지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
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.
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.
목차
1. 들어가며
2. 《문장》 이전의 ‘전통’ 담론
3. 《문장》의 위치
4. 비(非)표상으로서의 ‘조선적인 것’
5. 환상의 붕괴, 그 이후의 전통주의
참고문헌
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
식민지 시기 어문운동의 결산으로서의 『文章』(1)
구보학보
2019 .01
-
『문장』에 나타난 노인 인물 등장소설 연구
어문론집
2010 .03
-
정지용의 후기시와 『문장』 : 화단(畵壇)과 문단(文壇)의 교류를 중심으로
비평문학
2009 .09
-
『文章』 게재 시의 특성
비평문학
2010 .06
-
중국소설 《西遊記》 번역본의 조선후기 유통에 관한 연구 : 영남대 소장 번역필사본을 중심으로
중국어문논역총간
2017 .01
-
圖式理論視角下中韓翻譯過程硏究
중국어문학논집
2020 .06
-
1915년 조선물산공진회에 나타난 식민 권력의 이미지 구축 시도 -미술관 전시를 중심으로
탐라문화
2020 .01
-
일본의 武士와 조선 文士의 정신세계 －무사도와 선비정신의 비교연구－
日本學硏究
2011 .01
-
속간호 『문장』과 정지용
구보학보
2019 .01
-
1930년대 중후반 식민지 조선 금융기구 개편론의 전개와 함의
한국사연구
2020 .09
-
『문장』과 미술 -1930년대 전위예술가를 중심으로
구보학보
2019 .01
-
<문장>지 특성에 대한 再考 : 상허 이태준을 중심으로
어문론집
2015 .03
-
1930년대 조선문화의 정체성과 로컬 ‘향토’의 상상
어문연구
2009 .01
-
환웅, 삼조선과 부여ㆍ고구려ㆍ요ㆍ금ㆍ원ㆍ청의 계보 : 지식형태사에 입각한 한국과 방계의 역사
고조선단군학
2007 .06
-
『문장』의 시국 협력 문학과 「전선문학선」
한국근대문학연구
2010 .10
-
힘 영상도식의 신체화 연구 : TV 토론프로그램 참여자의 손짓을 중심으로
담화와인지
2017 .02
-
조선시대 對馬島 연구의 현황과 과제
동북아역사논총
2013 .09
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-810-018992331