일제강점기 경성(京城)의 음력설과 양력설 -북촌과 남촌을 중심으로-

안주영 비교민속학회 2019 비교민속학 Vol.0 No.68

The Korean New Year’s Day is the beginning point of the year and also for the seasonal customs, one of the most important seasonal customs of our country. However, due to the situation that the Lunar New Year’s Day originally had been considered as an unofficial holiday, Koreans underwent many confusions and conflicts to reach the conclusion that both the Lunar New Year’s Day and the Solar New Year’s Day were recognized as the national holidays. Despite the condemnation for celebrating both the solar New Year and the lunar New Year, many citizens of Seoul(Keijyo) celebrated the Lunar New Year during the occupation period of the Japanese Imperialism. There was the atmosphere of two differentiated cultures existing in two different regions – ‘Bukchon’ and ‘Namchon’ : the Lunar New Year's Day is called Koreans’ New Year’s Day, and the Solar New Year's Day called the Japanese’ New Year’s Day. This study presents how the Seoul(Keijyo) citizens actually celebrated the two differentiated New Year holidays, the analysis of the articles from the newspaper and magazine to seek the overall stance of the press in specific tone of the news to speak of the two differentiated New Year holidays, and also the documents of interview from the spot survey that was done to native Seoul citizens. Under the situation that it was during the certain Japanese occupation period, the press had to affirm only the Solar New Year’s Day and denied the Lunar New Year’s Day. However, many articles from the newspaper and the magazine often mentioned the importance and the meaning of Lunar New Year’s Day as they indirectly depicted the Lunar New Year’s Day’s lively scenery in Bukchon. Moreover, it was also ascertainable through interviews with the native Seoul citizens and many articles that there was a great awareness that only the Lunar New Year’s Day could be recognized among the past Korean citizens even with vast criticism on celebrating both the solar New Year and the lunar New Year and only praising the Solar New Year’s Day from the Japanese government general of Korea. There were accusations of celebrating both the solar New Year and the lunar New Year, which had lasted throughout the occupation period of the Japanese Imperialism. The press during the Japanese occupation period attempted to link the west modernization with celebrating only the Solar New Year’s Day. The modernization of the West, first adopted by Japan, also challenged the Korean government to adopt the modernization, which had a strong premise of the colonial modernity and encouraged the change of everyday life through the adaptation of solar calendar. This controversy over Solar New Year’s Day and the Lunar New Year’s Day clearly appeared on ‘Namchon’ with Japanese citizens and ‘Bukchon’ with Korean citizens during the occupation period of the Japanese imperialism in Seoul(Keijyo). Such spatial division and regional distinction have a great significance in the sense that they created different scenes with the contrasting meanings of two New Year’s Days − the Lunar New Year’s Day and the Solar New Year’s Day. 한 해의 시작인 설날은 세시풍속의 시작점으로 한국인들에게 가장 중요한 세시풍속의 하나라고 볼 수 있다. 그러나 설날이 지금처럼 양력설과 음력설로 나뉘어 양쪽 모두 공휴일로 인정되고, 음력설이 부정적인 의미의 ‘구정(舊正)’이 아닌 공식적인 의미의 ‘설날’로 달력에 표기되기까지 많은 혼란과 갈등이 있었다. ‘이중과세(二重過歲)’라는 비난을 받으면서도 일제강점기에 경성의 조선인들은 음력설을 지내왔다. “음력설은 조선인의 설, 양력설은 일본인의 설”이라는 말이 공공연히 들릴 정도로 일제강점기 경성에서는 ‘북촌’과 ‘남촌’이라는 분리된 두 장소에서 조선인과 일본인이 각기 다른 설 명절을 쇠는 이분화된 문화가 형성되어 있었다. 본고에서는 일제강점기에 경성 시민들이 양력설과 음력설을 실제로 어떻게 지냈는지, 양력설과 음력설을 지내는 대중을 향한 언론의 입장과 논조는 어떠했는지에 대하여 당시의 신문과 잡지의 기사 분석, 서울 토박이들의 현지조사 면담 자료를 통해 살펴보았다. 신문과 잡지의 기사들은 식민지라는 상황하에서 대외적으로는 양력설을 긍정하고 음력설을 부정하는 입장을 취해야 했으나 간접적으로는 북촌의 활기찬 음력설 풍경을 묘사하면서 음력설의 의미와 그 중요성에 대해 말하고 있었다. 또한 조선총독부에서 양력설을 강조하고 이중과세(二重過歲)를 비난함에도 불구하고 조선인들 사이에서는 여전히 “음력설만이 우리의 설”이라는 인식이 널리 퍼져 있었다는 것도 당시의 여러 신문 기사들의 내용, 서울 토박이들과의 면담 조사를 통해 확인할 수 있었다. 일제강점기 내내 지속되었던 이중과세(二重過歲)의 폐해에 대한 지적과 양력과세를 해야 한다는 당위론적인 논설류의 기사들은 양력과세를 서구의 근대화와 연결짓고자 하였다. 서구의 근대화는 일본이 앞서 도입한 것으로, 우리도 이에 따라야 한다는 식의 논리에는 ‘식민지적 근대성’이 전제되어 있었으며, 이는 ‘양력’이라는 근대 달력의 도입과 함께 일상생활의 변화를 촉구하는 것이었다. 음력설과 양력설을 두고 나타난 이러한 대립은 일제강점기의 경성에서 조선인의 공간인 ‘북촌’과 일본인의 공간인 ‘남촌’이라는 구분된 두 장소에서 뚜렷하게 나타났다. 이러한 공간적 이분화와 ‘구별짓기’는 음력설과 양력설이라는 대조적 의미를 지닌 세시풍속과 맞물려 상당히 대조적인 풍경을 만들었다는 점에서 시사하는 바가 크다.

강렬한 단맛의 폭력: 설탕, 제국과 노예 이야기 - 카라 워커의 <미묘함>과 빅 뮤니츠의 <설탕 아이들>을 중심으로 -

강지선 한국기초조형학회 2022 기초조형학연구 Vol.23 No.2

The purpose of this study is to examine the violence of sugar in the context of capitalistic imperialism by examining Kara Walker’s <A Subtlety> and Vik Muniz’s <Sugar Children>. First, this study explores the meanings of sugar as the symbols of wealth and power and the inseparable relationships among empire, slave, and sugar through the history of sugar. For the next step, this study examines the contemporaneity of empire, slavery, and sugar by relying on the concepts of ‘the new imperialism’ and ‘accumulation by dispossession’ of David Harvey and the concept of ‘Neo-Slave Narratives’ of Valerie Smith. Discussing the meaning and influence of empire and slavery history, this study emphasizes the fact that although imperialism seems to have been ended on the surface level, the exploitative history of slavery and empire has been continuing until now. Kara Walker’s <A Subtlety> and Vik Muniz’s <Sugar Children> represent materially and conceptually the violent aspects of sugar by using it as the main material for their works. Their works based on the history of slave labor-based sugar plantation imply themes of ‘New Imperialism’ and ‘Neo-Slave Narratives’: exploitation and predation, the commodification of black bodies and experiences. Walker expands the violence of slavery, empire, and capital into gender and gentrification. Muniz connects it into another form of exploitation of tourism. Both <A Subtlety> and <Sugar Children> visualize the reality that sugar-related slavery and the violence of capitalistic imperialism have been continuing into today’s ‘new imperialism’. Their works remind the fact that the unending exploitation and violence of sugar are the strongest ‘violence’ itself. Their works also show that art could reveal exploitation and violence that have been secretly flowed in the contemporary globalization era. 본 연구의 목적은 카라 워커(Kara Walker)의 <미묘함(A Subtlety)>과 빅 뮤니츠(Vik Muniz)의<설탕 아이들(Sugar Children)>을 통해 자본주의적 제국주의의 맥락 속에서 설탕의 폭력성을 살펴보기위한 것이다. 연구를 위한 첫 단계로서 역사 속 부와 권력의 상징으로서 설탕의 의미와 제국, 노예, 설탕간의 불가분한 관계성을 고찰한다. 다음으로 데이비드 하비(David Harvey)의 ‘신제국주의(The New Imperialism)’와 ‘강탈에 의한 축적(accumulation by dispossession)’, 그리고 발레리 스미스(Valerie Smith)의 ‘신노예서사(Neo-Slave Narratives)’ 개념에 의존하여 제국, 노예, 설탕의 동시대성을 탐구하고자 한다. 설탕에 깃든 제국주의적 폭력의 동시대적인 의미와 영향력에 대해 논함으로써, 본 연구는표면적으로 제국주의가 종결된 것처럼 보이는 현재에도 노예와 제국의 착취적 역사가 계속되고 있음을강조하려 한다. 워커의 <미묘함>과 뮤니츠의 <설탕 아이들>은 설탕을 주재료로 사용하면서 설탕에내재한 폭력적 양상을 물질적, 개념적으로 구현한다. 이 두 작업은 설탕 플랜테이션의 역사를 중심에두고 착취와 약탈, 흑인 몸과 경험, 그리고 역사와 문화의 상품화라는 신제국주의와 신노예서사의 주제들을 다루고 있다. 이러한 노예, 제국, 자본의 폭력성을 워커는 젠더(gender)와 ‘젠트리피케이션(gentrification)’이라는 현대 도시의 쟁점으로 확장한다면, 뮤니츠는 ‘관광’이라는 또 다른 착취의 방식에접목한다. 따라서 <미묘함>과 <설탕 아이들>은 설탕에 얽힌 노예와 자본주의적 제국주의의 폭력이오늘날의 ‘신제국주의’에도 이어지고 있는 현실을 가시화한다. 워커와 뮤니츠의 작업은 우리에게 설탕속 착취와 폭력이 끝나고 있지 않음이 가장 큰 ‘폭력’이라는 사실을 일깨워주고 있다.

“Going Native”: The New Imperialism in Late Victorian Adventure Novels She and Heart of Darkness

Jing Zhu 한국현대영어영문학회 2023 현대영어영문학 Vol.67 No.1

The late Victorian era witnessed the flowering of New Imperialism in literary circles. Critics like Edward W. Said and Homi K. Bhabha single out English novels, especially English adventure fiction, as a unique cultural form to explore the imperial attitudes and experiences during the period. Among late Victorian works of fiction, H. Rider Haggard’s She and Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness are prominent that they both endeavor to bring forth white men’s bodily and spiritual “encounters” on their imperial journey to Africa. Current scholarship on the two texts has tended to simplify them either as a critique or approval of New Imperialism and thus categorizes the writers as pro- or anti-imperialists. However, the dissemination of the ideology in popular literature at the end of the nineteenth century was not stereotyped and homogeneous. Therefore, this study traces the similarities and differences in depicting New Imperialism through the lens of “going native.” The paper will investigate the embodiment of the idea in individual texts and inspect the two adventure fictions together within the discourse of New Imperialism. Conventional textual interpretations and computerized analysis of texts are to be conducted.

2019 아이치트리엔날레에서 나타난 신제국주의와 억압된 애도

이봉욱 ( Lee Bongwook ) 한국영상미디어협회 예술과미디어학회 2021 예술과 미디어 Vol.20 No.1

‘2019 아이치트리엔날레’ 특별기획전인 《표현의 부자유, 그 후》에서 <평화의 소녀상>이 전시되면서 3일 만에 전시 중단 사태가 벌어졌다. 소녀상 전시는 일본 내에서는 대표적 금기 가운데 하나로 여겨진다. 하지만 이번 아이치트리엔날레 특별전시는 소녀상이 일본 국립미술관에서 전시된 첫 번째 사례가 되면서, 일본 사람들에게 큰 주목을 받았다. 본 연구는 일본정부나 우익단체로부터 협박을 받으며, 전시 중단이라는 초유의 사태가 발생한 특별전시 《표현의 부자유, 그 후》를 신제국주의적 권력과 억압 형태의 담론을 통해 예술 표현의 침해와 검열로 인해 전시가 중단된 배경과 정치적 이데올로기에 대해 알아보았다. 그리고 소녀상이 가지는 상징적 기념물로서 개인의 기억이 아닌 공적 기억으로서 예술형태와 표현들을 발견하고 인식하는 데 중점을 두었다. 소녀상은 일본 제국주의 강점기의 전시 성노예로 표상하기 위해 존재하는 것이 아니며, 전시 성폭력이라는 20세기 제국주의 시대 문제점들을 응축하고 이를 기억하고 고통 하는 여성들을 상징하는 기념비이자 진정한 사죄를 요구함과 동시에 희생자들의 넋을 위로하는 의미를 담고 있다고 할 수 있다. 본 연구는 또한, 특별전시를 통해 예술 표현이 공공의 기억에 대한 축제적 공간이 되어야 할 행사가 결국 정부와 우익단체의 압력과 협박으로 전시가 중지됨으로써 존중받아야 할 예술 작품에 대한 침해에 대해 연구하였다. 결국, 일본 우익단체와 정부 관계자는 특별전시에 출품한 <소녀상>의 표현에 대한 개입과 검열을 통해 관람자들에게 공적 기억을 재구성하여 개인을 넘은 사회적 애도의 공간을 억압하고, 대상과 애도자와의 슬픔이나 고통의 공감 관계를 억압하였다고 볼 수 있다. < Statue of Peace > was exhibited at a section of Aichi Triennale 2019 art exhibition, After ‘Freedom of Expression?’. But the section was shut down in three days. Because the exhibit, two artworks in particular struck a nerve with the online extremists. They threated on phone calls and social media. One of the artworks was < Statue of Peace >, whose exhibition is one of the typical taboos within Japan. Nevertheless the statue was the first case displayed at the National Gallery in Japan and received Japanese’ attention. This study attempts to figure out the background of the special exhibition, After ‘Freedom of Expression?’ and its political ideology in the sense of the power of new imperialism and discourse of depression by infringement of artistic expression and censorship. And it is also focused that < Statue of Peace > has symbolic significance not as a artistic practice of personal memory, but as a practice of public memory. The special exhibition was started as the space of the artistic festival and revealed the site led by the new imperialism. Finally the invasion of artistic expression and censorship rather reconstructed the public memory of audiences and oppressed the space of social condolence, tried to cut off the empathic relation with the victims and the condolers.

신제국주의 시대 영국박물관의 일본 컬렉션의 형성

티모시 클라크 국립중앙박물관 2015 미술자료 Vol.- No.87

The original founding collections of the British Museum (BM), bequeathed by Sir Hans Sloane in 1753, included a small number of Japanese objects collected in Japan between 1690 and 1692 by Engelbert Kaempfer (1651-1716). Much more significant were Kaempfer’ manuscripts and drawings (now British Library) that would form the basis for the translation and publication of his History of Japan (London, 1727), funded by Sloane. This would serve as the guide for a European intelligentsia interested in Japan until the 1850s. More comprehensive collecting of Japanese art and artefacts by the BM began in earnest following the opening of the new treaty port of Yokohama in 1859. This article focuses mainly on the period from 1859 until the beginning of WWI in 1914. This era marked the end of what is sometimes referred to as 'Britain's imperial century (1815-1914)' and by this date Japan too had expanded its overseas empire to encompass Taiwan, Korea and parts of NE China. To what extent was the formation of the ‘ritish’Museum’ holdings of Japanese works moulded by and reflective of this age of expanding new imperialisms? Within the larger framework of global realpolitik, BM collecting was the product -- to a perhaps unusual degree -- of the tastes, interests and capabilities of individual curators, served in turn by their links with collectors. In terms of generating popular understanding about both traditional and contemporary Japan, however, the BM’ collections and displays risked being overshadowed in a sensational way by huge international expositions such as the Japan-British Exhibition held in London in 1910, seen by more than 8 million visitors. The four important ‘ounding collections’of Japanese works acquired by the BM in the late 19th and early 20th centuries stem from the personalities and activities of four key individuals: Augustus Wollaston Franks (1826-1897) never visited Japan. He was ‘Keeper’(chief curator)of the BM from 1851-1897. Franks donated or bequeathed 3,022 Japanese objects between the 1860s and 1902. These were mainly ceramics/archaeological artefacts, netsuke and tsuba; also paintings and prints, metalwork and decorative arts, including religious icons. Franks was additionally responsible for attracting to the BM the collections of Anderson and Gowland below. William Anderson (1842-1900) worked in Japan from 1873-1880. He was professor of anatomy and surgery at the Naval Medical College in Tokyo. 3,299 items of Japanese pictorial art were sold by Anderson to the BM in 1881; 1,891+ volumes of Japanese illustrated books were then sold by him to the BM between 1882 and 1894. William Gowland (1842-1922) worked in Japan from 1872-1888. He was a chemist and metallurgist at the Imperial Japanese Mint (Zōheikyoku) in Osaka. About 480 Japanese and about 50 Korean archaeological artefacts from Gowland’ collection were purchased by Franks in 1889 and donated to the BM. Arthur Morrison (1863-1945) never visited Japan. He was a popular Victorian novelist. 1,851 ukiyo-e prints were sold by Morrison to the BM in 1906. 33 Chinese and 589 Japanese paintings from Morrison’ collection were donated by Sir William Gwynne-Evans in 1913. 66 Japanese paintings and 71 Japanese prints were bequeathed by Morrison in 1945. Although a proportion of the works acquired by each of these curators and collectors was contemporary, it is striking that so few illustrate the dynamic way in which Japan modernised and pursued colonialism after 1868. The BM’ collections from this period largely suggest a view of Japan (and of Japan in Asia) as the object of a colonizing gaze, rather than the subject of its own imperial expansion. Exceptions are perhaps the ‘yrical’colour woodblock prints of the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-5 -- presumed to have been purchased as new by Arthur Morrison, but mostly only bequeathed to BM in 1946 after his death -- and the small group of contemporary Nihonga paintings he acquired from visiting artists to London such as Shimomura Kanzan (1873-1930). An alternative model of personal interaction and friendship is represented by the case of Japanese artist, Kawanabe Kyō3sai (1831-1889) and British architect Josiah Conder (1852-1920). As a result of the brilliant work of Edward Said and others, we have developed the mind-set that Orientalism is always a dirty business of collaboration with imperialist ambition, and that Occidentalism is a bid to compete in this scramble for colonies by non-Western elites. What the friendship between Kyōai and Conder demonstrates, albeit on a micro-scale, is that it was sometimes possible for Japanese and Westerner genuinely to collaborate from positions of mutual curiosity and respect,within a non-colonialist mind-set.

사회진화론과 신소설 작가, 이해조와 이인직

유봉희 ( Yu Bong-hee ) 인하대학교 한국학연구소 2011 한국학연구 Vol.0 No.24

서세동점(西勢東漸)이 대세였던 대한제국의 시대, 전 사회는 격랑의 파고 속으로 들어가야만 했다. 신소설은 이 시기 전반을 배경으로, 정확히는 이른바 ‘애국계몽기’(1905~1910)에 태어났다. 그 출발과 중심에 이해조(李海朝, 1869~1927)와 이인직(李人稙, 1862~1917)이 자리하고 있다. 신소설은 서구와 일본의 첫 공세에 드러난 당시 사회를 비추는 거울이다. 이것은‘개화’를 외치지만 ‘누구의 손’에 ‘어떤 거울’이 들려지냐에 따라 그 거울이 비추는 작품의 세계는 판이한 양태로 나타난다는 것으로 해석할 수가 있다. 여기서 ‘한국 근대문학의 아버지’에 대한 정전(正典) 해석은 갈라졌던 것이다. 본고는 이러한 논란을 의식하는 가운데 향후 우리 신소설의 가치평가 기준을 설정하는 데 하나의 방법론으로 개화파 인사들 사상의 저류를 관통했던 사회진화론을 당시 작가들은 어떻게 이해하고 수용했는지를 이해조와 이인직의 작품을 통해 고찰하고자 한다. ‘우승 열패’, ‘양육강식’으로 상징되는 사회진화론의 수용 태도야말로 작가들의 문학관 나아가 사상의 기준을 결정하는 척도라 판단했기 때문이다. 이 지점을 놓칠 때, 신소설연구는 문학성과 정치성(사상성) 양단을 강조하는 단순 이분법적 구도에 빠질 우려가 있다. 사회진화론은 만국공법의 논리와 궤를 같이 하면서 19세기 후반부터 동아시아 지식층을 강타했던 최초의 서양사상이라 할 수가 있다. 동아시아의 수용과정에 대한 연구는 상당한 축적을 보이고 있다. 정치사상사 연구의 성과에 힘입은 바 크다. 우리 근대문학과 관련한 연구는 미미한 것이 사실이다. 그런 점에서 신소설에서 진화론의 영향을 고찰하는 것은, 당시 담론들의 관계망을 가늠할 수 있는 척도가 될 수 있을 것이다. 즉, 자강의 한 방편으로 수용했는가, 아니면 제국주의의 속성까지도 묵인한 채 받아들여, 궁극에는 민족의 주체적 입지를 망각했는가 하는 갈림길을 선명히 보여주는 기준이 될 수가 있다는 이야기이다. 이해조, 이인직 모두 사회진화론을 적극적으로 수용했다. 이인직은 개인보다 단체를 강조하는 국가주의적 색채를 강하게 나타내고 있는 반면, 이해조는 개인의 자율성을 강조하고 있다. 이 같은 상반된 사상은 논설 등 여타의 글에서도 여실히 나타나고 있고, 이것은 작품 속에 고스란히 녹아있기도 하다. 특히 이인직과 이해조의 주체 형성 과정은 그들의 작품과 긴밀하게 호응하고 있음을 확인할 수가 있다. 이러한 분석을 통해 이인직이 왜 개화사상에서 친일사상으로 일변했는가 하는 문제제기는 폐기되어야 한다는 결론에 이르렀다. 그가 생각한 친일은 곧 그의 개화사상인 것이었다. 그가 보여준 봉건체제에 대한 극단의 혐오 또한 친일로 가는 과정의 하나에 불과할 뿐이었다. 그런 측면에서 이해조의 『자유종』은 당시 시대의 조류였던 사회진화론을 받아들이면서도 주체적 입장에서 민족의 자강을 위한 대안을 제시하려 노력한 결과물임을 확인할 수가 있었다. 또한 그 담론구조는 당시 토론체 소설의 백미라 하지 않을 수 없다. 이해조와 이인직을 다시 읽어야 할 필요를 새삼 느끼게 한다. In the era of Korea Empire when the accent point was moving increasingly from the West to the East, the entire society was forced into the upheaval of change. The new-style novel was born during this era; specifically during the period of patriotic enlightenment (1905~1910). That’s where In-Jik Lee (李人稙,1862~1917) and Hae-Jo Lee (李海朝, 1869~1927) are positioned from the outset to the end. The new-style novel was a mirror that reflected the social world which had to be exposed by the first Japanese offensive. This can be said that the world reflected by that mirror may vary greatly depending on ‘who’ holds ‘what type of mirror’ even if it means it was about enlightenment. This was what divided the interpretation of the canon (正典) which was referred to as the ‘father of the modern literature of Korea.’ While this study considers such controversies, we would like to contemplate how the authors at the time comprehended and accepted the theory of social evolution that penetrated into subconscious currents of the ideology of the Enlightenment Party via the works of In-Jik Lee and Hae-Jo Lee as one of the methodologies in establishing the criteria of value evaluation for the Korean new-style novels in the future. We opted for this because the attitude of accepting the theory of social evolution symbolized as “The fittest survives” and “The weak fall prey to the strong" is, undoubtedly, the yardstick of determining not only the literary perspectives of the authors at the time but the criteria of their ideology. Unless this notion is considered, the study on the new-style novel is susceptible to the trap of false dichotomy that emphasizes the literary values and the politicization (‘ideologism’). In this regard, inquiring into the effect of the social evolution in the new-style novels can be an effective yardstick for estimating the relationship among discourses at the time. In other words, this will be the criteria for determining if they accepted as one of the ways to make our grounds even stronger or adopted those that belong to the attributes of the imperialism without thinking to a degree that they became oblivious of the nation’s independent status. Both I. J. Lee and H. J. Lee were one of those who fully accepted the theory of social evolution. While I. J. Lee was distinctive in the spirit of nationalism by putting a group before an individual, H. J. Lee is emphatic more on an individual’s autonomy. Their opposing thoughts are evident in their respective writings including their editorials, to say nothing of their publications. Most notably, the narrative structure of I. J. Lee’s “Teardrops of Blood” by and the discourse structure of H. J. Lee’s “Liberty Bell” are the epitome of the above statement. Further, it can be identified that the procedure of building a sense of independence by both authors is tightly linked with their publication works. With this analysis, we have reached a conclusion that the controversy over I. J. Lee’s conversion from the Enlightenment Thought to pro-Japanese. To him, pro-Japanese is was his way of practicing the Enlightenment Thought. Take Japan and the USA depicted in his “Teardrops of Blood” into account. How alienated are they from realities? It is nothing but a tool for the imperialistic pro-Japanese. In other words, it was only one of the procedures towards his extreme abhorrence against feudalism or towards pro-Japanese. In this note, H. J. Lee’s “Liberty Bell” confirms the fact that once and again that it is the product of his efforts to suggest an alternative to bolster the nation’s stance from the perspectives of independence with sovereignty rights while accepting the theory of social evolution as the current tendency. Furthermore, his discourse structure was indeed the epitome of the “dialogue novel” form. This is what made us realize that we must read both authors’ books again at this time. We humbly hope that our study would be the first step in such endeavors.

『토지』에 나타난 식민지 문인의 표상과 탈식민적 문학론의 단서들 -이인직·이광수에 대한 서술을 중심으로

정실비 한국현대소설학회 2024 현대소설연구 Vol.0 No.94

이 글에서는 『토지』에 나타난 식민지 문인의 표상을 고찰함으로써, 박경리가 제국주의와 문학의 관계를 어떻게 사유했는지에 대한 단서들을 얻고자 했다. 박경리는 실존인물인 이인직과 이광수, 허구의 인물인 임명빈과 이상현의 운명을 통해 식민지 시기의 문학의 역할을 사유하도록 독자를 이끈다. 우선, 박경리는 이인직을문학청년 임명빈과 대위법적으로 배치하여 이인직의 몰주체적인 모방으로서의 문학을 비판하고, 동시에 그러한 모방조차 해내지 못하는 임명빈의 무기력함을 비판한다. 또한, 박경리는 이광수의 민족개조론을 표면적으로는 제국에 저항하면서 실질적으로는 제국에 타협했던 모순된 담론으로서 재조명한다. 이광수는 소설가 이상현과 대위법적으로 배치되는데, 도피적인 댄디스트인 이상현의 시각을 통해서이광수 문학의 계몽성이 비판된다. 그러나 이상현은 계몽문학의 한계를 넘어설만한 문학을 창작하지 못하며, 소설가로서 성공하지 못하고 낙오한다. 박경리는 이인직과 이광수를 통해서 제국주의 권력과 문학의 공모를 보여주는한편, 임명빈과 이상현의 실패를 통해서 식민지 지식인의 주체적인 문학적 실천을불가능하게 만드는 제국주의 권력의 억압을 가시화한다. 박경리는 식민지 문인들의 표상을 통해, 문학의 역할은 추상적인 담론을 설파하는 것이 아니라 구체적인인간의 운명을 창조하는 것이며, 문학자의 역할은 인간을 계몽하는 것이 아니라 인간의 자유를 추구하는 것임을 보여준다. 박경리는 작가 자신을 닮은 문학소녀 ‘상의’를 통해 식민지 규율 권력으로부터 탈주하여 개인의 자유를 추구하는 글쓰기의한 사례를 보여준다. 박경리는 문학소녀의 습작이라는 실천 속에 제국주의와 공모하지 않는 문학의 가능성을 심어두었다. 이처럼 박경리는 자국 문학이 식민 권력과공모하거나 식민권력에 의해 좌절되었던 흔적들을 되살려내고 들춰낸다. 이 글에서는 그와 관련된 서술을 되짚어보면서 『토지』의 동력 중 하나가 식민지 경험에서비롯된 고통을 기억하고 망각에 저항하려는 의지였음을 확인할 수 있었다. This paper aims to explore the representations of colonial writers depicted in Land to uncover clues on how Pak Kyong-ni conceived the relationship between imperialism and literature. Through the fates of both real historical figures like Lee In-jik and Lee Gwang-su, and fictional characters like Im Myung-bin and Lee Sang-hyeon, Pak Kyong-ni guides readers to contemplate this relationship. Firstly, Pak Kyong-ni juxtaposes Lee In-jik with the literary youth Im Myung-bin, critiquing Lee In-jik’s unoriginal imitation in literature while simultaneously criticizing Im Myung-bin’s ineffectuality, which fails even to achieve such imitation. Additionally, through the characters' dialogues, Pak Kyong-ni reevaluates Lee Gwang-su’s theory of national reform, revealing it as a contradictory discourse that ostensibly resisted the empire but effectively compromised with it. Lee Gwang-su is contrasted with the novelist Lee Sang-hyeon, and through Lee Sang-hyeon’s escapist dandyism, the enlightening aspect of Lee Gwang-su’s literature is criticized. However, Lee Sang-hyeon fails to create literature that transcends the limitations of enlightenment literature, ultimately becoming a drunken failure. Through Lee In-jik and Lee Gwang-su, Pak Kyong-ni exposes the collusion between imperial power and literature, while the failures of Im Myung-bin and Lee Sang-hyeon highlight the oppressive colonial system that makes independent literary practice by colonial intellectuals impossible. Nevertheless, Pak Kyong-ni does not deny the potential for literature to transcend imperialism. In Land, she presents a cyclical view of history through the voices of characters and narrators, suggesting the possibility of constructing a counter-discourse that could overturn the social Darwinism underpinning imperialism. Furthermore, through the literary girl "Sang-ui," a character resembling herself, Pak Kyong-ni illustrates an example of writing that seeks freedom by escaping colonial disciplinary power. Through the literary girl’s practice of writing, Pak Kyong-ni embeds the potential for literature that does not collaborate with imperialism.

일제말기 전향자들의 시국인식과 문화론 : -김명식을 중심으로

서영인 대구대학교 인문과학연구소 2008 人文科學硏究 Vol.31 No.-

This research scrutinizes the recognition of the situation and theory of culture among converts in the Japanese Imperialism, especially focusing on Myungsik Kim. He provided proper example of differences and gaps of methods about coping with the dominant ideology, showing very specific notion on the contemporary situation. While it seemed that he agreed to the concept of New Order of East Asia in the late Japanese Imperialism, he keenly sensed the crack of the dominant ideology by grasping distinction of Chosun Dynasty and every side of discriminations in it. In addition, he censured the falsehood of the Oriental Discourse which was used to rationalized the ideology of New Order of East Asia from the standpoint of universalism of world culture. His Marxist tendency that always tries to understand current history not on the logic of subjugation and domination but on the objective analysis and development of human history made it possible to maintain least discretion and resistance against the dominant ideology. His example shows overdetermined feature of passive cooperation/resistance of many converts at that time.

帝国主義へのかなたへ

羅義圭(La, Eui-Kyu) 대한일어일문학회 2018 일어일문학 Vol.80 No.-

Since 1991, when the Taisho Democracy era celebrated, Japan has set a big slogan “imperialism outside, constitutionalism inside” and has begun to walk in the way of full-scale imperialism. That was a strong consciousness of taking monopoly of exclusive Asian interests, domination over the whole of Asia and discrimination against Asia as a war principle whereby Japan becomes the leader(of the whole Asia). It was a way to postulate outsider for self-preservation within the relationship with outsider such as the powers of the West/Europe and America, and subsequently the whole of the neighboring Asian countries including Korea. That may indeed be an imperialistic tendency. Self-preservation here includes violent and colonialistic acts that understand outsider, control outsider and make use of outsider within the range of their own interests. In other words, imperialism is always likely to be accompanied by “consciousness of others” presupposing self-preservation. Although it is a minority, however, there were people who tried to build relationships with outsider from the perspective of “small countryism”. This study focused on three people(Kōtoku shūsui, Tani Tateki, Miura Tetsutaro) amongst them. At the root of their “small countryism” viewpoints, it seems that the process of building the relationship with outsider involved the self being shaken in the encounter with outsider, disassembling himself and creating a new identity there. I believe that this process may be an indispensable idea to rebuild “anther Japan” throughout history. Therefore, this paper presents a method of constantly separating “self” from “nationalism” and cross-linking to building relationships with outsider as a method of constructing “self-reform” through the process of “self-denial”.

‘신중화제국주의’적 역사해석과 중국 왕조의 계통성 고찰

윤명철(Youn, Myung-Chul) 고조선단군학회 2018 고조선단군학 Vol.39 No.-

중국은 ‘신화시대’부터 ‘중화인민공화국’까지 일관된 계통성을 지니지 않았다. 공간적으로 전체는 물론, 중심 공간조차도 통일한 상태가 아니며 종족적으로는 한족이 주도해서 전국을 ‘직접 통치’ 및 ‘직접 관리’하지는 않았으며, 중국문명을 생성한 것은 아니다. 그런데 중국을 비롯한 주위 국가 및 종족들은 이러한 사실을 잘 인식하지 못했다. 거기에는 한자를 비롯한 기호의 문제를 이해하지 못했으며, 종족에 대한 정확한 이해가 부족한 탓도 있다. 또한 중국이라는 정치체와 주도집단들의 몇 가지 의도도 강력하게 작동했다. 그리고 현재는 ‘신중화제국주의’라고 평가될 만한 행위를 하는 중국이 국가팽창, 영토갈등, 내부의 몇 가지 문제들을 활용하여 또 다른 형식으로 역사를 왜곡하고 있다. 중국 또는 중화문명을 만들고 발전시키는 데에는 한족 외에 주위의 많은 종족들이 큰 역할을 했으며, 필자의 분류에 따르면 동방문명과 북방문명의 일부 구성원들이 정복왕조를 세우고, 중국의 활동범위를 확장시키는 등 중요한 역할을 담당하였다. There never was so-called ethnic orthodoxy in China from the Chinese mythology era to the period of the People’s Republic China. From the perspective of space, even in the central area, unified time usually lasted a very short time. However, China and other countries and tribes did not recognize this fact. It does not understand the problem of symbols, including Chinese characters, and lacks an accurate understanding of the race. Also, some of the intentions of China’s politicians and leading groups also acted strongly. And now China, which is considered to be regarded as a ‘New chinese imperialism’, is distorting its history in another way, using the expansion of the state, territorial conflict, and some internal problems. In this thesis, first of all, the author revealed the importance of the integrity of Chinese history, furthermore, The author explored the holistic approach and the realistic background of Chinese historical studies. In addition, the authors analyzed from a biological point of view to analyze the characteristics of China. In addition to the Han Chinese, many of the surrounding tribes played a large role in the creation and development of Chinese or Chinese civilization, and according to my classification, some members of Eastern civilization and northern civilization established a conquest dynasty and played an important role.