스즈키 다케오(鈴木武雄)의 식민지조선근대화론

박찬승(Park Chan Seung) 한국사학사학회 2014 韓國史學史學報 Vol.0 No.30

스즈키 타케오는 1928년부터 경성제국대학에서 법문학부 교수로서 경제학을 가르치면서 총독부의 경제정책에도 깊숙이 간여한 인물이다. 그는 종전 후 일본에 돌아가 1946년 일본 대장성에서 비밀리에 수행한 『일본인의 해외활동에 관한 역사적 조사』라는 프로젝트의 조선, 만주, 대만편 가운데 조선편 집필에 주도적으로 참여하였다. 스즈키 다케오는 이 프로젝트에서 「조선통치의 성격과 실적」이라는 글을 썼다. 이 글에서 그는 일본의 식민지 한국 지배정책을 미화하고, 일본의 지배에 의해 한국은 비로소 근대화될 수 있었다고 주장하였다. 따라서 이 글은 1945년 이후 이른바 '식민지근대화론'의 출발점이 된 글이었다고 볼 수 있다. 이 논문은 이 글의 내용을 분석하고 비판한 것이다. 스즈키 다케오는 "일본의 한국 영유는 본질적으로는 제국주의적, 그 가운데에서도 군국주의적 지배의 범주를 벗어나지 못하였지만, 서양 여러 나라의 소위 식민지정책과는 달리 이상주의적인 통치 행태를 보였다"고 주장하였다. 그는 당시 일본은 한국을 식민지로 간주하지 않았으며, 조선인을 식민지민으로 대하지 않았다고 주장하였다. 그는 일본정부나 총독부의 '동화주의'나 '內地延長主義', 더 나아가 '內鮮一體' 정책이 그것을 잘 보여준다고 말하였다. 예를 들어 그는 일본이 한국에서 미곡 생산 중심의 산업구조를 만든 것이나, 전쟁 중에 인적ㆍ물적 자원을 동원한 것은 일본의 한국에 대한 산업정책이 근본적으로는 일본을 위한 것이었다는 것을 보여준다고 인정하였다. 그러나 그는 일본의 한국 통치 기간을 통하여 한국의 산업경제가 그 이전과는 비교할 수 없을 정도로 비약적으로 발전하였다는 점을 강조하였다. 그는 그런 점에서 일본의 한국 지배정책을 제국주의적 식민정책이라고 간단히 말해버릴 수는 없다고 주장하였다. 그는 일본은 한국을 '一視同仁'의 입장에서 대하려 하였다고 주장하였다. 이처럼 그는 비록 일본의 한국 통치에 문제가 많았지만, 한국의 근대화가 이루어진 것은 일본의 통치에 의한 것이었다고 주장하였다. 그는 일본의 통치 기간 동안 한국인들의 경제적, 문화적 생활수준도 크게 향상되었다는 것을 특히 강조하였다. 그러나 이와 같은 주장은 역사적 사실을 은폐, 왜곡, 호도하는 내용이었다. 일제의 한국 지배정책은 한국에서 인적ㆍ물적 자원을 수탈하고, 한국인들을 차별적으로 대우하는 것을 그 특징으로 하는 것이었기 때문이다. 결국 스즈키 다케오의 '식민지조선 근대화론'은 일본의 식민지 지배정책을 미화하고 합리화하기 위한 논리였다고 평가할 수 있다. Takeo Suzuki (鈴木武雄) is the scholar who was deeply engaged in the economic policy of the Japanese Government General of Korea, while teaching economics as a professor of the Faculty of Law and Literature at Kyeongseong Imperial University from 1928. After World War II, when he went back to Japan, he leadingly took part in writing the Part of Korea out of the Parts of Korea, Manchuria and Taiwan in the Project of Historic Investigation on Japanese Overseas Activities, which was secretly conducted by Japanese Ministry of Finance (大蔵省) in 1946. Takeo Suzuki wrote, "Characteristics and Achievements of the Rule over Korea," in the project. In his writing, he glorified Japan's ruling policy of colonial Korea, and insisted Korea could be modernized by Japanese rule. Therefore, his writing can be regarded as the beginning of Colonial Modernization Theory after 1945. This paper analyzed and criticized his writing. Takeo Suzuki asserted, "Japan's possession of Korea did not go beyond imperialistic, especially, militaristic ruling scope in essence, however, Japan showed an ideal type of ruling, unlike many Western countries' colonial policies." He said Japan did not regard Korea as a colony, and did not treat Korean people as colonial people those days. He insisted that the assimilation policy (policy to assimilate Koreans to Japanese), the mainland extension policy (Korea is the extension of Japan) and the policy of "Korea and Japan are One" by the Japanese government or the Japanese Government General of Korea showed Japan's position. For example, he acknowledged Japan's building of rice production-centered industrial structure or mobilization of human and material resources during the war showed that Japan's industrial policy towards Korea was for Japan basically. He, however, stressed Korean industrial economy made a remarkable development, incomparable to the past during Japan's colonial period of Korea. In this context, he insisted Japan's ruling policy over Korea cannot be simply regarded as imperialistic colonial policy. Takeo Suzuki claimed Japan tried to treat Korea in the position of treating Japan and Korea equally. Although, there were many problems in Japan's ruling over Korea, he insisted Korea's modernization was conducted through Japan's rule over Korea. He especially emphasized Koreans' economic and cultural levels sharply improved during Japan's colonial rule over Korea. His claim, however, is actually to conceal, distort and mislead historic facts. The reason is that Japanese imperialistic ruling policy over Korea had such characteristics as exploiting human and material resources in Korea and treating Koreans in a discriminatory way. Takeo Suzuki's Modernization Theory of Colonial Korea can be rated as the logic to glorify and rationalize Japanese colonial ruling policy.

지방병 연구와 식민지배 : 1927년 영흥 및 해남지역 에메틴 중독사건을 중심으로

신규환(Sihn Kyu-hwan) 大韓醫史學會 2009 醫史學 Vol.18 No.2

This paper aims to examine the spread of paragonimiasis and the Japanese colonial government’s response to it. To consolidate colonial rule, the Japanese colonial government needed medications to cure paragonimiasis. When Dr. Ikeda Masakata invented acid emetine to cure paragonimiasis in Manchuria in 1915, emetine treatment carried the risk of emetine poisoning such as fatigue, inappetence, heart failure, and death. Nonetheless, Japanese authorities forced clinical trials on human patients in colonial Korea during the 1910s and 1920s. The emetine poisoning accident in Yeongheung and Haenam counties in 1927 occurred in this context. The Japanese government concentrated on terminating an intermediary host instead of injecting emetine to repress endemic disease in Japan. However, the Japanese colonial government pushed ahead with emetine injections for healthy men through the Preliminary Bureau of Land Research in colonial Korea in 1917. This clinical trial simultaneously presented the effects and the side effects of emetine injection. Because of the danger emetine injections posed, the colonial government investigated only the actual condition of paragonimiasis, delaying the use of emetine injection. Kobayashi Harujiro(1884?1969), a leading zoologist and researcher of endemic disease for three decades in the Government General Hospital and Keijo Imperial University in colonial Korea, had used emetine while researching paragonimiasis, but he did not play a leading role in clinical trials with emetine injections, perhaps because he mainly researched the intermediary host. Government General Hospital and Keijo Imperial University therefore faced limitations that kept them from leading the research on endemic disease. As the health administration shifted the central colonial government to local colonial government, the local colonial government pressed ahead with emetine injections for Korean patients. Emetine poisoning had something to do with medical power’s localization. Nevertheless, the central colonial government still supported emetine injections with funds from the national treasury. The emetine poisoning accident that occurred simultaneously in two different regions resulted from the Japanese colonial government’s support. This accident represented the Japanese colonial rule’s atrocity, its suppression of hygiene policies, and its disdain for colonial inhabitants. The colonial government sought to accumulate medical knowledge not to cure endemic disease, but to expand the Japanese Empire.

일제 식민역사의 청산과 역사부정

최규환(Choe Kyu Hwan) 헌법이론실무학회 2015 헌법연구 Vol.2 No.2

It has been now 70 years since Korea's liberation from Japanese colonial rule. However the liquidation of colonial history is still progressive in Korea and Japan. It is the Authoritative and institutional state violence of the past which makes a key concept of the liquidation of the colonial history. In other words, historical clearance is an ex post facto measure to establish social justice and democratic order and to recover individual social damage caused by authoritative and institutional human rights abuse. Liquidation of history pass off discovery of truth, judgment on accountability, offender punishment, judicial remedies such as reparation/compensation and retrial, an official apology of perpetrator state, succession of history lesson such as national social commemoration business. However, it is establishment of social introspection and legal institution that makes possible liquidation of history. Historical clearance is performed on the three horizon. ① Clearance between colonial and colonialized states ② internal liquidation of colonialised nation ③ internal liquidation of colonial nation. Korea had been under Japanese colonial rule for 35 years smce early 20th century. Japanese colonial rule came in action in all different endeavor including political, economical, social, cultural and educational section. For decades Koreans could not use Korean language and Korean name. Korea had been exploited economically. Men were drafted and conscripted to fight in the war by force. Women had been taken and coerced into sexual slavery by Japanese soldiers. Korea was emancipated when Japan was defeated in the Second World War. But after the war Korea couldn't obtain a victorious state position. Three years right after emancipation, Korea became under American military domination. America focused on keeping Korea and Japan not to be taken over by communist. Therefore historical clearance was just a secondary thing from the U.S. military government view of point. Rather government officials and police officials succeeded themselves, the U.S. military government hold hands with past ruling class. The Republic of Korea was established in 1948 and the Constitution enact about liquidation of history on human sources. But since pro Japanese groups were in the core of power, sincere historical clearance was impossible. Furthermore cold-war era and military dictatorship in Korea made it impossible to discuss on colonial-rule history clearance. In 2000, special law was enacted to liquidate colonial rule history. But these laws only focused on fact- finding. Meanwhile establishing diplomatic relations, Korea and Japan made an arrangement on the right to compensation. This arrangement was totally incomplete because it dose not specify colonial rule compensation. Furthermore interpretation in that arrangement was not same. The fundamental reason of incomplete agreement was that Korea saw the Japanese ruling illegal but Japan vice versa. Lately, Korea's Constitutional Court and Supreme Court made senes of judicial decisions on the assumption that Japan's past ruling on Korea is illegal. Abe's cabinet is working on erasing responsibility of colonial rule and accountability of World War II. Historical clearance never go without historical denial. Some nations m Europe has law which regulate criminal punishment on holocaust denial. A constitutional review is needed on punishment of historic denial in view of freedom of speech and academic freedom. However since limitation on freedom of speech and academic freedom should be proportionate and punishment must be ultimate step, criminal punishment would be justified only when denial of history becomes hate speech. 일본 제국주의 식민지배로부터 70여 년의 세월이 흘렀지만, 식민역사청산은 현재까지도 한국과 일본에서 현재진행형이다. ‘역사청산’은 과거의 ‘국가폭력’, 권력적·제도적 인권침해로 발생한 개인적·사회적 피해를 회복하고 사회 정의와 민주적 질서를 회복하기 위한 사후적 조치를 말한다. 역사청산은 우선 진상규명을 통한 진실 발견, 이를 바탕으로 한 책임 및 책임의 귀속자 판단, 가해자 처벌, 피해자 복권 및 배상·보상, 재심 등의 사법적 구제, 국가의 공식적 사과, 국가적·사회적 기념사업 등을 통한 역사적 교훈 계승과 같은 일련의 조치로 이루어진다. ‘역사청산’ 의 목적은 국가폭력, 권력남용에 대한 사회적 성찰을 전제로 하며, 동일 혹은 유사한 과오로 왜곡된 역사가 되풀이되지 않도록 하는 국가적·사회적·법적 구조와 제도를 수립하는 것이다. 따라서 역사청산에서는 청산의 결과도 중요하지만, 청산을 위한 사회적 합의 도출과정, 청산 절차, 이를 뒷받침할 근거 법률의 제정 과정 역시 해당 ‘역사청산’의 유효성과 완성도를 결정한다. 식민역사청산은 3가지 문제 지평을 가진다 ① 식민지배국가와 피지배국가 간에 발생한 문제의 지평, ② 식민지배국가 내부의 청산 문제라는 지평, ③ 피식민지배국가 내부의 청산 문제라는 지평이다. 해방 직후 식민잔재 청산 논란은 대부분 ③ 지평 중에서 인적 청산 문제에 집중되었고 이것은 현재도 이어져 오고 있다. 그러나 식민잔재 청산의 문제 해결 순서는 ③→②→①의 역순으로 진행될 수밖에 없다. 그리고 ③의 문제 지평인 피식민지배국가 내부 체제의 청산은 체제 민주화·헌법화의 과정이라고 할 수 있다. 그러나 한국전쟁과 한반도의 냉전 체제 고착화는 일제 식민잔재 청산을 위한 사실 확인조차 전혀 진행할 수 없는 상황을 조성하였다. 일제 지배의 실상을 밝히고 식민지 동화정책의 실상을 정확히 규명하는 일은 식민잔재 청산의 일차적 과제임에도 가로막혀 있었다. 이것은 최근에 일본군성노예 문제나 강제동원 문제로, ‘식민지 수탈론’과 ‘식민지 근대화론’의 논쟁으로, 일본의 역사수정주의와 역사교과서 문제로 대표되는 식민 기억을 둘러싼 투쟁으로 나타나고 있다. 특히 한·일 양국에서 벌어지고 있는 논쟁은 모두 동일한 공동의 역사에 대한 기억과 해석 투쟁이기에 상호 강력한 영향을 미칠 수밖에 없다. 일제 식민기간은 30∼50년이다. 일제의 식민통치는 정치·경제·사회·문화·교육 등 모든 방면에 걸쳐 전방위적으로 이뤄졌다. 우리말, 우리글 그리고 이름조차 그 긴 기간 동안 사용되지 못했고 배우지 못했으며 전수되지 못했다. 한반도에 대한 일본 제국주의의 식민통치는 그 당시 열강이 보였던 식민통치 양식과는 달랐다 단순한 정치적·경제적 수탈에 그치지 않았고, 민족말살 및 동화정책에 이어 군에 강제징용하고 전시동원체제에 편입시키며 부녀자를 일본군 성노예로 삼는 등 매우 혹독하고 반인륜적인 통치 양태를 보였다. 제2차 세계대전에서 일본이 항복을 선언을 하면서 한국이 해방되었다. 그러나 한국은 여기서 승전국의 지위를 얻지 못했고, 해방 직후 년간 미군정기를 맞게 되었다. 미국이 가장 우려했던 것은 일본과 한반도의 공산주의화였던 것으로 알려져 있다. 따라서 미군정 입장에서 볼 때, 일제식민잔재의 청산은 부차적인 것에 불과하였다. 오히려 미군정은 일제식민지 시대 통치기구를 그대로 활용하고 일제 강점기 관료집단을 거의 그대로 유임시켰으며 일제법령도 상당 부분 존치시켰다. 1948년 대한민국의 광복과 동시에 헌법은 일제잔재 청산으로서의 인적 청산을 규정하였다. 그러나 친일파가 권력의 핵심을 장악한 상황에서 진정한 역사청산은 쉽지 않은 일이었다. 더욱이 냉전과 한국에서의 군사독재는 일제식민역사의 청산을 사실상 불가능하게 하였다. 2000년대에 들어 일제식민잔재 청산을 위한 특별법들이 제정되게 되었다. 다만 이 법들은 단지 진실 규명에만 초점이 맞춰져 있었다. 한편, 한국과 일본은 외교관계를 수립하면서 청구권협정을 체결하였으나 식민지배 배상을 특정하지 않은 불완전한 것이었다. 더구나 이 협정을 둘러싼 해석마저 양국이 상당한 견해차를 보이고 있다. 그 결정적인 이유는 바로 일제 식민지배를 한국은 불법강점이라고 보는 반면 일본은 합법적 지배였다고 보고 있기 때문이다. 최근에 한국 헌법재판소와 대법원은 일본의 한국식민지배가 불법강점이었음을 전제로 일련의 사법적 결정을 내렸다. 그러나 이 와중에도 일본의 아베정권은 식민지배 및 제2차 세계대전의 책임을 지우려는 노력을 멈추지 않고 있다. 역사청산은 역사부정과 상호연관된다. 유럽의 몇몇 국가에서는 홀로코스트 역사 부인과 그로 인해 야기되는 증오표현을 처벌하는 법률을 가지고 있다.

『朝鮮の敎育硏究』에 나타난 일제시대 초등 역사 수업 실천

김봉석 한국사회과교육연구학회 2007 사회과교육 Vol.46 No.3

The Practice of Elementary History Classes during the Japanese Colonial Rule in 『A Study on Chosun's Education』 Kim, Bong-Seok Seoul Yongma Elementary School This study is designed to research history classes in the elementary school during the Japanese colonial rule. The verbal evidence of teachers and students, two subjects of the history classes, would be the most important materials for this study. However, it was impossible to obtain those evidences. Accordingly, attention was paid to contemporary class guidelines and educational magazine "A Study on Chosun's Education." The magazine, only one magazine for elementary education during the Japanese colonial rule, covered all areas of elementary education including curriculum, educational methods, evaluation, and guidance for living and contained detailed information on the contemporary educational phenomena. The study on three guide books of the Korean history and one class afternote has revealed that the contemporary history classes focused on questions and answers, presentation, teacher-led tale-based teaching, and self-study by students' research and presentation. Comtemporary students are assumed to have taken more various types of classes than stated in the guide book. Most of all, it is urgent to find and research the verbal evidence of teachers and students, two subjects of comtemporary history education, and teachers' notes and diaries. Furthermore, it is required to make a following comprehensive study on "A Study on Chosun's Education", only one magazine for elementary education during the Japanese colonial rule. This magazine covers all areas of elementary education from 1930s to 1940s during the Japanese colonial rule. 본 연구는 일제시대 초등 역사수업의 실천 모습에 관한 것이다. 당시의 수업 실천을 살펴보기 위해서는 수업의 두 주체인 교사와 학생의 구술자료가 가장 생생한 자료가 될 수 있으나 이를 구할 수 없었다. 이에 당시의 수업지도안과 이를 수록한 교육잡지인 『朝鮮の敎育硏究』에 주목하였다. 이 잡지는 일제시대의 유일한 초등 교육잡지로서 교육과정, 교육방법, 평가, 생활지도 등 초등교육 전 영역에 걸친 글들이 게재되어 있다. 따라서 당시 교육 현상을 정밀하게 살펴볼 수 있는 자료이다. 3편의 국사과 수업지도안과 1편의 수업 후기를 중심으로 살펴본 결과, 일제시대의 역사 수업은 문답과 발표 그리고 교사의 설화에 의한 교사중심의 수업과 아동이 조사발표하는 자학자습의 수업 형태가 혼합된 형태였다는 것을 알 수 있었다. 실제 수업에서는 지도안에 실려 있는 내용 보다는 좀 더 다양한 수업 실천이 전개되었을 것이다. 무엇보다도 당시 역사교육의 두 주체인 교사와 학생의 구술자료 확보와 교사들의 수기나 일기 등 자료의 발굴과 연구가 절실하다. 아울러 일제시대의 유일한 초등교육잡지인『朝鮮の敎育硏究』에 대한 총체적인 후속연구도 필요하다. 여기에는 1930년대에서 1940년대 초까지 일제시대 초등교육의 모든 분야에 걸쳐 실질적인 내용이 담겨 있기 때문이다.

“역도조선(力道朝鮮)”의 명암 : 일제강점기 역도의 발전과 힘(力)의 주체 전환

이희재 연세대학교 의학사연구소 2023 연세의사학 Vol.26 No.2

This study examines the introduction and development of weightlifting during the Japanese colonial period and analyzes its dual nature. The growth of modern Korean sports needs to be understood not only in the context of nationalist influence but also in its multidimensional relationship with colonial authority. Weightlifting in colonial Korea grew within the coexistence of nationalist aspirations and Japanese colonial rule, as both inadvertently emphasized the goal of promoting robust physical health. Notably, the correlation between sport and improving physical fitness influenced the development of weightlifting during the Japanese colonial period from the perspective of medical history. Weightlifting in Korea was originally introduced and encouraged by Korean elites with a nationalist orientation. During the Japanese colonial period, Koreans used it as a means to communicate and unite with each other. This solidarity, in turn, propelled the development of weightlifting. As weightlifting developed, it acquired a dual nature, as the agent of power (力) gradually shifted. Initially, weightlifting was introduced as a means of strengthening the Korean nation through physical training, but by the late 1930s, it had transformed into a sport that aligned with the national policy of promoting healthy citizens. When the total mobilization system was implemented, Japan promoted the improvement of the nation’s physical fitness, even in the colonies. This close integration of national policy and sports directed Korean weightlifting toward the goal of “improving the physical fitness of the populace.” In other words, the original nationalistic focus on a healthy body coincidentally aligned with Japanese colonial policies, resulting in a duality in Korean weightlifting. Furthermore, the achievements of Korean weightlifting athletes amplified national pride, but weightlifting’s national characteristics gradually eroded under the slogan of Naeseon Ilche, or “Japan and Korea are one.” The Korean elite originally intended to showcase the prowess of the Korean nation to Japan and the world through sports, especially weightlifting. Paradoxically, colonial rule induced interest among the populace in matches between Korean and Japanese athletes and acted as a catalyst for the development of athlete capabilities. Nevertheless, the accomplishments of Korean athletes belonged to the Japanese Empire. The power they exhibited, namely as the agent of physical prowess, was externally represented not as “Korean” but as “imperial subjects.” In addition, when Korean weightlifters were perceived to overwhelm Japanese performance and shake the hierarchy of the Empire of Japan, Korean weightlifting was blocked from further development by Japanese colonial rule. Yeokdo Joseon, or “Weightlifting Joseon,” was a headline that encompassed duality, leveraging a sense of national victory to subdue national identity. It also had a dual nature in that it served as a signal announcing its end while celebrating the peak of weightlifting development in Korea.

재조선 일본인이 재현하는 ‘지방’ -일제시기 지방지 편찬을 중심으로-

허영란 부경역사연구소 2014 지역과 역사 Vol.- No.34

This study set out to investigate modern format provincial guidebooks published by the colonial administrative agencies or Japanese people in Korea between 1907 and 1945 and critically review the aspects of Korea represented in them. During the Japanese rule, a number of provincial guidebooks were published in urban areas containing a large population of Japanese people and traditional cities filled with scenic spots and places of historic interest, whereas there are few or no data on provincial guidebooks on local agricultural towns where a majority of Korean population resided. The serious regional deviation in the publication of provincial guidebooks reflects an objective deviation in information about local areas available those days. The inequality of information structured in the generation process of historical materials cannot help being reflected in the historical aspects represented through local history research, which is why it is important to analyze an objective situation of “unequal distribution and absence of provincial guidebooks” based on comparative studies when doing a research on local history. Also needed is a discourse criticism of provincial guidebooks during the Japanese rule. The example of Suwon indicates that the provincial guidebooks published mainly by Japanese people targeted the Japanese nationalities and Japanese people in Korea as their readers. Settling down all over the nation, Japanese people placed themselves at the center to look at Korea and the local places where they settled down. As far as they were concerned, the existence of Korean people was a secondary landscape or the object of enlightenment. It is thus necessary to deconstruct such power of viewpoint and trace back the narration of a book in order to critically interpret provincial guidebooks those days. Korean people were in different conditions from the Japanese communities around the nation in the establishment process of colonial ruling system, and such a situation was reflected in provincial guidebooks. Thus reorganizing local history with provincial guidebooks should be preceded by comparing provincial guidebooks for the state of publication and critically comparing and analyzing their publication environments, conditions, and purposes.

‘식민지 건축 유산’에 대한 인식 변화와 반일(反日) 민족주의: 일제 잔재에서 근대문화유산으로

전재호 경남대학교 극동문제연구소 2020 한국과 국제정치 Vol.36 No.3

This article examines changes that have occurred in the perception of South Korea’s architectural heritage from the Japanese colonial period. It analyzes the causes of these reassessments and the relationship between reproduced memories and anti-Japanese nationalism in modern cultural heritage projects, focusing on the colonial architectural heritage in Gunsan in the 2000s. Since the demolition of the Japanese Government-General building in Seoul in 1995, the interpretation of colonial architecture has undergone a gradual change: from remnants of Japanese colonial rule to a modern cultural heritage. Gunsan has restored a physical space in which two opposing cultural images coexist: one contains memories of the Korean people’s resistance to Japanese colonial rule and the other is a Japanese-style space that preserves colonial memories of the 1930s. This paper argues that Gunsan has created a space that is contradictory but complementary.

일제에 의한 조선 궁중음악 전통의 전유 과정에 대한 연구-비밀문서 <雅樂隊에 관한 건>(1921)을 중심으로

권도희 한국음악사학회 2023 한국음악사학보 Vol.70 No.-

Among the documents in Changsŏgak (藏書閣), there is a secret document titled “The Paper for the Chosŏn Court Orchestra Organization” (1921) in the document file called Chosŏn aak (朝鮮雅樂). This document serves as a confidential record illustrating the situation where the Japanese colonial government sought to control the Korean court orchestra organization (雅樂隊). This article examines the activities of the orchestra before and after the document was written, shedding light on when, how, and why the Japanese colonial power attempted to control institutionally over Korean court music. While previous studies on the changes in Korean court music during the Japanese colonial period have mostly focused on individual cases, this study specifically highlights on the institutional changes of Korean court music during the Japanese colonial era. This article also explores when and how Korean court music was institutionalized, as well as how it differed from the court music system of the tradition of Changakgwŏn (掌樂院) in the Chosŏn dynasty. The Japanese Government-General of Korea aimed to establish a legitimate institutional system to control the Chosŏn Court Music organization within the Japanese enshrinement ritual, at least after finishing Japanese Royal Shrine jichinsai (地鎭祭) in May 1921. However, due to Japanese inability to provoke the Korean people after the March 1st Independence Movement, the Japanese colonial government only began implementing this plan after the completion of Emperor Kochong (高宗)'s pumyoŭi (祔太儀) in the March 1921. Accordingly, in November 1921, the Japanese Government-General of Korea prepared a confidential document titled “The Paper for the Chosŏn Court Orchestra Organization” to change the institutional foundation of the Court Orchestra by the year 1925. The plans outlined in this document began to be implemented from May 1922 onwards, and consequently the Korean traditional court music was forcibly mobilized for the ceremonies of the Japanese enshrinement ritual in 1926. While this system established by the Japanese colonial government contributed to the stability of the Korean royal court music organization, it hindered the preservation and development of Chosŏn court music in the long term. The primary function of the organization, performing music and dance, was compromised by the organizational structure imposed by the Japanese colonial government. The Japanese colonial government, not deeming it a significant issue, was satisfied as long as they could utilize the superficial appearance of music and dance performances in various ceremonies to showcase their colonial authority. Rather, the Japanese colonial government emphasized this change as the “preservation” of “koak (古樂)” and promoted it to the public. However, this change can be seen not as a behavior of their cultural responsibility to a civilized society but as a manifestation of their practical power ruling over the Chosŏn Peninsula, actively appropriating the cultural heritage and its meaning as a colony. 장서각에 소장되어 있는 조선아악 이라는 서류철 중에는 <아악대에 관한 건>이라는 문서가 있다. 이 문서는 일제가 이왕직 아악대를 통제하고자 했던 상황을 선명하게 보여주는 비밀문서이다. 이 글에서는 이 문서의 작성 전후로 아악대가 어떻게 활동했는지 살펴봄으로써 일제 강점기에 조선 궁중음악의 제도적 통제가 언제, 어떻게, 왜 시도되었는지 밝혀 보았다. 이제까지 일제 강점기에 벌어진 한국의 궁중음악의 변화에 대해서는 개별 사례의 보고인 경우가 대부분이었지만, 본고에서는 일제 강점기에 이루어진 한국 궁중음악에 관한 제도적 통제 상황을 밝혀 보았다. 따라서 본고를 통해 한국 궁중음악이 언제 어떤 방식으로 일제에 의해 제도화되었으며 그것이 조선의 예악 제도나 장악원 전통과 어떻게 다른지 정리해보았다. 조선총독부는 늦어도 1921년 5월 이후 즉, 조선신궁의 지진제를 치른 후에 이왕직 아악대를 합법적으로 조선신궁에서 치르는 의식에 동원할 수 있게끔 제도적 장치를 마련하고자 했다. 그러나 3·1 운동 이후로 일제는 조선인을 자극할 수 없었기 때문에 고종 황제의 부묘의가 끝나자마자 이 계획을 실천하기 시작했다. 이에 따라 조선총독부는 1921년 11월에 비밀문서로 <아악대에 관한 건>을 작성하여 1925년을 기한으로 아악대에 관한 제도적 기반을 바꿀 수 있도록 준비했다. 이에 따라 1922년 5월 이후 이 문건에서 다뤘던 계획이 실현되기 시작했고, 결과적으로 1926년에 아악대는 조선신궁에서 치러진 의식에 절차에 따라 동원되었다. 일제가 주도한 이와 같은 제도 변화는 아악대 조직의 안정성에는 기여했지만, 궁극적으로 조선아악의 보존과 발전을 기대하기는 어려웠다. 아악대의 가장 중요한 역할은 악무 실천인데, 일제는 이 기능을 떨어뜨린 상태로 조직을 꾸렸기 때문이었다. 그러나 일제는 이 점은 개의치 않았다. 외형만 갖춘 악무가 일제의 각종 의식에 동원됨으로써 노릴 수 있는 효과 즉, 식민 통치 권력을 과시적으로 보여줄 수 있다면 충분했기 때문이다. 오히려 일제는 이러한 변화를 “고악”의 “보존”을 실현한 행위로서 인식하고 일반 사회에 과시했다. 그러나 이 변화는 일제가 문명사적 책임감을 갖고 있는 주체로서의 문화적 사명을 완수한 것이 아니라 조선을 통치하고 있는 현실 권력으로서 피식민국의 문화유산과 그 의미를 적극적으로 전유한 것이라고 할 것이다.

야담잡지를 통한 역사소설가로서의 김동인 재조명: 일제강점기 단군 소설화 양상과 관련하여

이민희 한국비교문학회 2012 比較文學 Vol.0 No.57

Until now Kim Dong In as the historical novelist has been estimated as the pro-Japanese oriented writer for the sake of full-length novel at that time's newspapers. In considering the Dangun suppression level of the period of Japanese colonial rule, however, Kim Dong In's whereabouts which were thoroughly seen through the journal of an unofficial historical story where the 「The Heritage of the Three States」, that is the precedent of Dangun, was publicly released and circulated present counter reasons that were not intended to be included into the colonial rule theory in itself. In comparison with the Choi Nam Sun calling Dangun's attention at the domain of verse who entered the group 'The chosun history compilation committee' which strongly angered Japan's Dangun obliteration policy in 1928, after that, no more called Dangun's attention, Kim Dong In although novelizing Dangun belately in 1930's had been continued that works after the liberation of the Japanese colonial rule. But, the historical novel through an unofficial historical story including Kim Dong In's relevant novels could not be found the consciousness to wipe out the opinion <Dangun=Susanou> which had been taken advantage of the Japan-Chosun conformity theory in the period of Japanese colonial rule. That only in the level of emphazing the Chosun's everlasting history through the Dangun and after liberating the Japanese colonial rule is showing the situation of presenting the image distinctly. Hereby the remainder of work is how to see the dangerousness which is intended to include the myth of Dangun into the history through the novel although 「The Heritage of the Three States」, that is the precedent of Dangun. This is obivous that the opinion <Dangun=Susanou> is derivated from the precedent 「The Chronical Heritage of Japan」 on the opposite side of the Korean people's Nationalism creation through the myth of Dangun. The interesting fact in connection with this content is that on the one hand, the Dangun, having been widespreadly considered as the heteronymous same phantom of the Susanou inside of the Japan-Chosun conformity theory, was located in the level of the translation release and just mention by the the journal of an unofficial historical story which were relevantly free from the Japanese censorship in the colonized Chosun, on the other hand, in the colonial Japan, the Susanou was all the more released by the newspaper as the image of doubting the Imperialism. This enables us to reconsider the myth, the history, and the function of literature in the theory of colonial rule pattern.

일제시대 조선총독부의원과 경성제대의 정신의학자들의 연구

민성길,이창호,이규박 대한신경정신의학회 2015 신경정신의학 Vol.54 No.2

Eighty-three of 114 original articles and abstracts of research published by neuropsychiatrists of Chosun Chongdokbu Hospital (the Japanese colonial government hospital in Korea) and Keijo- (Seoul) Imperial University Hospital during the Japanese colonial period (1910−1945) in journals including Shinkeigaku-zassi (Neurologia), Seishin-shinkei-gaku zassi (Psychiatria Et Neurologia Japonica), and The Journal of Chosun (Korea) Medical Association were reviewed. Most articles were on clinical research based on descriptive and biological psychiatry while only 4 articles were on dynamic psychiatry, probably because Japanese pioneers in psychiatry had introduced German psychiatry into Japan during the 1880s. The first paper was written by Dr. Shim Ho-sub. Professor Kubo of Keijo- (Seoul) Imperial University published most articles, followed by Dr. Hikari, Dr. Hattori, and Dr. Sugihara. There were more articles on symptomatic psychosis and morphine addiction, followed by general paralysis, schizophrenia, neurological diseases, narcolepsy, epilepsy, and neurasthenia. The meaningful articles even for today were comparative studies between Japanese and Koreans and articles on opioid use disorder in Korea. Authors reported a markedly lower rate of psychotic inpatients in the population of Koreans compared with Japanese. Japanese researchers argued that, because of simpleness in social life in Korea and less violence or excitement in symptoms, Korean mental patients could be cared for by family or members of the community, or be treated by shamanism rather than bringing them to a public mental hospital, and poverty also prohibited hospital care. Finding of higher ratio of schizophrenia to manic-depressive psychosis among Koreans than Japanese was discussed in relation to delayed cultural development of Korea compared to Japan. In addition, traditional customs prohibiting marriage between relatives in Korea was related to low prevalence of manic-depressive psychosis, local endemic malaria was related to low prevalence of general paresis, and poor general hygiene was related to high prevalence of epilepsy. Unclear (undifferentiated) form of psychotic symptoms including hallucination and delusion was reported in more Koreans than Japanese. Also Korean patients showed a more atypical form in diagnosis. Authors added that they had found no culture-specific mental illness in Korea. However, no Korean psychiatrists were included as author in such comparative studies. Comparative studies on constitution between Koreans and Japanese mental patients and prisoners were also unique. However, no Korean psychiatrists participated in such comparative studies. In studies on morphine addiction in Koreans, Japanese researchers argued that such studies were necessary to prevent introduction of morphine-related criminal phenomena to Japan. Meanwhile, Dr. Kubo had left a notion on adaptation problems of Japanese living in the foreign country, Korea. Nevertheless he reported nothing about psychosocial aspects of mental illness in relation to political, cultural, and economic difficulties Koreans were experiencing under the colonial rule of Japan. These general trends of studies based on German biological and descriptive psychiatry and policies of colonial government to isolate “dangerous” mental patients in hospital appeared to reflect colonial or ethnopsychiatry of those days. These policy and research trends seem to have worsened stigma attached to mental disorders. Japanese tradition of psychiatric research was discontinued by return home of Japanese scholars with the end of WWII and colonial rule.