. When he visited to Beonsan(邊山), he seek for Wonhyobang(元曉房), which Wonhyo(元曉) and Sabok(蛇福) dwelling. Wonhyo(元曉) and Sabok(蛇福) stand as a symbol for the guidance of afterlife in Shilla(新羅). For this reason, I think that their presence in Beonsan connected to Baekje resistance. He also went on a visit to Jinpyo(眞表)'s Buddhist hermitage, it named miraculous hermitage(不思義方丈) . It posited very highly the edge of precipice. so Lee GyuBo climb up a ladder. He also write about Jinpyo(眞表)'s portrait, and so on. In his write about three Buddhist monk, Boduk(普德), Wonhyo(元曉), Jinpyo(眞表) had unique record and described another points. And he visited dolmen in Gumma(金馬) and decribed that it made by pre historical age people and it represent holy site. So his writings are not only account of a trip but also historical record about Korean ancient history.

李穀의 詩世界와 自我意識

강동석 한국한문교육학회 2010 한문교육논집 Vol.35 No.-

The purpose of this thesis is to analyze the literary view of the poem written by Ga Jeong, Lee-Gok of the latter part of the Koryo dynasty, to grasp the writer's view, and further to interpret how they all are connected to his self-consciousness in order to form the poem. The characteristic of the poem is to keep expressing the writer's self- consciousness. Poem is a genre which certainly expresses internal consciousness: its focus is to picture both internal and external meanings of the poem in the way of finding a meaning outside of writing. However, not all materials and subjects are like mentioned above. In that point of view, the literature of the poem, in general, relates to the self-consciousness. The reason why this became the starting point of this discussion is because the poem mainly says about self-reflection and reminisce about life. In particular, his writings which are expressed for the whole period make readers as if they are reading diaries. First of all, the awareness of the reality of this poem can be ascertained through the writer's politics: ‘Cheoninsanggwanron’ In fact, the writer thought that ‘Jai’ was related to politics by connecting the idea to the theory of ‘Cheoninsanggwanron’ from ‘Dongjungseo’ which is not easy to ascertain among the literary men, and setting a relationship between the sky and human beings. And he put the reason for the exemplary government in the people. Therefore, his literary views always contain the spirit of loving people, and are formalized agonies of a government official who suffered from contradiction between reality and ideality. In addition, there are a lot of pieces of works which talk about nature as their subject material in the literary view of the poem. The things that readers can catch from the works are the attitude of uncertainty and reflection of life, purification of one's mind that are naturally expressed. This seems to be contained all agonies of his official career, homesickness of his hometown, and longing for his parents when being in government services both in Koryo and Won dynasty. On the other hand, this view of nature has a different type from Neo-Confucianism that Mok-eun Lee-Saek, his son showed, and it is an evidence that Neo-Confucianism had not been established firmly yet. 본 논문은 고려 후기의 문인 稼亭 李穀(1298-1351)의 시세계를 분석하여 거기에 내포된 세계관을 포착하고, 그것이 자아의식과 어떻게 맞닿아 작품에 형상화되고 있는지를 해명하는 데에 목적을 둔다. 이곡 시세계의 특징은 자아의식을 끊임없이 표출하고 있는 데 있다. 물론 시라는 장르가 내면의식의 표출이며 그것을 言外之意로 잘 표현하는 것에 핵심이 있기는 하지만 모든 소재나 주제가 그렇지는 않다. 그러한 점에서 이곡의 시문학은 대개 이 자아의식과 맞물려 있다는 데 특징이 있다. 특히 전 시기에 걸쳐 표현되고 있는 그의 작품들은 마치 일기를 쓰고 있는 듯 삶에 대한 회고와 반성이 주를 이루고 있기에 이를 논의의 출발점으로 삼은 것이다. 우선 이곡의 현실 인식은 그의 정치관인 天人相關論에서 확인 할 수 있다. 사실 성리학적 사고를 지닌 문인들에게서 漢代 董仲舒의 천인상관론을 발견하기란 쉽지 않다. 그런데 이곡은 이 철학적 체계를 끌어 들여 하늘과 인간의 관계를 설정하여, 災異가 인간의 정치와 관련이 있다고 생각한 점은 주목할 만하다. 그리고 그 중심점에 백성을 두고서 善政의 이유를 여기에 두었다. 그렇기에 그의 시에는 늘 애민의식이 담겨 있으며, 현실과 이상으로부터 상충하는 관료로서의 고뇌도 형상화되고 있다. 아울러 이곡의 시세계에는 자연을 소재로 노래한 작품군이 많다. 이 작품들에서 확인되는 것은 자연을 매개로 자연스레 발산되는 인생무상적 태도, 인생에 대한 회고, 내면의 정화 등이다. 이는 고려와 원나라 양국에서 벼슬을 하던 한 문인의 당시 환로에 대한 염증, 고향에 대한 향수, 부모에 대한 그리움 등이 모두 녹아 있는 형상화로 보인다. 이곡의 이러한 자연관은 그의 아들 牧隱 李穡이 보여주었던 성리학적 자연관과 다른 형태의 것으로, 여전히 성리학이 깊이 자리 잡지 않은 것을 방증하는 자연관이기도 하다.

이규보 「개원천보영사시(開元天寶詠史詩)」의 기사(紀事) 선택(選擇)과 구성(構成)에 관하여

이희영 ( Lee Hee-young ) 근역한문학회 2017 한문학논집(漢文學論集) Vol.48 No.-

본고는 이규보가 문학적 역량을 보여주기 시작한 시기에 지었던 「開元天寶詠史詩」43수에서 보이는 기사 선택의 양상과 구성 의도에 대하여 그 의미를 파악하고자 하였다. 이규보가 선택한 기사는 명황과 양귀비 둘 사이에서 벌어지는 내용을 중심축으로 하여, 개원 연간을 보필했던 재상, 명황과 양귀비의 형제들, 이백·왕유와 같은 문인들, 당시의 풍속에 대한 내용들까지 다양하다. 이것은 태평성세에 목표를 잃은 황제의 관심이 美色으로 옮겨진 뒤, 나라가 쇠락해 가는 과정을 보여주고자 한 것으로 보인다. 이규보는 43개의 기사를 서문에서 언급했던 사항들이 잘 드러날 수 있도록 내용들을 선택하여 서사적으로 구성하였다. 개원 연간은 명황을 보필했던 재상과 형제들에 대한 정을 바탕으로 開元之治를 이루었다는 내용의 기사를 영사시의 전반부에 구성하였으나 상대적으로 비중이 적다. 이것은 천보 연간의 失政으로 인하여 나라를 혼란으로 이끌었다는 부정적인 면을 강조하는 기능적인 구성이라고 할 수 있다. 이규보는 ‘명황’이라는 한 개인을 중심으로 역사의 추가 변할 수 있다는 기사들을 구성하여 ‘歷史의 興亡’ 혹은 ‘權力의 無常’과 같은 일반적인 역사의 흐름을 보여주고자 한 것으로 보인다. 이 시기에 이규보는 아버지 상을 마친 뒤 천마산에서 내려와 본격적인 구직활동을 하게 된다. 그는 앞서 언급했지만 巨韻長篇을 이 시기에 집중적으로 쓰고 있으며, 특히 구직 외에도 역사에 대한 관심이 至大한 것은 「東明王篇」이라는 서사시를 지었다는 점에서 확인할 수 있다. 이러한 관심의 연장선상에서 ‘개원·천보’ 연간의 기사를 선택하고 구성하여 43수의 연작시를 짓게 되었을 것으로 본다. 43수의 영사시는 이규보 개인이 역사에 대한 평가를 담고 있기 때문에, 그 속에서 명황의 ‘經世濟民’에 대한 失策을 지적하는 것은 고려사회를 비판하는 寓意적 요소가 있다고 볼 수도 있다. 이러한 점을 인정하면서도 이규보가 더욱 중점을 둔 것은 명황의 역사적 사실을 바탕으로 經世에 대한 자신의 생각을 보여준 것이라고 할 수 있다. 즉 개원 연간의 기사는 그 시대의 정돈된 群臣 관계를 통하여 전성기를 구가한 모습을 본받고, 천보 연간의 기사는 단단하다고 생각했던 나라의 기틀이 한순간에 무너질 수 있다는 생각으로 평소부터 安易한 마음을 단속해야 왕조가 이어질 수 있다는 면을 보여준 것이다. 이규보는 사대부로서 지녀야할 정치적 이상을 43수의 연작시로 말했다고 볼 수 있다. This article explores Yi Gyubo’s historical lyric on the events during Kaiyuan and Tianbao period (開元天寶詠史詩) especially focused on its aspect of selection of records and its organization. The records that lee selected are concentrated with the affairs between Emperor Xuanzong of Tang and Yang Guifei, and it also includes various stories related to ministers, brothers of Tang Xuanzong Yang Guifei, literati like Le Bai and Wang Wei, traditional seasonal customs at that time etc. It is presumable that this selection of material for writing historical lyric is to show the process of downfall of Tang dynasty due to Tang Xuanzong’s being captivated by a woman Lee Gyubo not only selected forty-three records among the whole records but also the content of the record so that the topics mentioned in the prefaces of the records should be clearly represented. As to Kaiyuan (開元) peiod, at the former part of his work Lee arranged the records concerning Tang Xuanzong’s achievement of great politics during Kaiyuan period with ministers and brothers who assisted him, however, it is relatively a minor part of whole work. It is presumed that it is his intention to emphasize the negative aspects of his misgovernment. Lee seems to show the course of history can be changed by a person that is Tang Xuangzong, and to suggest the general principle of history represented by the conception like ‘the rise and fall of history’ and ‘vanity of power’ etc.

이규보 『江南集(강남집)』 연구

이희영 ( Hee Young Lee ) 우리어문학회 2015 우리어문연구 Vol.53 No.-

This paper is to examine the format of Gangnam-jip included in the 6th volume of Dongguk-isangguk-jip and its poetic worlds. Lee Gyubo felt lost suffering a series of misfortunes and expressed the oppression of the heart and the sense of emptiness in his poems as a poor scholar. On the other hand he also expressed his peaceful and released mind during his illness and depression. The remarkable point is that his joyful life in nature is well represented in his Gangnam-jip throughout his life. His joyful life did not last long though, as he expressed his sadness and mental vagueness with the yearning for the life in Gaeseong. In addition, we need to pay attention to his activities after his journey to Gangnam. He started to look for position actively as he arrived at Gaeseong. It is indisputable that he was trying to go with the tide. At the center of this change of mind is Gangnam-jip.

補閑集의 破閑集 續補에 대하여

金善祺(Kim Sunki) 한국언어문학회 2006 한국언어문학 Vol.59 No.-

  This study aims to examine the relationship between Pahanjip, the first Korean book about poems and their related stories and Bohanjip, which was published 40 years later. The main focus of this study is the extensive and augmentative relationship between two books. There were two main reasons to publish Bohanjip. One was the insufficiency of Pahanjip itself, and the other was the demand which the writer of Bohanjip and people around him realized to supplement Pahanjip.<BR>  As a result of the study, Pahanjip was excessively oriented toward Lee Inro’s personal achievements and his view points about literature. Those were recognized as negative factors by other writers. The leading figure who criticized Lee Inro was Choi Wu, who was the ruler of the times. The writer of Bohanjip was Choi Ja. In comparison to Pahanjip, there existed a will to extend and develop the contents of Pahanjip in Bohanjip.<BR>  In extension parts, the quantity and areas of data were expanded. In addition, criticism became more various, and objectivity increased. Bohanjip contains contents which were compiled and evaluated more carefully than Pahanjip. Lee Inro’s rhetorical device which quoted famous old writers’ writing was replaced by Originality Theory. Lee Inro’s place as the head of literary circles was replaced by Lee Gyubo. The efforts to extend the old book and develop it into the new one made a significant contribution to early Korean poetry books.