한국근대문학사와 「운수 좋은 날」 정전화의 아이러니

손성준(Son, Sung-jun) 한국현대문학회 2016 한국현대문학연구 Vol.0 No.50

이 글은 「운수 좋은 날」의 정전화 과정을 시대별 평론 및 문학사 서술, 그리고 작가의 대표작에 대한 인식의 변천 등을 통해 살펴본 것이다. 「운수 좋은 날」은 1960년대 후반부터 대두된 리얼리즘론, 민족문학론, 그리고 노동문학이라는 현대문학의 쟁점 및 화두를 배경으로 재발견되어 한국 단편소설의 정점에까지 오르게 된다. 「운수 좋은 날」의 정전화 과정은 겹겹의 아이러니로 싸여있다. 식민지시기의 암울함을 증언했지만 현진건의 생전에는 문단의 주목을 받거나 작가의 핵심 작품으로 인정받지 못하다가 해방 이후 또 다른 시대적 폭력 속에서 조명된 사실도 그렇거니와, 번역을 통한 학습이 반영된 작품의 반어적 구조가 이후 한국 단편소설 최고의 기법적 성취로 평가받게된 점도 그러하다. 기왕의 정전들 역시 그 역사성을 고려한 정전화 과정에 대한 재검토가 필요하다. 각각의 특수한 사정과 역사적 맥락이 결합하여 지금의 형상이 되었을 것이기 때문이다. 이를 해명하는 작업은 문학사를 근본적으로 재구성하는 일과 직결되어 있다. This paper looked into the process of the canonization of Unsu joeun nal(A Lucky Day) by examining critiques and literature history descriptions according to periods, and changes in perceptions about the writer"s magnum opus. Unsu joeun nal was rediscovered against the background of the issues and topics of Realism theories, national literature theories, and contemporary literature called labor literature, which became conspicuous from the late 1960s, and ascended to the peak of Korean short stories. The canonization process of Unsu joeun nal is covered with layers of irony, as manifested in the facts that the ironical structure of the work reflecting his learning from translation came to be evaluated later as the foremost technical achievement in Korean short stories as well as that it did not attract attention from literary circles or was not recognized as Hyun Jin-geon"s major work during his lifetime, but received the spotlight amidst another violence of the times after national independence. The past canons also require re-examination about the process of their canonization in view of their historicity. Because their respective special circumstances and historical contexts are presumed to have been combined to generate their current forms. The work of elucidating this is directly linked with the work of fundamentally reconstructing the history of literature.

도구로서의 제국 영웅 -20세기 초 한국의 비스마르크 전기 번역-

손성준 ( Sung Jun Son ) 한국문학연구학회 2012 현대문학의 연구 Vol.0 No.47

19세기 말 20세기 초 한국의 신문·잡지에서는 독일제국의 영웅 비스 마르크에 대한 기사가 빈번히 출현한다. 그에 대한 본격적인 전기물도 연 재 및 단행본의 형태로 반복하여 등장하였다. 본 연구의 목적은 비스마르 크 전기 중 박용희朴容喜의 <비스마ㄱ 傳>, 황윤덕黃潤德의 <比斯麥傳>에 포커스를 맞추어 비스마르크의 한국적 변용 양상을 드러내는 것이 다. 박용희와 황윤덕의 텍스트는 둘 다 사사카와 기요시(笹川潔)의 <ビスマルック>(博文館, 1899)를 저본 삼아 역술한 것이었다. 사사카와는 비스 마르크를 변론하는 방식의 화법을 구사했다. 군대를 앞세운 대외정책 비 판에 대해서는 비스마르크가 우승열패의 시대의 최적자임을 들어 옹호하 였고, 민권 축소 비판에 대해서는 君權主義者로서의 신념 및 존왕심 강조 를 통하여 정면으로 맞서며 오히려 그러한 영웅이 등장할만한 국가적 토 양을 염원했다. 사사카와의 텍스트를 참조한 박용희와 황윤덕은 각기 다른 방식으로 번역에 임했다. 박용희의 경우 비스마르크의 이름을 내걸었음에도 글의 전개 과정에서는 자신의 목소리를 전면화시켜 다른 맥락으로 이야기를 풀어나가는 전략을 취한다. 복잡해 보이기까지 하는 다채로운 구성의 <비스마ㄱ 傳>은 결국에 폭력의 시대를 고발하고 약소국의 사람들로 하여금 경계심을 갖게 한다는 점에서 나름의 일관성을 확보하고 있다. 국 민정신에 대한 강조는 이러한 일관된 의도 속에서 타진되는 박용희식 대 안의 일환이었다. 한편 황윤덕이 번역한 <比斯麥傳>은 보성관의 계몽 기획 속에서 등장했다. 황윤덕은 저본의 변론적 색채를 걷어내고 첨삭을 통하여 사사카와의 비스마르크를 자신이 생각하는 완전무결한 영웅의 형 상에 가깝게 만들었다. 또한 그는 철혈정책의 의미를 극대화 하여 약소국 한국의 정치 현실 속에 드리워진 절망을 벗겨낼 수 있는 대안으로 삼고자 했다. 박용희가 실천적 대안을 비스마르크 서사의 외부에서 찾았다면, 황 윤덕은 내부에서 찾은 것이다. 비스마르크는 아시아 침략을 강행하고 있던 독일제국의 국부였으나 그 의 행적은 식민지 신세로 전락하고 있던 한국에까지 버젓이 번역되었다. 그러나 이는 단순히 제국주의에 대한 동경이 아니라 비스마르크라는 도 구를 발화의 원점으로 취하는 것이었다. 사사카와의 집필에서는 사사카 와의 판단과 성향에 따라 비스마르크의 상이 결정되었지만 박용희와 황윤덕이 원한 것은 사사카와의 메시지와는 거리가 있었다. 이에 박용희· 황윤덕은 사사카와의 매듭지점을 자신들의 시작지점으로 삼고, 각기 다 른 기준으로 역술 작업을 수행한다. 비스마르크라는 고정된 실체는 이렇 게 번역 과정에서 재차 변형되어갔다. The Newspapers and Magazines published in Korea from the late 19th century to the early 20th century very often carried articles about Bismarck, a hero of the German Empire. Full-scale biographies on him appeared over and over again in the form of serials or books. The purpose of this study is to show the Korean transformation of Bismarck focusing on <비스마ㄱ 傳> by Park Yong-hee(朴容喜) and <比斯麥傳> by Hwang Yoonduk( 黃潤德). Both of the texts by Park and Hwang were translations of <ビスマルック> by Sasakawa Kiyoshi(笹川潔). Sasagawa`s style of speech in this book was the one arguing in favor of Bismarck. He defended his foreign policy headed by the military against critics saying that he was an optimal person in the age of the survival of the fittest. He faced criticism of reducing civil rights squarely asserting militaristic belief and respect for the Japanese emperor emphatically and rather longed for national soil in which such a hero could appear. Both of Park and Hwang referred to Sasagawa`s text, but they translated it differently. Park chose tactics of telling a story according to the different context keeping his own voice in the front line, although the name of Bismarck was the title of his work. <비스마ㄱ 傳> which has a varied constitution to such an extant as to look tangled eventually gets consistency of its own in the sense of reporting the times of violence and making the people of a small country have a feeling of wariness. Emphasis on the national spirit was one of Park`s style of alternatives floated as such a consistent intent. On the other hand, <比斯麥傳> translated by Hwang appeared as one of enlightenment plans by Bo Sung Gwan. Hwang got rid of the defensive color of the original one and transformed Sasagawa`s Bismarck into the hero which he considered to be ultimate through editing of it. In addition, he maximized the meaning of Blut und Eisen Politik and made it an alternative to eliminate the ashes of despair in reality. It can be said that Park found a practical alternative on the outside of the story of Bismarck, but Hwang found it inside of it. Bismarck was the national father of German Empire which pushed ahead with invasion of Asian countries, but his whereabouts was overtly translated in Korean nevertheless. This was, however, to take the tool of Bismark as a starting point of speech. In Sasagawa`s writing, the image of Bismark was determined depending on Sasagawa`s decision and disposition, but the thing that Park and Hwang intended was different from it. Park and Hwang, therefore, made Sasagawa`s Knotting point their starting point, and carried out translating it. The fixed substance of Bismarck was transformed again in the process of translation on this wise.

특집논문 : 전기와 번역의 ‘종횡(縱橫)’ -1900년대 소설 인식의 한국적 특수성-

손성준 ( Sung Jun Son ) 한국문학연구학회 2013 현대문학의 연구 Vol.0 No.51

한국의 1900년대는 기존 소설에 대한 신랄한 비판과 위기의식을 근대 인쇄매체를 통해 표출한 최초의 시기이다. 이전에도 존재해 온 소설은 이 시기에 이르러 새 것으로 거듭나야 하는 당위성을 요구받았는데, 이는 중국 및 일본 소설론의 영향 속에서 본격화 된 것이라 할 수 있다. 그러나 여기에는 중국이나 일본과는 차별화되는 특수성이 나타난다. 1900년대 한국에서 소설의 위기 및 극복 담론은 박은식, 신채호 등의 주도로 이루어졌다. 그들의 이론과 실천은 한국 소설사에 뚜렷한 족적을 남겼는데, 본고에서는 그 원동력을 ‘전기’와 ‘번역’으로 보았다. 전자는 구소설의 전들을 부정한 후 새로운 소설로서의 ‘전’을 제시했다는 의미에서 시간의 ‘종축(縱軸)’이고, 후자는 새로운 소설이 될 내포를 외부에서 끌어들였다는 의미에서 공간의 ‘횡축(橫軸)’이다. 량치차오의 소설론과, 그 영향을 크게 받은 것으로 알려진 박은식 및 신채호의 소설 관련 작업 사이에는 근본적 차이가 있었다. 그것은 바로 ‘전기’와 ‘소설’ 사이의 경계 설정에서 나타난다. 번역이든 창작이든 줄곧 ‘소설’과는 구분된 독자적 공간을 확보하고 있던 량치차오의 전기에, 소설이라는 정체성이 부여된 것은 한국에 소개되면서부터였다. 박은식은 작금의 국문소설을 비판하면서 의도적으로 전(傳)류 ‘구소설’을 집중적인 공격 대상으로 삼았다. 그리고 ‘신소설’로 제시한 것이 바로 서양 영웅의 ‘전’이었다. 그는 ‘전’을 선호하는 대중의 취향을 포섭하되, 번역을 통한 새로운 내용으로 대중의 취향 자체를 개척하고자 했다. ‘전’이라는 기표를 통해 소설 독자를 포섭하고자 한 노력은 『대한매일신보』나, 여러 근대잡지의 <소설>란, 단행본 소설의 발간 등을 통해서도 확인된다. 이 같은 전략은 장지연, 신채호에 의해서도 관철되었으며, 특히 신채호는 두 가지 측면에서 진전된 모습을 보였다. 하나는 새 국문소설의 전범을 만드는 데 장애가 되는 이인직 류의 신소설 작가를 정면으로 비판하는 것이었고, 다른 하나는 역술뿐 아니라 저술을 통해서도 스스로의 실천을 확장시켜 나간 것이다. 필자는 본 연구를 통해 도출된 결론을 토대로, 한문소양을 갖춘 이들은 ‘전(傳)’을 선호한 반면 국문 독자들은 ‘소설’을 선호했다는 도식, 1900년대의 계몽지식인들이 소설의 효용론에만 천착하여 끝내 독자들과 괴리될 수밖에 없었다는 시각, 소설 언어의 경합에서 국한문체가 도태되었다는 주장 등에 기존 연구의 인식에 이의를 제기하였다. In 1900s, Korea experienced the expression of caustic comments and consciousness of crisis through modern print media regarding novels for the first time. Novels which had existed before had to show a certain level of appropriateness to become something new at that time. Such a trend was activated under the influence of the novel discussions from China and Japan. However, there was a special feature which was different from that of China or Japan. In 1900s, the discussions regarding the crisis and the process of overcoming it in Korea were led by such eminent intellectuals as Park, Eun-Sik(朴殷植) and Shin, Chae-Ho(申采浩). Their theories and practices left a clear mark in the history of Korean novels. This paper considers that the driving force for such a mark consisted of ‘biographies’ and ‘translations’. ‘Biographies’ represent the ‘vertical axis’ of time since they suggested a new kind of novel by denying the traditional features of novels. Meanwhile, ‘translations’ represent the ‘horizontal axis’ of space since they brought in new properties of novels from outside. There are fundamental differences between the novel discussions suggested by Liang Qi Chao(梁啓超) and the novel-related works carried out by Park, Eun-Sik and Shin, Chae-Ho. Such differences are shown on the boundary between ‘biographies’ and ‘translations’. Liang Qi Chao`s Biographies, which had possessed their own space which was different from that of ‘novels’, regardless of translations or original copies, were combined with the identity of novels when they were introduced in Korea. Park, Eun-Sik criticized new Korean novels while intentionally focusing on the ‘traditional novels’ reflecting the features of ‘biographies’ as the exclusive targets. He suggested the ‘biographies’ of Western heroes as ‘new novels’. While attracting the attention of the public that preferred ‘biographies’, he tried to exploit the entire preference of the public through new contents based on translations. It is possible to see his effort to attract readers of novels through ‘biographies’ in such media as the ‘novel’ column of Korea Daily Newspaper(大韓每日申報), various modern magazines and the publication of books. Such a strategy was also applied by Jang, Ji-Yeon(張志淵) and Shin, Chae-Ho. In particular, Shin, Chae-Ho showed a progress in two aspects. One of them was the direct criticism towards the writers of new novels, including Lee, In-Jik(李人稙), who were considered to be obstacles against new Korean novels. The other one was the expansion of the boundary for practices not only through translations but also through writings. Based on the conclusion drawn by this paper, I believe that those who had the knowledge of Chinese characters preferred ‘biographies’, while those who wanted to read Korean preferred ‘novels’. Also, I suggest an objection regarding the recognition of the previous studies focusing on the opinion that the enlightened intellectuals in 1900s tried to follow the effective theory of novels, failing to establish a connection with readers, and the elimination of the mixed style between Korean and Chinese characters in the competition for the words used in novels.

텍스트의 시차와 공간적 재맥락화

손성준(Son, Sung Jun) 동악어문학회 2014 동악어문학 Vol.62 No.-

본 연구는 염상섭의 초기 번역 활동에 주목하여 텍스트 선택의 경위와 그 의미를 궁구하고, 이와 염상섭 소설들의 관련 양상을 고찰한 것이다. 염상섭은 메이지 일본의 문인 후타바테이 시메이를 경유하여 러시아 소설에 접속했다. 시메이의 번역문은 그 문체적 혁신으로 말미암아 일본 문단에서 큰 권위를 확보하고 있었다. 염상섭의 선택에는 그 권위에 대한 고려가 반영되어 있었으며, 번역태도 역시 저본을 꼼꼼하게 옮겨내는 방식이었다. 하지만 내용적 측면에서는 전혀 다른 방점을 찍으며 번역소설 자체가 자신의 문제의식을 대변하게 했다. 염상섭은 가르쉰의 ?四日間?을 통해서는 조선의 전쟁 체험, 즉 3?1운동의 죽음을 재현했고, 투르게네프의 ?密會?를 통해서는 여성해방이라는 화두를 던졌다. 이는 동시기의 소설 ?萬歲前?이나 ?除夜? 등에도 삽입된 메시지들이었다. 본격적 의미에서 처음으로 세계문학과 조우하며 나온 식민지 조선의 번역들은, 염상섭의 사례와 같이 저본과는 차별화 된 시공간적 조건의 차이와 번역자 개인의 문제의식이 빚어내는 각각의 맥락을 지니고 있었을 것이다. 따라서 본 연구는 향후 다른 대상에게도 적용 가능한 방법론의 한 사례로서 일정한 의의를 획득할 수 있다. This study noticed in the early translation activity of Yeom Sang-seop, examined his choice of translation text and the meaning it contains. Also, determined the aspects of his novels as an extension of translation activity. Yeom Sang-seop accessed Russian novel through Meiji Japan"s writer, Hutabatei Simei. Simei"s translation was renowned for it"s innovative style of writing in Japan"s literary circles. Yeom Sang-seop"s choice of texts reflected this authorities, and his translation attitude was also very simple and meticulous. But on the side of novel"s content, he tried very different way, and let translated novel represents his critical consciousness by itself. Yeom Sang-seop reenacted the horror of 3?1 independence movements, Chosun"s war experience through V. Garshin"s novel, Four days(四日間), and brought up women"s liberation issue through Turgenev"s Meeting(密會). These messages were also implied in other novels of the same period, such as Mansejeon(萬歲前) and Jeya(除夜). Colony Chosun was in the beginning stage of encountering international literatures in earnest, at that time of the Chosun"s translated literatures would have their own stories consisted of difference of time-space concept condition and translator"s personal concept of history, just like the Yeom Sang-seop"s case. So this study has significance as a example of translation study methodology which is applicable to other objects hereafter.

특집2: 동아시아 문화와 사상의 교류와 변전 : 식민지 번역장(飜譯場)과 검열 -조명희의 『그 전날 밤』 번역을 중심으로

손성준 ( Sung Jun Son ) 반교어문학회 2015 泮橋語文硏究 Vol.0 No.39

본 연구는 식민지시기에 검열이라는 변수가 번역자의 태도와 식민지 번역장(飜譯場)의 형성에 어떠한 방식으로 작용하였는지를 고찰한 것이다. 주요 분석대상은 투르게네프의 장편소설 『그 전날 밤』에 대한 조명희의 번역으로서, 그가 저본으로 삼은 일역본과 두 번역 판본(《조선일보》연재본과 박문서관의 단행본)을 각기 비교 검토하여 검열의 흔적을 밝히고 조명희의 검열 인식 및 대응을 살펴보았다. 러시아 여성 옐레나와 터키의 압제 하에 있던 불가리아 출신의 유학생이자 독립운동가인 인사로프의 비극적 사랑을 그린 『그 전날 밤』은, 그 서사적 성격상 1920년대 식민지 지식인들의 폭넓은 호응을 이끌어냈다. 식민지인들이 식민지 출신 주인공에게 각별한 관심을 보이는 것은 당연할지도 모른다. 그러나 그관심이 그대로 문자화되기 어려운 곳도 식민지였다. 1924년 8월부터 10월 사이발표된 조명희의 《조선일보》연재본은 저본에 충실하게 번역되다가 후반부에 이르러 갑자기 발췌역과 역자의 자체 요약 방식으로 바뀌게 된다. 한편 1925년에 나온 단행본 버전의 경우 신문연재 당시 축약된 내용이 정상적으로 번역되었다. 그 대신 연재본에는 없던 수백 자에 이르는 복자(覆字)가 새겨지게 된다. 이러한 훼손된 번역들의 배후에는 검열이 있었다. 그럼에도 불구하고 『그 전날 밤』을 온전히 번역하겠다는 조명희의 의도는 끝내 성취되었다고 볼 수 있다. ‘복자’의 경우는 원문이 존재하는 이상 ‘복원’이가능하기 때문이다. 단행본 『그 전날 밤』의 원문은 신문연재본이다. 비록 연재는 막다른 길에 봉착했지만 이미 원작분량의 약 80% 지점까지가 신문을 통해 충실히 번역·배포된 상태였던 것이다. 한편 단행본의 경우 많은 복자로 뒤덮여 있었음에도 신문연재 당시 축약된 부분만큼은 복자가 부재했는데, 이는 조명희가 복자 배치의 주체였기 때문에 가능한 일이었다. 요컨대 단행본의 복자는 신문을 통한 확인이 가능하며, 신문연재에서 축약되었던 부분은 단행본을 통한 확인의 길이 열리게 된 것이다. 이렇듯 조명희는 신문연재본과 단행본을 번역상의 상호보완적 관계에 놓이도록 하였다. 식민지의 합법 출판물은 예외 없이 한 차례 이상의 검열을 거친 결과물이지만, 검열납본 원고와 대조해보지 않는 이상 그 과정에서 ‘걸러진 것’이 무엇인지는 알 수 없다. 문제는 ‘남은 것’만을 분석의 대상으로 삼을 경우, 해당 텍스트의 존재 의미를 제대로 간취하기 어렵다는 것이다. 그런데 다음의 두 가지 경우는 ‘걸러진 것’의 실체, 즉 검열 이전과 이후의 텍스트 편차를 파악할 수 있는 여지가 허락되어 있다. 하나는 신문에 연재된 후에 단행본으로 간행되는 경우이고, 다른 하나는 번역물이다. 전자는 식민지 조선에 적용되던 신문지법과 출판법의 편차로 인해 ‘신문연재본’이 원형으로서 남아 있고, 후자는 애초에 다른 법역(法域)으로 인해 훼손 없이 유통된 ‘번역 저본’(주로 일본어로 된)이 원형으로서 남아 있기 때문이다. 조명희의 번역소설 『그 전날 밤』은 두 가지의 ‘원형’이 모두 남아 있는 사례다. 본고는 이 조건들을 활용하여 복자를 복원하거나 조명희의 텍스트 개입 및 검열 대응 방식을 추적할 수 있었다. 이러한 방법론은 보다 폭넓게 적용될 필요가 있다. 식민지시기 번역문학 연구에서의 검열과, 검열 연구에서의 번역문학이라는 요소는 공히 필수적 참조항으로서 재발견되어야 할 것이다. This study considered how the variable of censorship worked on translators`` attitudes and the formation of the field of translation in the colonial period. With Cho Myeong-Hee``s translation of On the Eve, a novel by Turgenev, as its main object of analysis, this study compared a Japanese translation of the novel, which Cho Myeong-Hee used as an original script, and its two translation versions by Cho Myeong-Hee(a version run serially in The Chosun Ilbo and a version of an independent volume published by Bakmunseogwan); and revealed traces of censorship and considered Cho Myeong-Hee``s perception on the censorship and his response to it. On the Eve, which depicted tragic love between Elena, a Russian girl, and Insarov, a foreign student and independence activist from Bulgaria that was suffering from Turkish oppression, was much acclaimed by intellectuals of the colony in the 1920s. It may be natural for colonial people to have paid special attention to the hero who was from a colony. However, it was also in the colony that it was hard to put such attention into print as it was. The translation version published in The Chosun Ilbo August through October 1924 was faithful to the original script; from the latter half, however, it suddenly changed into an excerpt translation and the translator``s own summary. On the other hand, in the case of the independent volume published in 1925, parts abridged during serial publication in the newspaper were translated normally. Instead, hundreds of bokja (覆字, text smearing, fuseji), which were not shown in the serial publication, were written into the volume. Censorship was behind the damaged translation. Nevertheless, it may be said that Cho Myeong-Hee``s intention to translate On the Eve I in its intact form was ultimately accomplished. For, in the case of bokjas, restoration is possible as long as an original script exists. The original script of the independent volume On the Eve is the version run serially in the newspaper. Although the serial publication reached a dead end, about 80% of the original script had been faithfully translated and distributed through the newspaper. On the other hand, in the independent volume covered with a lot of bokjas, bokja was not found among the parts abridged during serial publication in the newspaper, which was possible because Cho Myeong-Hee was the subject who placed bokja. In short, it has become possible to check bokja in the independent volume against the newspaper and to check the abridged parts run in the newspaper with the independent volume. Like this, Cho Myeong-Hee put the newspaper version and the independent volume version in complementary relationship. Without exception, legitimate publications in the colonial period are results that passed censorship one time or more; however, it is not possible to know what were ``filtered out`` during the process of censorship unless they are checked against their original copies submitted for censorship. The problem is that if only ``what is left`` is analyzed, it is difficult to grasp properly the meaning of the existence of the relevant text. But as for the following two cases, there is the potential for detecting the true nature of ``what is left,`` that is, differences in the texts between before and after censorship. One is a case where a translation is published in an independent volume after being run in a newspaper; and the other is translation materials. As the former, the original copy of the serials in the newspaper exists due to time difference between the Newspaper Law and the Publication Law that were enforced in Joseon; and as the latter, ``original scripts`` (mainly in Japanese) of the translation circulated undamaged are left in its original form because it belonged to different jurisdiction from the outset. On the Eve translated by Cho Myeong-Hee is a case where both the two types of ``originals`` are left. This paper was able to restore bokja using the above conditions, and to track Cho Myeong-Hee``s methods for intervening in the text and responding to censorship. This methodology needs to be applied more widely. Both censorship in the studies of translated literature during the colonial period and the element of translated literature in the studies of censorship will have to be rediscovered as essential references.

특집 번역의 동아시아적 시공간과 한국문학 : 근대 동아시아의 애국 담론과 『애국정신담』

손성준 ( Sungjun Son ) 한림과학원 2015 개념과 소통 Vol.- No.16

The purpose of this study is to shed some light on the universality and particularity implied in the discourses of patriotism in Korea, China, and Japan, by inquiring into some aspects of the translation of A Tale of the Patriotic Spirit and the way it has been generally accepted into modern East Asia. The original work, Tu seras soldat, histoire d’un soldat francais : Recits et lecons patriotiques, was written by Emile Lavisse, a French cavalry officer, in 1888. Through the stories told by individual patriots, this book describes how France endured a period of humiliation and pain, after its disastrous defeat in the Franco-Prussian War, but rose to become a powerful nation once again. At the same time, the work can also be understood as a school textbook designed to prepare students to fulfill their duty of military service. In Japan, Odachime Gatsukan (大立目克寬) and Itabashi Jiro (板橋次郞), army officers of the Meiji era, translated ‘Tu seras soldat’ as ‘Aikokuseishin-tan’ (愛國精神譚), reorganizing the original work around two main characters and deemphasizing those features which resembled a school textbook. This Japanese version was published in 1891 when the ideas of loyalty and patriotism were dominating the Meiji era education system, following the proclamation of the Imperial Rescript on Education (1890). The two heroes of the Japanese translation, who were clearly fictitious in the original work, are instead presented as real-life characters, which provides more dramatic realism to the success story of France. The Chinese version, ‘Aiguo Jingshen Tan ’ (愛國精神談), was published in 1902 under the pen name of Aiguo Yiren (愛國逸人), by Guang zhi shu ju (廣智書局) in Shanghai. This organization was responsible for many cultural projects in support of the Hundred Days’ Reform led by Liang Qichao (梁啓超), publishing lively works on modern knowledge and discourses about patriotism. Aiguo Yiren made a very free translation, with many additions and deletions, and much rewriting, though most of the individual anecdotes were included. The latter part of the original work has a passage describing how French soldiers established colonies in Algeria and Vietnam, and the Chinese translation retains an accurate account of the fighting between France and China, which then held sway in Vietnam, thus revealing the incompetence of the Qing government, and encouraging Chinese readers to open their eyes to the reality of the modern world order. in which the fittest survive and the weakest go to the wall. In Korea the book is known as ‘Aeguk-jeongsin-dam’, with four translations being produced over a period of eight years from 1906. This includes magazine serials in Joyangbo and Seo-u, both unfinished, and two versions translated by Lee Chae-u, one in the Korean-Chinese style and one entirely in Korean characters (Hangeul), both published in book form. All four versions actually took Aiguo Yiren’s Chinese version as their source text. This paper is particularly focused on how Lee Chae-u’s translation into the Korean-Chinese style interprets the Chinese source material. His principal aim was to show the Joseon people, who were confronted with the loss of their national sovereignty, the model of the French people who overcame a similarly miserable situation to achieve national prosperity and military power. To this end, he stuck closely to Chinese text, mostly concentrating on the introduction of Western history and Western civilization, and emphasizing how social Darwinism was expected to supply a new world order. The Japanese, Chinese and Korean translations of Tu seras soldat all made a case for ‘patriotism,’ but this was understood very differently:the Japanese translators were living in a period when the Japanese emperor was synonymous with the state, the Chinese translator was aiming some sharp criticism at the Qing government, and the Korean translator was trying to offer hope at a critical moment of national ruin and despair. The ‘patriotism’ revealed by these translations was not spontaneous, but was rather a reinterpreted and planned product of the modern period. Thus, during the process of transition to becoming modern nation-states, the three East Asian countries each advocated ‘patriotism’ according to their own specific temporal and spatial contexts.

번역문학의 재생(再生)과 반(反)검열의 앤솔로지 - 『태서명작단편집(泰西名作短篇集)』(1924) 연구

손성준 ( Son Sung-jun ) 한국문학연구학회 2018 현대문학의 연구 Vol.0 No.66

『태서명작단편집』(1924)은 서양[泰西]의 여러 단편소설을 번역하여 엮은 책으로서, 한국 최초의 서양 단편 앤솔로지로 알려져 있다. 『태서명작단편집』의 근간은 홍명희, 진학문, 염상섭, 변영로 등 4인의 번역자가 과거 『동명』, 『개벽』, 『학지광』, 『신생활』에 역재(譯載)했던 단편소설 15편이었다. 번역자들은 주로 일역본을 경유한 중역(重譯)의 방식으로 서양 단편을 소개했지만, 변영로의 번역작 3편은 모두 영역본의 중역이었다. 기획 및 편집을 맡은 변영로는 우선 번역진을 구성한 후, 각자의 과거번역을 추적하여 모으는 단계를 밟았다. 그 결과 15편 중 9편이 러시아 소설로 편중되는 구성의 불균형이 나타났다. 이는 『태서명작단편집』이 철저히 발신자 중심의 기획이라는 것을 방증한다. 변영로와 동료들은 이미 각자의 기준에서 조선의 독서계에 필요하다고 판단한 서양 소설들을 선보였고, 현재는 그것을 한 데 엮여 재차 선보이고자 할 따름이었다. 최초 발표된 원고의 형태와 『태서명작단편집』으로 재편집된 판본을 비교해보면, 일부 표기를 제외하고는 큰 차이를 확인할 수 없다. 기점이 된 4개의 잡지는 합법적 영역에서는 최고 수준의 ‘불온함’을 장착하여 검열체제와의 갈등이 일상화되어 있던 잡지였다. 검열의 강도가 격화되고 있던 시기적 특수성을 감안하면, 『태서명작단편집』은 과거의 문제적 번역들을 ‘태서명작’의 이름으로 ‘재생’시킨다는 의미를 지니고 있었다. 사전검열의 결과 비록 최남선이 번역한 「마지막 課程」(알퐁스 도데 원작)은 삭제되었지만 활자화된 15편의 소설 역시 상당수가 식민지 조선의 억압된 상황에 대한 은유, 애국심과 독립정신의 고취, 계급투쟁의 당위성 등 검열의 기준에 저촉될 만한 여러 가지 요인을 내재하고 있었다. 나아가, 『태서명작단편집』의 수록작 가운데 10여 편은 공통적으로 ‘타자와의 관계 속에서 오는 깨달음’의 문제를 다루었다. 이러한 일관된 메시지는 이 앤솔로지가 1923년 9월 1일에 발생한 관동대지진로부터 얼마 지나지 않아 기획되었다는 점에서 더욱 문제적이다. ‘타자’였던 탓에 죽임당해야 했던 조선의 비참한 역사 직후에, 공교롭게도 『태서명작단편집』은 ‘타자가 틀린 것이 아니다’라는 목소리를 집결시킨 형태로 등장했던 셈이다. 『태서명작단편집』은 결국 식민지 조선에 대한 발화였다. The Taeseo Myeongjak Danpyeonjip (Anthology of Occidental Short Story Masterpieces)(1924) is a compilation of translated Western short stories, and is known as the first anthology of Western short stories in Korea. The Taeseo Myeongjak Danpyeonjip is based on 15 short stories previously translated and published in Dongmyeong, Gaebyeok, Hakjigwang, and Sinsaenghwal by four translators of Hong Myeong Hui, Jin Hak Mun, Yeom Sang Seop, and Byeon Yeong Ro. While the translators mostly introduced Western short stories by second-hand translation via Japanese, Byeon Yeong Ro’s three translations were all translated from English versions. Byeon Yeong Ro, the planner and editor of the compilation, selected the translators, and then tracked and collected their past translations. As a result, the compilation showed such an imbalance of composition that Russian short stories were predominant with 9 of the 15 short stories. This corroborates that the Taeseo Myeongjak Danpyeonjip was planned on an entirely sender-centered basis. Byeon Yeong Ro and his colleagues had already introduced Western stories judged by them as necessary for the reading public of Joseon according to their own criteria, and then only intended to publish them again in the form of a compilation. The comparison between the texts of the manuscripts initially published and their re-edited versions in the Taeseo Myeongjak Danpyeonjip shows no great difference except for some expressions. The four magazines that originally had published the works were routinely in conflict with the censorship system due to their top-level ‘rebelliousness’ within the legal limits. Given the distinct characteristics of the period when the intensity of censorship was increased, the Taeseo Myeongjak Danpyeonjip had the significance that it ‘regenerated’ problematic translations of the past under the title of ‘Occidental masterpieces.’ Although only The Last Lesson (originally written by Alphonse Daudet) translated by Choi Nam Seon was removed as a result of the censorship, most of the 15 stories put into print also included factors that might be in conflict with the criteria of censorship, such as a metaphor for the situation of oppressed colony Joseon, the infusion of patriotism and the spirit of independence, and the justification for class struggle. Further, 10 works in the the Taeseo Myeongjak Danpyeonjip commonly dealt with the issue of ‘realization from relationship with the other.’ Such a consistent message was more problematic in that the anthology was planned shortly after the Great Kanto earthquake in September 1, 1923. For the appearance of the Taeseo Myeongjak Danpyeonjip as much as gave voice to ‘The other is not wrong’ just after the miserable history of Joseon where Joseon people had to be killed because they were the others. The Taeseo Myeongjak Danpyeonjip was utterances about the colonial Joseon after all.

지식의 기획과 번역 주체로서의 동아시아 미디어 ― 『조양보(朝陽報)』를 중심으로

손성준 ( Son Sung-jun ) 성균관대학교 대동문화연구원 2018 大東文化硏究 Vol.104 No.-

『조양보』는 한국 최초로 상업적 종합잡지를 지향한 비기관지였다. 본 연구는 한국잡지 중 <실업>, <담총>, <소설> 항목을 처음으로 도입한 『조양보』의 지면 구성이 일본의 대표적 종합잡지인 『태양』을 참조한 결과로 보았다. 그러나 동일한 틀을 사용한다 하더라도, 그 내용을 채우는 것은 전적으로 매체의 선택이었다. 이 글은 『조양보』의 편집진이 특정 중국어와 일본어 단행본들을 재료를 선별하고 다른 방식으로 배치하는 사례를 종합하여, 『조양보』가 단순히 번역의 매개였을 뿐 아니라 ‘번역의 주체’이기도 했다는 것을 밝혔다. 매체의 출현과 지식의 유통이라는 근대전환기의 현상 이면에는 ‘번역’이라는 실천이 놓여 있었다. 『조양보』의 <논설>란 기사에서 70% 이상, <소설>란의 100%가 번역에 기댄 결과물이라는 사실이 증명하듯, 정기간행물을 통한 1900년대 후반의 계몽운동에 있어서 번역은 필수불가결했다. 이것이 당대의 미디어 자체를 ‘飜譯場’의 관점에서 재고해야 할 이유다. ‘번역’의 문제는 보통 ‘자생적 발전’의 대척점에서 사유되었고, 따라서 연구사의 주변부에 놓이는 경우가 대부분이었다. 하지만 대한제국기 잡지들의 존재 양상을 고려할 때 이는 주객이 전도된 것에 가깝다. 잡지의 간행 주체들이 중시한 것은 ‘번역’을 통한 지식의 재편이었다. 그들이 절실히 보급하고자 한 각종 학문과 담론은 기본적으로 자가생산이 불가한 영역에 있었다. 그렇기에 ‘자생적 발전’을 새로운 차원에서 이끌어내기 위해서는 知識場의 재구성이 선행되어야 했다. 이것이 당대 번역의 본질이자 지향이었다. 번역된 것들이 의미하는 바를 보다 적극적으로 고구해야 하는 이유는, 결국 번역 자체가 ‘자생적 선택’에서 비롯된 산물이기 때문이다. Joyangbo(朝陽報) was a non-official publication that pursued a commercial general-interest magazine for the first time in Korea. This study judges that the layout of Joyangbo, which introduced the sections of < Business(實業) >, < Story Collection(談叢) >, and < Fiction(小說) > for the first time among Korean magazines, was the result of referring to The Sun(太陽), Japan's representative general-interest magazine. However, although the same framework was used, what it was filled with was entirely up to the media's choice. This paper reveals that Joyangbo was not only the media of translation, but also was 'the subject of translation', by putting together cases where the editorial staff of Joyangbo selected materials from specific Chinese and Japanese books and arranged them in different ways. Behind the appearance of media and the distribution of knowledge, which were phenomena in a period of transition to the modern era, there was the practice of 'translation'. As shown by the facts that more than 70% of leading articles in the < Editorial(論說) > section of Joyangbo and 100% of stories in its < Fiction > section depended on translation, translation was indispensable for the Enlightenment Movement through periodicals in the late 1990s. This is the very reason that media of the time itself should be reconsidered in terms of 'the field of translation(飜譯場)'. The problem of 'translation' has generally been reasoned at the antipode of 'spontaneous development', and thus has always been at the periphery of the history of study. However, given the existence aspects of magazines during the period of the Great Korean Empire, this is almost like putting the cart before the horse. It is the reorganization of knowledge that the subjects of magazine publication regarded as important. Basically, various knowledge and discourses they desperately tried to disseminate were not within the domain of self-production. Therefore, to elicit 'spontaneous development' from a new dimension, the reconstruction of knowledge-field had to precede. This is the nature and orientation of the translation of the time. The reason that what translations mean should be more actively investigated is that the translation itself is ultimately the product of 'spontaneous choice'.

번역과 원본성의 창출: 롤랑부인 전기의 동아시아 수용 양상과 그 성격

손성준 ( Sung Jun Son ) 한국비교문학회 2011 비교문학 Vol.0 No.53

This study analyzes how the biography of Madame Roland, a lady from the period of French Revolution, was changed through the space of translation of Japan-China-Korea connection. Among the biographies of Madam Roland, The Queens of Society(1860), co-authored by Grace Wharton and Philip Wharton of England, shows clearly the translation route to East Asia. In The Queens of Society, she was described as a deficient person in religious and personality though she was a great woman. In Japanese edition, she was introduced as a model of modern woman without negative factor(The Model of Lady, The Queen of Relationship, by Tsubouchi Shoyo, 1887 and The Flower of French Revolution, by Tokutomi Roka, 1893). Whereas, this model woman was recreated as the origin of revolution by Liang Qichao(A Life of Madame Roland, The Bravest Modern Woman, 1902). His translation allowed the new image of Madame Roland to be introduced in Korea(A Life of Madame Roland, The Best Modern Heroine, 1907). Shoyo, Roka and Liang Qichao viewed the radicalism of French Revolution from a same standpoint, after Wharton defined that they had to take precautions against it by conservative ideas of revolution. Particularly, Liang Qichao described Madame Roland as a mother of revolution as well as a victim of revolution to show his double recognition of French Revolution. Whereas, in Korea, the conservative ideas of Liang Qichao was deleted(in the newspaper form) or the message of expectation for radical change of society was added(in the book from). To translate Western literatures into China was to receive authoritative information even though it was double translation. For this reason, a translation became the activity to create a new origin, not a relation of an origin and a copy. The texts of Whartons and Shoyo were an origin and a translation but they were not the same story. So were the biographies of Madame Roland by Liang Qichao and Korean translator. Texts of three East Asian countries functioned as independent text with originality in each place. The significance of study in translation of East Asia in modern transition is not to investigate whether it is literal or liberal translation or research into the level of influence, but to find how intervention of translator create a new originality in the extraordinary nature of the translating place.

「각본 격야(隔夜)」 번역의 시공간적 맥락

손성준 ( Son Sung-jun ),한지형 ( Han Ji-hyoung ) 국제어문학회 2015 국제어문 Vol.0 No.67

Turgenev is a writer a ssessed as a political moderate who was opposed to revolutionary changes, though he had sensitivity to the situation of times and the current of its changes. In the case of On the Eve(Накануне, 1860) among his novels, it featured as its main character a young Bulgarian man who dreams of revolution, and even such a situation was created that even the radical group of the then Russia came to evaluate the work positively. Actually, Turgenev himself was adamant in rejecting the position of considering On the Eve as `the eve of a revolution`; however, its text contained inter-textuality for political interpretation. In 1920, Hyun Cheol, who was a New Drama Movement promoter and the Chief of Department of Art & Science for Gaebyeok, published Scenario Gyeogya, serials of a translated work, in the first issue of the magazine through its ninth issue. The Scenario Gyeogya was On the Eve adapted for the stage, and its original script was Kyakuhon Sono Zenya(脚本 その前夜) by Kusuyama Masao(楠山正雄), who was working as a dramatizer for Geizyutsuza(藝術座). Kyakuhon Sono Zenya (脚本 その前夜) itself was a text that emphasized more the aspects of awakening colony people to the reality and their struggle than the original work. In the translator`s forward, Hyuncheol introduced the original work as a work that explained `today`s Russia,` that is, Russia where a socialist revolutionary state was established; and made it known that the reason for translating the scenario was that it had the most points in common with Joseon of those days. Behind Hyun Cheol`s selection of the scenario was his intention to tell about the political reality of Joseon through the revolutionary Russia. On the other hand, he attempted progress in the culture of Joseon by emphasizing in the translation `the collision of ideas` between characters of old and new generations revolving around the necessity for women`s liberation. Under Hyun Cheol`s planning, Gyeogya was actually performed at Danseongsa theater, and a sensation created by Gyeogya among Joseon people is indirectly witnessed by Overnight Fog (Jisaeneun angae), a novella written by Hyun Jin-geon. At the time when the first publication of Gaebyeok was imminent, Hyun Cheol picked the scenario of On the Eve, placing the first priority in his translation to the work over A Doll`s House (Et dukkehjem) or Hamlet. For after encountering Kyakuhon Sono Zenya(脚本 その前夜) during his study in Japan, he had a hunch about the status to be retained by it in case that it would be placed into the specific time and space of colony Joseon.