분단구조의 동·서독 민속학 = German Volkskunde in East and West Germany

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This paper deals with the institutionalization of the post-war field of Volkskunde in the two Germanies. The attempt to come to terms with the Nazi past in post-war German folklore scholarship has taken diverse forms and directions. Due to differing political contexts, the process of coming to terms with the past was more variable in the West than in the East. The discussions of the National Socialist period of Volkskunde have created a rupture in the discipline characterized by divergent goals of justification, critique and revision. Between 1945 and 1965 folklorists sought to justify and maintain the status quo of the discipline. This climate reflected the superficial denazification measures. As the student movement addressed the problems in German academic and social life in the 1960s, Bauginger and Emmerich in West Germany critiqued the continuity of theories and orientations in the history of the discipline. Volkskunde scholarships have attempted to produce changes in the postwar institutional structure in the 1970s. Today a number of different nomenclatures are in existence, but the central organization in Germany still bear the name Volkskunde.
And this paper analyzed the scientific approaches and strategies folklorists used to establish the field in East Germany. East German Volkskunde criticized post-war Volkskunde scholarship in West Germany and maintained that new, socialist scholarship was developed in the East. Nonetheless, the discipline's situation was actually similar in the two Germanies in the post-war era. Spamer and Steiniz still followed normative paths that emphasized the scholarly tradition of folklore research. While the SED intensified the political direction and the socialist model in East Germany, Volkskunde became more and more integrated into political spheres in order to strengthen the identification with socialist ways of thinking. Since the 1960s a new aspect emerged in the study of folklore with the broadening of the field of research in East Germany. The study of so-called material culture was shaped and Jacobeit fostered intensified international cooperative work in the field of implement research. The normalization of East-West relations after the Ostverträge of the 1970s contributed to participate in international dialogue. Dialogue and cooperation between folklorists in the GDR and in the West were taken place in the 1980s.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 연구는 전후 분단된 상황에서 동·서독이 한민족 두국가라는 정치적, 사회적 배경에 따라 민속학연구에서 어떠한 변화를 초래했으며 양국의 민속학자들이 어떠한 역할을 하였는가를 추적하고자 하였다. 동·서독은 제3제국 파시즘민속학의 과거극복과정에서 민속학의 연구방법과 조사영역에 이르기까지 서로 다른 길을 걸어갔다. 연구는 우리학계에서 다루지 않아왔던 동·서독민속학의 의미성을 재발견하고 전후 독일민속학의 전개과정에서 보여준 학문적 발전을 평가하고자 한다. 체제와 이데올로기의 틀에서 달라져온 민속학 학술형태와 민족문화에 대한 인식차이가 어떠했는가를 확인하고자 했다. 특히 낯선 영역으로 남아있던 구동독의 민속학을 살펴 이들이 추구하였던 민속학분야의 연구성과는 무엇이며 어떤 의미와 영향을 남기는 지 고찰하고자 하였다.
본문에서 과거 제3제국 민속학의 극복과 전후 학술 활동이 양국에서 어떻게 진행되었는가를 살펴서 동·서독의 민속학연구사를 비교분석할 것이다. 다음으로 민속학은 민족의 공통된 유·무형의 생활문화를 근거 있게 실증하며 정체성을 밝히는 인문과학이기에, 분단시기 민속학이 냉전적 이념의 굴레를 벗어나 민족의 이름으로 동질감을 느끼게 하고 민족공동체로서 동·서독주민사이의 정서적 이질감을 해소하고자 어떠한 매개적 노력을 해왔음을 살필 필요가 있다. 이를 통해서 동·서독의 통일과정에서 독일민속학이 어떤 역할과 교류협력을 통해 정체성 회복노력을 하였는지 확인되는 계기가 될 수 있기에, 여전히 분단의 아픔을 겪고 있는 우리에게도 민족동일성의 회복 및 상호 가치체계에 대한 이해를 위해 활동한 민속학의 학술적 뒷받침은 의미 있는 시사점을 줄 수 있을 것이다.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 손기웅, "신동방정책과 대북포용정책" 두리 2000

2 손선홍, "분단과 통일의 독일현대사" 소나무 2005

3 Peuckert. Willi-Erich, "Überlegungen und Betrachtungen. Zur Situation der deutschen Volkskunde" 1 : 130-135, 1948

4 Maus, Heinz, "Zur Situation der deutschen Volkskunde" 349-359, 1946

5 Emmerich, Wolfgang, "Zur Kritik der Volkstumsideologie" 1971

6 Kramer, Diete, "Wem nützt Volkskunde?" 66 : 1-16, 1970

7 Bausinger,Hermann, "Volkskunde.Von der Altertumsforschung zur Kulturanalyse" 1971

8 Wiegelmann, Günter, "Volkskunde, Eine Einführung" 1977

9 Bausinger, Hermann, "Volkskultur in der technischen Welt" 1986

10 Bausinger, Hermann, "Volksideologie und Volksforschung; Zur national-sozialistischen Volkskunde" 61 (61): 177-204, 1965

11 Scharfe, Martin, "Towards a cultural history: Notes on contemporary Volkskunde" 4 : 333-343, 1979

12 Lixfeld, Hannjost, "The Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft and the Umbrella Organizations of German Volkskunde during the Third Reich" 50 (50): 95-116, 1991

13 Jacobeit, Wolfgang, "Research into Peasant Work and Economy in the German Democratic Republic" 5 (5): 379-385,

14 Iggers, Georg G, "New Directions in historical Studies in the German Democratic Republic" 28 (28): 59-77, 1989

15 Dow, James R, "National Socialistic Folklore and Overcoming the Past in the Federal Republic of Germany" 50 : 117-153, 1991

16 Gerndt, Helge, "Kultur als Forschungsfeld, Über volkskundliches Denken und Arbeiten" 1981

17 Brinkel, Teresa, "Institutionalizing Volkskunde in Early East Germany" 46 (46): 141-172, 2009

18 Bausinger, Hermann, "Grunzüge der Volkskunde" 1993

19 Brednich, Rolf W, "Grundriss der Volkskunde. Einführung in die Forschungsfelder der Europäischen Ethnologie" 2001

20 Dow, James R, "German Volkskunde, A Decade of Theoretical Confrontation, Debate, and Reorientation(1967-1977)" Indiana University Press 1986

21 Moser, Hans, "Gedanken zur heutigen Volkskunde. Ihre Situation, ihre Problematik, ihre Aufgaben"

22 Kamenetsky, Christa, "Folklore as a political tool in Nazi Germany" 85 : 221-235, 1972

23 Brückner, Wolfgang, "Falkensteiner Protokolle" 1971

24 Zimmermann, Harm-Peer, "Empirische Kulturwissenschaft, Europäische Ethnologie, Kulturanthropplogie, Volkskunde" 2005

25 Kaschuba, Wolfgang, "Einführung in die Europäische Ethnologie" 1999

26 Steinitz, Wolfgang, "Die volkskundliche Arbeit in der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik" 1955

27 Weber-Kellermann, Ingeborg, "Deutsche Volkskunde zwischen Germanistik und Sozialwissenschaften" 1969

28 Jacobson, Johanna Micaela, "Boundary Breaking and compliance: Will-Erich Peuckert and 20th century german Volkskunde" 2007

29 Geiger, Klaus, "Abschied vom Volksleben" 1970