일제 식민 지배와 헤게모니 탈구 = Dislocation of hegemony in colonial Korea: Hegemony of imaginary America without presence in a yellow colony

국문 초록 (Abstract)

1920년 8월 24-25일간 미국 상하 양원의원 9명을 포함하여 총 49인으로 구성된 미국의원단 동양시찰단이 경성에 입성했다. 이들의 조선 입국은 6월부터 9월 중순까지 중국, 만주, 조선, 일본 내 조선인들에게 제2차 조선독립운동의 기회로 간주되었고 관공서 폭파, 요인 암살, 만세 시위, 상가 철시가 기획·시행되었다. 1880년대 이래 미국이 조선의 독립을 지원하고 해방시켜 줄 것이라는 기대와 신뢰가 유지되어 오다가 미국의원단 방문을 계기로 표출되었던 것이다. 이 글에서는 미국의원단 사건을 미국이 일본의 식민지 조선에서 헤게모니적 타자로서 존재하고 顯現하는 방식과 의미를 극단적 방식으로 보여주는 예외적 사례로 규정하여 이를 기호학적 문화사 접근을 통해 두텁게 해석해보았다. 조선인들이 해방 이후까지도 가졌던, 허구와 오해로 판명된 ‘상상의 미국’은 조선인에게 내재된 유교적 정치문화, 온정주의 망탈리테, 오리엔탈리즘에 대한 대응, 백인종 우월주의 그리고 국제정세 변화에 따른 일미전쟁설 등과 같은 의미요소들에 의해 적극적으로 절합된 것임을 주장했다. 이러한 방식의 ‘부재하는 타자’ 미국이 식민지 조선에서 顯現한 메커니즘은 일본 식민 지배의 성격, 곧 식민 지배와 헤게모니의 離接과 脫臼를 드러내는 것이다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study aims to inquire into and reveal meanings of ‘America’ and its working mechanisms in colonial Korea through deconstructing an historical event which was called as ‘the second independence movement’ labelled following after the first independence movement on Ist March,1919. Generally, the 2nd movement in 1920 refers to a series of anti-Japan demonstrations such as small-scaled riots, destruction of governmental buildings and etc. that were planned and carried out for showing ‘American Representatives Visiting Group for Orient’(美國議員團, ARVGO) off Korean’s wil for independence from Japanese Occupation. Koreans looked after chance to speak to the world how desperately they desired for independence and how much civilized they were enough to understand and handle the Willsonian national determinism. I discussed that a series of demonstrations occurred in a period of ARVGO visit to Korea can be an interesting historical case full of implications to be explorred into, because it could inform us what America meant for Korean and how it were conceived under Japanese Occupation. I argued this sort of irregular and exceptional event and accident can be a text to be interpreted with thick description as C. Geertz said and R. Danton did in his studies on ways of thinking of Europeans living in the 18th century. The so-called interpretative, anthropological, and cultural approach to history is not traditional historical approadch but is an insightful as much as to have us get a new perspectives and understandings about the past. It means ARVGO itself is a cultural text that were generated, signified, and constituted its meanings under the structured meaning system. If we can deconstruct and isolate the meaning constituencies that constructed ARVGO as a whole, then we could get into the real working mechanism of America which enjoyed and maintained a great influence on Korean’s way of thought and actions until Liberation. I identified five constituencies of meanings conferred to ARVGO. Koreans wanted to deny orientalism that has defined Koreans as uncivilized and inferior ethnic by showing off their action plan for independence. The second constituency is traditional confucian mentalite that idealized a rule by morality as an ideal politics for the part of the ruler, the strong. In this respect, Koreans expected that America and Americans which were considered as the strongest and the highest moral country in the world could and should give us what they want in need. The third is the paternalism that has rooted in the confucian political culture in Korea. Koreans did not shamed to beg supports and protection from the strong moral country, America because it is the strong men’s obligation and duty to do something for the weak without expecting reward or payment. The fourth is a sort of cult for white-ness based on racism which has penetrated into Korea ever since 1880s. They respected and admired white-ness as an icon of civilization and morality as shown in doings by missionaries. The last constituency is a theory of impending war between America and Japan and a theory of isolation of Japan from the world system. Koreans expected America could liberate Korea from Japanese domination through war. Hence they had to do something in this critical moment with a hope for possible liberation in near future. All this meanings immanent in Korean society and were given to America and ARVGO are the real factor affecting Korean’s responses and actions toward ARVGO. America existed in Korea without presence in real. This kind of presence of absent America can be said as a hegemonic presence over the colonized Korean.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 유선영, "황색 식민지의 문화정체성:아메리카나이즈드 모더니티" (18) : 81-122, 1997

2 구대열, "한일합방과 국제관계" 이화여대 10 : 189-221, 1990

3 구대열, "한국의 대서양 개국문제의 재검토-한미,한영 수교조약 당시 극동의 국제 관계를 중심으로 in: 사회과학논집3집" 3 : 105-121, 1983

4 정재훈, "초기 한국 개신교인의 대미인식 연구" 숭실대학교 2007

5 정진석, "일제시대 민족지 압수기사 모음"

6 이시재, "일제말의 조선인 流言의 연구" 20 : 211-230, 1987

7 나가타아키후미, "일본의 조선통치와 국제관계:조선독립운동과 미국 1910-1922" 일조각 2005

8 미즈노 나오키, "일본의 식민주의를 생각한다 in: 생활속의 식민주의" 산처럼 17-34,

9 유선영, "육체의 근대화:아메리칸 모더니티의 육화" 9 (9): 8-48, 2001

10 헨리 임, "유로-아메리칸 헤게모니와 근대 한국 역사학의 기원" 아세아문제연구소 51 (51): 97-125, 2008

11 박충석, "유교의 정치학:원리적 고찰" 이화여자대학교 15 : 55-71, 1995

12 박종민, "온정주의 정치문화와 권위주의 통치의 정당성" 30 (30): 105-122, 1996

13 강상중, "오리엔탈리즘을 넘어서" 이산 1997

14 나가타 아키후미, "미국, 한국을 버리다 : 시오도어 루스벨트와 한국" 기파랑 2007

15 길진숙, "독립신문·매일신문에 수용된 문명/야만 담론의 의미 층위 in: 근대 계몽기 지식개념의 수용과 그 변용" 소명출판 59-95, 2005

16 정선태, "근대계몽기 민족 국민 서사의 정치적 시학" 인문과학연구소 (50) : 147-172, 2006

17 함동주, "근대 일본의 문명론과 그 이중성:청일전쟁까지를 중심으로 in: 근대 계몽기 지식개념의 수용과 그 변용" 소명출판 363-392, 2005

18 장인성, "구한말 조선의 미국관에 관한 연구-1880년대까지의 미국관 형성을 중심으로" 서울대학교 1986

19 김동택, "近代 國民과 國家槪念의 수용에 관한 硏究" 대동문화연구원 41 : 357-388, 2002

20 King-Hall,Stephen, "Western Civilization and the Far East." Methuen & Co. Ltd 1924

21 Oppenheim,R, "The West and the anthropology of other people’s colonialism:Frederick Starr in Korea,1911-1930" 64 (64): 677-703, 2005

22 Spinks,Charles Nelson, "The Termination of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance" 6 (6): 321-340, 1937

23 Geertz,C, "The Interpretation of cultures:Selected essays" Basic Books Inc. Publishers 1973

24 Darnton,R, "The Great Cat Massacre:And other episodes in French cultural history" Vintage Books 1985

25 Choi Chungmoo, "The Discourse of Decolonization and Popular Memory:South Korea" 1 (1): 77-102, 1993

26 Spinks,Charles Nelson, "The Background of the Anglo-Japanese Allience" 8 (8): 317-339, 1939

27 Willett,R, "The Americanization of Germany,1945-1949" Routledge. 1989

28 Mead,W.R, "Special providence:American foreign policy and how it changed the world" A Century Foundation Book 2001

29 Nye,Jr.Joseph S, "Soft Power and American foreign policy" 119 (119): 255-270, 2004

30 Kuisel,R, "Seducing the French:the dilemma of Americanization" Univ. of California Press 1993

31 Elteren,Mel van, "Rethinking Americanization abroad: Toward a critical alternative to prevailing paradigm" 29 (29): 345-367, 2006

32 Westwood,S, "Racism,Mental Illness and the Politics of Identity in Racism, Modernity Identity" Polity Press 247-263, 1994

33 Buxton,Noel, "Oppressed Peoples and the League of Nations" J.M .Dent & Sons, Ltd 1922

34 Grajdanzev,AndrewJ, "Modern Korea.Research Associate of Institute of Pacific Relations" The John Day Company. 1944

35 Cumings,Bruce, "Korea’s Place in the Sun:A Modern History" W.W.Norton & Company 1997

36 Burnett,Scott S, "Korean-American Relations Vol.III:The period of diminshing influence,1896-1905" Univ. of Hawaii Press 1989

37 Baty,Thoma, "Korea,Japan and Freedom" 24 (24): 212-224, 1928

38 Ward,J.Manning, "Colonial Self-Government the British experience,1759-1856" Cambridge University Press 1976

39 류준필, "19세기말 독립 의 개념과 정치적 동원의 용법:독립신문 논설을 중심으로 in: 근대 계몽기 지식개념의 수용과 그 변용" 소명출판사 15-58, 2005