일제 후반기의 담론 지형과 《문장》

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Founded in February 1939, 《Munjang》pursued 'Joseon like things' characterized by reactionary attitudes, reactionism and classic inclination etc and on one hand, the traditionalism of 《Munjang》 was laid on the extension of discourses of' 'Joseon' and 'tradition' that repeatedly appeared throughout the 1930s and on the other hand, it had the nature of critical responses to the situation of 'crisis' of values where the value of Western modernity was doubted. The meaning possessed by 《Munjang》 in the topography of discourses during the last period of Japanese Imperialism is not separated from the issue of how to evaluate the 'traditionalism' that was emphasized by the persons who led this medium through the representation, 'Joseon like things'.
The topography of discourses of Joseon went into a new aspect as of the Sino-Japanese War (1937). The new aspect was accompanied with irrevocable changes in the topography of discourses caused by realistic conditions such as further reinforced Japanese Imperialism's control over thought, discontinuance of many media and the beginning of operation of a fascist system. The foundations of 《Inmunpyeonglon》 and 《Munjang》 in 1939 were a literary expression of these changes. The logical composition 〈the Western =universal/Joseon(the Orient) = special〉 that had led the traditionalism in 1930s began to change as of 1937 and this was connected with the critical senses of 'the conquest and subjugation of modernity that were intensively appeared during the last period of Japanese Imperialism.
《Munjang》 tried to extend a world different from the linearly divided time in the modern times through the combination of aestheticism and traditionalism and attempted to experience affluent life independently from the historical reality in that world. While concentrating their effort on materializing the tradition of the traditionalists in 1920s, they tried to draw out it to the field of life through the revitalization of tradition. These were expressed as 'Joseon like things', 'Joseon like tradition' etc, however, these were not directly contrary to the Japanese Imperialism's discourse of colonial rule. If the disposition of discourses until early 1930s was the schema. 'the Western=universal/the Orient=special', this schema began to be substantially doubted around the time of the dissolution of KAPF and the doubt was expressed in the forms of 'crisis' and 'anxiety'. After the Sino-Japanese War, this schema that had been supporting the modernity of the colony began to be changed into 'Japan(the Orient) = universal/Joseon=special' and since the middle of 1930s, especially, the traditionalism of Munjang tried to reach the tradition of Joseon through aestheticism within this disposition of discourses. Of course, a sort of circular formula is involved in both of the two schemata mentioned above. In the former schema, for 'Joseon' to be included in 'the Orient', the equation, 'Joseon=Japan' had to be established but this equation was not desired by Japan as well as intellectuals in Joseon because as soon as this equation would be established, the colony would not be a colony any more. Besides, since the latter half of 1930s, intellectuals in Joseon conducted criticism activities based on the belief that the latter schema, that is, the schema, 'Jacan(the Orient)=universal/Joseon=special) could actually work. The 'Joseonism' of 《Munjang》 is positioned in this context as well.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김용준, "회화로 나타나는 향토색의 음미" 1936

2 황종연, "한국문학의 근대와 반근대" 동국대 1991

3 김윤식, "한국근대문학사상비판" 일지사 1978

4 민족문학사연구소 기초학문연구단, "조선적인 것’의 형성과 근대문화담론" 소명출판 2007

5 김태준, "조선연구의 의의" 1935

6 좌담(일문), "조선문화의 장래와 현재" 1938

7 이병기, "조선 고전문학의 정수" 1935

8 고봉준, "전형기 비평의 논리와 국민문학론 -최재서 비평을 중심으로-" 한국현대문학회 (24) : 245-273, 2008

9 서인식, "전통론, 조선일보, 1938. 10"

10 김기림, "장래할 조선문학" 1934

11 이태준, "예술의 동서" 1933

12 임화, "역사적 반성에의 요망" 1935

13 정종현, "식민지 후반기(1937-1945)한국문학에 나타난 동양론 연구" 동국대 2005

14 이병기, "시조는 혁신하자" 1932

15 정지용, "시의 옹호" 1939

16 차승기, "반근대적 상상력의 임계들" 푸른역사 2009

17 정지용, "문학독본" 박문출판사 1948

18 이태준, "문방잡기" 1939

19 서인식, "동양문화의 이념과 그 형태" 1940

20 김용준, "동미전을 개최하면서" 1930

21 이태준, "내가 본 나" 1930

22 김현숙, "김용준과 『문장』의 신인문화 운동" 미술사연구회 (16) : 365-392, 2002

23 최재서, "고전부흥의 문제" 1935

24 이태준, "고완품과 생활" 1940

25 박치우, "고문화 재음미의 현대적 의의" 1937

26 황종연, "『문장』파 문학의 정신사적 성격" 동악어문학회 21 : 91-144, 1986

27 차혜영, "‘조선학’과 식민지 근대의 ‘지(知)’의 제도 - 『문장』을 중심으로" 국어국문학회 (140) : 505-533, 2005

28 김예림, "1930년대 후반 근대인식의 틀과 미의식" 소명출판 2004