夏目漱石の形容詞の表記の異同 -「いい·よい」を中心に-

青木浩之 ( Aoki Hiroyuki ) 한국일본근대학회 2017 일본근대학연구 Vol.0 No.58

漱石の主要17作品について岩波書店1993年版『漱石全集』の校異表に基づき、形容詞の表記の異同を「いい·よい」を中心に見てきた。漢字、反名、そして漢字と反名の三種類に大別して考察した結果は次の通りである。 漢字の項では、同一語を異なる漢字で表記している場合と漢字表記の字順が轉倒している場合を考察した。反名の項では、まず送り反名について考察し、明治時代の送り反名の一般的な傾向と同樣に漱石は讀みやすくする目的で反名を多く送る例が多かったことを示した。また、ルビの變更、原稿ルビの誤表記、その他の反名遣いの變更等にも言及した。大體において「全集」が文法的にも慣用的にも正しい表記となっていることが認められた。漢字と反名の項では、平反名から「好い」「能く」への變更に言及して漱石の用字の特徵を考察した。 岩波書店1993年版『漱石全集』には、初出の新聞·雜誌、初版單行本と、また漱石の原稿とも多くの異同が見られた。このような異同は、漱石自身の表記に關する規範意識の薄さや誤記に起因している所もあるが、各テキストの段階で本文を確定する際の編集方針や、印刷過程の誤植等によって生じる異同もあり、信賴する本文、底本の確定の難しさを垣間見る事ができる。作品硏究は何らかのテキストに準據して行うのだが、テキストの選定がいかに重要であるかが改めて認識される。 Based on the list of spelling differences in Iwanami Shoten 1993 edition “Soseki Complete Works”, I have examined 17 major works of Soseki to check the differences about the spelling of adjective, centering on “II or YOI (good).” The subject of examination is Kanjis, Kana letters, and both Kanjis and Kana letters. In Kanji section I examineed the case where the same words are written with different kanjis and the one where the order of kanji is overturned. In Kana section ! first examined Okurigana letters, and showed that Soseki had been more likely to use longer Okurigana letters for the convenience of reading, just as the general tendency of using Okurugana letters in the Meiji era. I also mentioned the changes of Furigana letters, Furigana letters written wrong in Soseki’s manuscripts, and other changes of Kana usages. In Kanji and Kana section I examined the characteritics of Soseki’s using Kanji and Kana letters, seeing the changes from Hiragana letters to “好い” or “能く”. In Iwanami Shoten 1993 edition “Soseki Complete Works” many differences of the spelling were found, comparing to the first serial newspaper or magazine, the first edition of book, and manuscripts of Soseki. These resulted from writing atitude of Soseki not so much careful about spelling, and from his wrong spelling. Other reasons are editorial policies of deciding Soseki’s original text at each publication, and mistakes in the printing. We realize the difficuties of deciding reliable original texts or source books of Soseki through this report.

夏目漱石の形容詞の表記の異同 ‒ 「いい․よい」を中心に ‒

아오키 히로유키 한국일본근대학회 2017 일본근대학연구 Vol.0 No.58

Based on the list of spelling differences in Iwanami Shoten 1993 edition “Soseki Complete Works”, I have examined 17 major works of Soseki to check the differences about the spelling of adjective, centering on “II or YOI (good).” The subject of examination is Kanjis, Kana letters, and both Kanjis and Kana letters. In Kanji section I examineed the case where the same words are written with different kanjis and the one where the order of kanji is overturned. In Kana section ! first examined Okurigana letters, and showed that Soseki had been more likely to use longer Okurigana letters for the convenience of reading, just as the general tendency of using Okurugana letters in the Meiji era. I also mentioned the changes of Furigana letters, Furigana letters written wrong in Soseki’s manuscripts, and other changes of Kana usages. In Kanji and Kana section I examined the characteritics of Soseki’s using Kanji and Kana letters, seeing the changes from Hiragana letters to “好い” or “能く”. In Iwanami Shoten 1993 edition “Soseki Complete Works” many differences of the spelling were found, comparing to the first serial newspaper or magazine, the first edition of book, and manuscripts of Soseki. These resulted from writing atitude of Soseki not so much careful about spelling, and from his wrong spelling. Other reasons are editorial policies of deciding Soseki’s original text at each publication, and mistakes in the printing. We realize the difficuties of deciding reliable original texts or source books of Soseki through this report. 漱石の主要17作品について岩波書店1993年版『漱石全集』の校異表に基づき、形容詞の表記の異同を「いい・よい」を中心に見てきた。漢字、仮名、そして漢字と仮名の三種類に大別して考察した結果は次の通りである。 漢字の項では、同一語を異なる漢字で表記している場合と漢字表記の字順が転倒している場合を考察した。仮名の項では、まず送り仮名について考察し、明治時代の送り仮名の一般的な傾向と同様に漱石は読みやすくする目的で仮名を多く送る例が多かったことを示した。また、ルビの変更、原稿ルビの誤表記、その他の仮名遣いの変更等にも言及した。大体において「全集」が文法的にも慣用的にも正しい表記となっていることが認められた。漢字と仮名の項では、平仮名から「好い」「能く」への変更に言及して漱石の用字の特徴を考察した。 岩波書店1993年版『漱石全集』には、初出の新聞・雑誌、初版単行本と、また漱石の原稿とも多くの異同が見られた。このような異同は、漱石自身の表記に関する規範意識の薄さや誤記に起因している所もあるが、各テキストの段階で本文を確定する際の編集方針や、印刷過程の誤植等によって生じる異同もあり、信頼する本文、底本の確定の難しさを垣間見る事ができる。作品研究は何らかのテキストに準拠して行うのだが、テキストの選定がいかに重要であるかが改めて認識される。

나쓰메 소세키 문학의 한국어 번역과수용 양상

이한정 한국일어일문학회 2017 日語日文學硏究 Vol.103 No.1

This paper examine the acceptance of Natsume Soseki’s literature in Korea in terms of the publication status of translated versions. The first Korean translation version of Natsume Soseki’s work is “Botchan”, translated by Jong-yeol Lee and published in 1960. Since then, most works of Natsume Soseki such as novels, critiques, essays, letters, etc. except for “Literary Theory”, “Literary Criticism”, Haiku, and Chinese poetry have been translated into Korean. Also, “Botchan”, “I am a Cat”, and “Kokoro” have been translated multiple times by different translators. In addition to these three works, “Sorekara”, “Michikusa”, “Yume Juya”, etc. have been included in the “Complete Series of World Literature” in Korea. Korean translations of Natsume Soseki’s works have increased after the 2000s. It was influenced by the fact that “Botchan” was evaluated as a so-called “classic” in the 1990s and was included as a book for youths’ preparation for discourse; it is also because Natsume Soseki was introduced in Korea as ‘Shakespeare’ of Japan, ‘nation’s author’, and ‘Obverse of a 1984 series 1000 Japanese yen banknote’, widely spreading the awareness among Korean readers that he is the most representative author in Japan. Going along with this atmosphere, all 14 books were translated into the Korean version of “Natsume Soseki’s Novel Collection” for 3 years from 2013 to 2016. It is clear that the publication of these completed works was achieved not because study on Natsume Soseki made progress in Korea but rather due to the expansion of Korean readers of Natsume Soseki’s literature. Natsume Soseki’s literature has secured awareness as must-read works in this era. Presently, Natsume Soseki’s literature has become ‘goods’ and ‘classics’ in Korea. 本稿の目的は1945年から2016年までの夏目漱石文学の韓国語翻訳の出版現況についてと、その受容の様相を考察することである。韓国において最初に翻訳出版された夏目漱石の作品は『坊っちゃん』であり、その出版年は1960年である。そして2016年まで『文学論』『文学評論』、俳句、漢詩など一部を除いて夏目漱石の作品のほとんどは韓国語に翻訳されている。また、『坊っちゃん』『吾輩は猫である』『こころ』は数十回にわたって再度訳されており、この三作を含めて『それから』『道草』「夢十夜」は韓国で出版されている各出版社「世界文学全集」にも収められている。夏目漱石の作品の韓国語訳が増加したのは2000年代以降である。1990年代に『坊っちゃん』が青少年向けの必読書の一つになった影響もあるだろう。さらに夏目漱石は日本の「国民作家」「シェイクスピア」などとメディアによって紹介され日本の代表作家として読者層にその認知が広がったこともある。このような流れで2013年から2016年まで韓国語版『夏目漱石小説全集』全14巻(短篇集は別巻)が刊行された。全集は好調な売れ行きを見せた。夏目漱石の韓国語の作品は現在「古典」とある種「商品」のように受け入れられていると言えよう。

夏目漱石の文体研究 -『それから』を中心に-

李炳萬(Lee, Byung-Man) 동아시아일본학회 2019 일본문화연구 Vol.0 No.71

夏目漱石의 작품 『それから』의 문체 기교에 대하여 여러 각도에 시점을 두고 또한 다른 작품과 비교 검토하면서 이 작품이 漱石의 작품 중에서 문체적으로 어떠한 위치를 갖고 있는지 조사해 보았다. 그 결과, 漱石의 문체는 그의 생애에 있어서 최후의 작품이 되었던 『明暗』에 이르러 ‘성숙’되고 ‘완성’되었다는 많은 연구자들의 견해가 있었고 인정하지 않을 수는 없지만, 이번 조사에서 漱石의 문체는 그때까지 써온 여러 가지 방법이 『それから』에서 합류하여 일단 문체 확립의 단계를 들어갔고, 『それから』이후의 작품의 문체는 『それから』에 사용된 문장구성, 또는 문장기교의 발전적인 현상을 볼 수 있었다는 것이 보다 명확한 견해가 아닐까하고 추측해 볼 수 있을 것이다. 그 밖에 『それから』의 비유표현에서는 漱石의 교양의 심오함과 날카로운 지성을 느끼게 하였고, 어휘나 조어(造語)에 있어서는 유머 넘치는 표현을 너무도 평범하게 사용하면서 설명도 하지 않는 것이 도리어 漱石의 재미있는 면이 아니었나 하는 생각이 들었다. 게다가 뭐니뭐니해도 빼놓을 수 없는 것은 漱石의 묘사력이 아닐까 생각했다. 자연묘사에서는 대화문을 삽입시킴으로써 과거로 회귀되어 있었던 장면을 현재의 장면으로 되돌리는 이른바 시간적 거리의 이동이 특징적이었다. 이처럼 漱石의 표현의 기교가 엿보였고, 인물묘사에서는 『それから』이전의 작품과 상당한 차이를 보였다. 즉 『それから』이전의 작품에서는 그 묘사가 섬세하고 미문조(美文調) 속의 시적인 일종의 요염한 취향이 많았지만, 『それから』에 이르러서는 미문조(美文調)가 옅어지고 과잉표현이 생략되어 필요 최저한의 표현 방식을 사용하게 되었다고 말할 수 있을 것 같다. The Author of this essay has researched for what characteristicsthe novel “Sorekara”has in the style of works of Natsume Soseki, in comparison with other works, while having focusing on the stylistic techniques in the novel “Sorekara” from various perspectives. It is substantial during the research to accept the general opinion until now that the style of Soseki has matured at most and reached to the completed level in his last and unfinished work “Meian”. In the novel “Sorekara”, however, various methods of expression which Soseki tried unified to reach to a mature standard for the moment. Further, the metaphorical expressions in “Sorekara” shows the enriched education and the keen intelligence of Soseki. For example, Soseki uses the very humorous expressions, especially by coining words or combining words, and he doesn’t explain anything about it. It makes the readers interesting in his works, and will be marvelous in Soseki. Furthermore, Soseki is excellent in the description. Especially characteristic is the change of the temporal distance: the description of the past suddenly ends to change to that of the present by inserting the conversations among the characters in the present. The skillfulness in description manners of Soseki is also shown in this point. novel “Sorekara” and the former works thereof. In the former works, the description is made in detail, and has a poetic taste and a kind of fascinating atmosphere in the ornate expression. In “Sorekara”, however, Soseki prefers the simple expression to the ornate one, and thus describes the necessity minimums.

소세키(漱石)의 하이쿠 창작활동에 대한 고찰 –마쓰야마(松山)와 구마모토(熊本)의 시절을 중심으로-

김활란 경희대학교 인문학연구원 2022 인문학연구 Vol.- No.52

This paper examined Soseki’s five-year haiku activities through letters to his acquaintances during the Matsuyama period from April 1895 to April 1896 and Kumamoto period from April 1896 to July 1900. Soseki, who announced his introduction to Haiku in Matsuyama, participated in meetings with Haiku poets from Matsuyama for about 50 days with Shiki, who temporarily returned home, and Soseki fell into the world of Haiku. During his five years in Matsuyama and Kumamoto, he created many haiku and was selected by Shiki through the epistle, and eventually became a talented haiku poet. Kyoshi, a disciple of Shiki, also had human exchanges and haiku activities. Soseki also left a great mark on Kumamoto as a haiku poet. The activities of Shimeiginsha, centered on Soseki, created a new wind in Kumamoto, Kyushu, which was a barren land of haiku, and also helped to produce a number of haiku poets from Kyushu. The five years in Matsuyama and Kumamoto were the most active and passionate period of Soseki’s life as a haiku poet. 이 논문에서는 소세키가 1895년 4월부터 1896년 4월까지의 마쓰야 마 시절과 1896년 4월부터 1900년 7월까지의 구마모토 시절에 지인들에게 보낸 서간 등을 통해 그의 5년간의 하이쿠 활동 등에 대해 살펴보았다. 마쓰야마 에서 시키에게 하이쿠 입문을 선언한 소세키는 일시 귀향한 시키와 함께 지내는 50여 일 동안 마쓰야마 출신의 하이쿠 시인들과의 모임에 참여하면서 소세키는 하이쿠의 세계에 빠져들게 된다. 마쓰야마와 구마모토에서 지내는 5년 동안 많은 하이쿠를 창작하여 서 간을 통해 시키에게 첨삭을 받으며, 마침내 실력 있는 하이쿠 시인으로 성장할 수 있었 다. 시키의 제자인 교시와도 인간적인 교류와 함께 하이쿠 활동도 함께 하였다. 또한 소 세키는 하이쿠 시인으로서 구마모토에도 커다란 발자취를 남겼다. 소세키를 중심으로 한 시메이긴샤 활동은 하이쿠의 불모지나 다름없던 규슈 구마모토에 새로운 바람을 일 으켜 규슈 출신의 하이쿠 시인들을 다수 배출하는데, 일조하기도 하였다. 마쓰야마와 구 마모토에서의 5년은 소세키의 인생에서 하이쿠 시인으로써 가장 활발하고 열정적으로 활동한 시기였다.

이광수(李光洙)와 나쓰메 소세키(夏目漱石)의 병(病)을 바라보는 관점

신윤주 한국일본근대학회 2019 일본근대학연구 Vol.0 No.64

Various media in Korea and Japan pointed out that Lee Kwang-soo overlaps with Soseki Natsume in December 2016 and January 2017, the “100th anniversary of the birth of his work Moojeong” and the special meaning of One hundred years after Soseki’s death. In this paper tried to examine how the individual illnesses of both Korean and Japanese national writers such as Lee Kwang Soo and Soseki influenced those who were intellectual authors. The goal of this paper is to consider what the viewpoints of both were as a writer looking at illness in a series of essays and diaries written on their bedside. There is a clear difference between the situations of Lee Kwang-soo and Soseki, but it is very similar in the fact that they lived in the sight of others, had ‘trauma’ from the particular experiences in the past and found out the causes of situations from their inherent ‘natures’. In addition to the physical pain that lies in the path of life and death, their own enthusiasm for survival will also be common. Most of all, Lee Kwang Soo and Soseki reveal the painful intentions that they failed to perform properly as a husband and father due to experiences on illnesses, such as hospitalization, hospital life, and medical treatments. This paper concluded Lee Kwang-su and Soseki turned their eyes toward their family, also had to write their writings as a writer under any circumstances, instead of neglecting the results of the illness that make humans the weakest, 2016년 12월과 2017년 1월은 이광수에게는 「작품 『무정』 탄생 100주년」, 소세키에게는 「사후 100년」이라는 특별한 시간적 의미가 겹친다는 것을 한국과 일본의 다양한 미디어에서 시사했다. 본 논문에서는 한국과 일본의 국민 작가로 대표되는 이광수와 소세키 두 사람 모두에게 발병되었던 병(病)이 결국 지식인이자 작가라는 타이틀을 가진 그들에게 어떤 영향을 끼쳤는지 살펴보고자 한다. 더불어 병으로 인해 두 사람 모두 병상에서 일련의 수필과 일기를 통해 병(病)을 바라보는 그들 작가로서의 관점이 어떠하였는지 살펴보고자 한다. 이광수와 소세키는 남의 시선에 갇혀 산다는 점, 각자 처한 제반적 상황에는 분명 차이가 존재하며 자신의 모습이 과거 특정한 경험으로 인한 ‘트라우마’나 태생적인 ‘성격’ 탓으로 돌린다는 점은 상당히 유사하다. 뿐만 아니라 생사의 갈림길에 놓인 육체적 고통 앞에서도 삶을 버텨내겠다는 열정 역시 공통지점이다. 무엇보다 이광수와 소세키는 병(病)으로 인해 병원에 입원, 병원생활, 요양과 같은 경험을 통해 남편으로서, 아버지로서의 역할을 제대로 하고 있지 못한 괴로운 속내를 밝힌다. 이러한 점들을 미루어볼 때 작가적 기질이 얼마나 강한지를 알 수 있다. 인간을 가장 나약하게 만드는 병(病)의 무게감을 고통을 느끼는 그 자체로 방치해 두지 않고 글을 쓰는 행위를 통한 작가로서의 책무, 나아가 가족으로 시선을 돌린 이광수와 소세키만의 병을 치유하는 자신들의 관점이 그대로 읽히는 지점이다.

루쉰과 나쓰메 소세키(夏目漱石)의 근대 주체 탐색― ‘나래주의(拿來主義)’와 ‘자기본위(自己本位)’의 ‘주체 세우기(立人)’ 양상

고점복 고려대학교 중국학연구소 2020 中國學論叢 Vol.0 No.68

The purpose of this paper is to examine the pattern of establishing a modern subject through Natsume Soseki, a intellectual of late modern country, and Lu Xun, a intellectual of premodern country. To this end, this paper discusses the aspects of Soseki’s ‘Self-Hood(自己本位)’ and Lu Xun’s ‘Nalaizhuyi(拿來主義)’. The Soseki’s ‘Self-Hood’ is not a selfish individualism but a ‘moral individualism’, and The Lu Xun’s ‘Nalaizhuyi’ emphasizes subjective activeness in the acceptance of foreign cultures. Through the ‘Self-Hood’, Soseki reconsiders the value of traditions forgotten in the process of modernization and emphasizes the reflective introduction of foreign cultures. The ‘Self-Hood’ and The ‘Nalaizhuyi’ emphasize the subject’s activeness and emphasize the value of freedom in which the subject’s activeness is expressed. For both Soseki and Lu Xun, freedom for the exercise of personality is the basic condition of modern subjects. Another reason why both emphasize the exercise of personality and freedom is the witness of the individual’s anxiety and solitude faced in the process of modernization. China and Japan only differed in the pace of modernization, and both were forced to throw away familiar ones and accept unfamiliar ones. This is due to the fact that the modernization of the two countries did not proceed voluntarily, but was counter-forced by external forces. On the other hand, since freedom for the exercise of personality may infringe the freedom of others, both require an ethic of self-check. This emphasis on the morality of literary art is also a key mechanism for the completion of both literary forms and contents. Both literary forms and contents, similar to self-centeredness, have a strong social color. They hoped that exercising their personality enthusiastically would ultimately break down the barriers between people, and in fact their literature had the effect of healing individualistic loneliness and anxiety faced by modern Japanese and Chinese through the exercise of personality.

소세키의 어학적 어프로치와 번역-일한번역을 중심으로-

윤호숙 한국일어일문학회 2017 日語日文學硏究 Vol.103 No.1

Recently, due to the fourth industrial revolution, translation by machine has become a societal topic. Translation by a person will eventually become unnecessary. Accordingly, the occupation of translator is at risk of becoming obsolete. However, in literary translation, limitations are felt in translations by machines. If translation by machine becomes generalized in the future, the priority task will have to be to raise the quality of translation. In the case of literary works, it is said that there is significance in the translation of literary works by people; especially when properly considering the intention of the author. However, when examining the translation of already published literary works in detail, one will find a considerable amount of mistranslation. Therefore, in order to make the translation accurate and faithful, it is necessary to have a deep understanding of the writer and the work as well as the original language, the language to be translated, and the knowledge of the culture of the two language areas. In this article, I examined the linguistic characteristics of Natsume Soseki and the intention of the author, in detail, for the translated books of the representative novels by Natsume Soseki, which are the most translated in Korea. Additionally, I compared and considered whether the translated text is faithfully and accurately reflected through the Korean translation. As a result, it was possible to know the linguistic characteristics of Soseki and the intention of expression of the writer from vocabulary, stylistic body, particle, conjunction, tense, passive, sign, etc. which are elements of language agreement and Western context. Regarding Korean translation, it turned out that there were remarkable mistranslations. Therefore, in order to have an accurate understanding of Soseki's work, it is necessary to faithfully translate Soseki's linguistic characteristics and intention. 最近、4次産業革命により、機械翻訳が社会的な話題にあわせて、人による翻訳は必要なくなり、将来なくなる職業として翻訳家が上位に上がっている。しかし、文学翻訳の場合、機械翻訳では限界が感じられる。 今後、機械翻訳が一般化されると、翻訳の優先的課題はその質を高めることにある。文学作品の場合、作家の意図をきちんと把握し翻訳される時、人による翻訳の意義があると言えるが、すでに出版された文学作品の翻訳を詳しく調べると、誤訳が相当数みられた。 したがって、翻訳を正確且つ忠実にするためには、元の言語と翻訳する言語及び、両言語圏の文化に対する知識だけでなく、作家と作品に対する深い理解が必要である。 本稿では、韓国で最も多く翻訳されている夏目漱石の代表小説の翻訳本を対象に、漱石の語学的特性と作家の意図などを詳しく調べ、韓国語翻訳を通じて忠実かつ正確に反映されているかを比較、考察した。 その結果、言文一致と欧文脈の要素である、語彙、文体、助詞、接続詞、時制、受け身、符号などから、漱石の語学的特性と作家の表現の意図を知ることができ、韓国語翻訳に誤訳がかなりあることがわかった。したがって、漱石の作品と正確な理解をするためには、漱石の語学的特性と意図を忠実に翻訳する必要がある。

사소설(私小說)적 특성과 근대 일본 - 나쓰메 소세키(夏目漱石)의 『도련님(坊っちゃん)』을 중심으로 -

이병진 한양대학교 일본학국제비교연구소 2019 비교일본학 Vol.46 No.-

본 논문에서는 일본 근대문학을 대표하는 최초의 문호로 불리게 된 나쓰메 소세키가 문학이 계몽과 이른 시기에 결별한 문단의 흐름에 역행해 전통적인 감수성과 윤리관을 호명하게 된 과정에 대하여 살펴보고자 한다. 도덕성과 윤리관을 상실한 일본사회에 대한 소세키의 부정적인 시선과 비판은 근대성을 내면화하는 과정에서 조우하는 고립된 스스로의 심리상태를 표출한 것이다. 무모하고 비타협적인 주인공 ‘나’는 외부인의 시선으로 일본사회의 봉건적인 악습과 도덕적인 타락을 비판하고, 과감히 사회악을 퇴치하는 정의감 넘치는 소세키의 자화상이기도 했다. 이러한 근대화 과정에서 서양문명의 가치관과 전통적 가치관 사이의 갈등에 직면하게 된다. 그 결과 소세키를 포함한 메이지 시대의 지식인들은 근대적 주체의 형상에 고뇌하게 된다. 소세키의 불안정하고 예민한 심리상태와 건강상태, 그리고 근대성의 공포가 그의 신경쇠약을 악화시킨 주요한 요인으로 자리하고 있었던 것이다. 결국, 서구 근대 주체를 모방하는 동시에 그것에 대결하고 저항하는 양가성(ambivalance)을 지닌 소세키가 『도련님』이라는 사소설을 통해 그의 불안정한 심리상태를 서사한 것이었다. The purpose of this paper is to examine how Soseki Natsume, who became the first literary icon to represent modern Japanese literature, became a household name for traditional sensibility and ethics while running counter to the trend of literature breaking up with the enlightenment at an early stage. Soseki's negative views and criticisms of Japanese society, which has lost morality and ethics, are expressing his own isolated state of mind in the process of internalizing modernity. The reckless and uncompromising protagonist, “I,” was also a self-portrait of the righteous Soseki, who criticizes feudal evil practices and moral depravity in Japanese society from the point of view of outsiders, and boldly fights against social evils. In this process of modernization, we face a conflict between the values of Western civilization and traditional values. The Meiji-era intellectuals, including Soseki, had agonized over the shapes of modern subjects. Eventually, Soseki's unstable, sensitive state of mind, health and the fear of modernity were becoming the main factors that worsened his nervous breakdown. In the end, Soseki, who imitates modern Western subjectivities with ambivalence as he also confronts them and resists them, expressed his unstable state of mind through his I-novel, Bochan (Doryeonnim in Korean).

이광수(李光洙)와 나쓰메 소세키(夏目漱石)의 병(病)을 바라보는 관점

신윤주 한국일본근대학회 2019 일본근대학연구 Vol.0 No.63

2016년 12월과 2017년 1월은 이광수에게는 「작품 『무정』 탄생 100주년」, 소세키에게는 「사후 100년」이라는 특별한 시간적 의미가 겹친다는 것을 한국과 일본의 다양한 미디어에서 시사했다. 본 논문에서는 한국과 일본의 국민 작가로 대표되는 이광수와 소세키 두 사람 모두에게 발병되었던 병(病)이 결국 지식인이자 작가라는 타이틀을 가진 그들에게 어떤 영향을 끼쳤는지 살펴보고자 한다. 더불어 병으로 인해 두 사람 모두 병상에서 일련의 수필과 일기를 통해 병(病)을 바라보는 그들 작가로서의 관점이 어떠하였는지 살펴보고자 한다. 이광수와 소세키는 남의 시선에 갇혀 산다는 점, 각자 처한 제반적 상황에는 분명 차이가 존재하며 자신의 모습이 과거 특정한 경험으로 인한 ‘트라우마’나 태생적인 ‘성격’ 탓으로 돌린다는 점은 상당히 유사하다. 뿐만 아니라 생사의 갈림길에 놓인 육체적 고통 앞에서도 삶을 버텨내겠다는 열정 역시 공통지점이다. 무엇보다 이광수와 소세키는 병(病)으로 인해 병원에 입원, 병원생활, 요양과 같은 경험을 통해 남편으로서, 아버지로서의 역할을 제대로 하고 있지 못한 괴로운 속내를 밝힌다. 이러한 점들을 미루어볼 때 작가적 기질이 얼마나 강한지를 알 수 있다. 인간을 가장 나약하게 만드는 병(病)의 무게감을 고통을 느끼는 그 자체로 방치해 두지 않고 글을 쓰는 행위를 통한 작가로서의 책무, 나아가 가족으로 시선을 돌린 이광수와 소세키만의 병을 치유하는 자신들의 관점이 그대로 읽히는 지점이다. Various media in Korea and Japan pointed out that Lee Kwang-soo overlaps with Soseki Natsume in December 2016 and January 2017, the “100th anniversary of the birth of his work Moojeong” and the special meaning of One hundred years after Soseki’s death. In this paper tried to examine how the individual illnesses of both Korean and Japanese national writers such as Lee Kwang Soo and Soseki influenced those who were intellectual authors. The goal of this paper is to consider what the viewpoints of both were as a writer looking at illness in a series of essays and diaries written on their bedside. There is a clear difference between the situations of Lee Kwang-soo and Soseki, but it is very similar in the fact that they lived in the sight of others, had ‘trauma’ from the particular experiences in the past and found out the causes of situations from their inherent ‘natures’. In addition to the physical pain that lies in the path of life and death, their own enthusiasm for survival will also be common. Most of all, Lee Kwang Soo and Soseki reveal the painful intentions that they failed to perform properly as a husband and father due to experiences on illnesses, such as hospitalization, hospital life, and medical treatments. This paper concluded Lee Kwang-su and Soseki turned their eyes toward their family, also had to write their writings as a writer under any circumstances, instead of neglecting the results of the illness that make humans the weakest,