What Research Says About Using Literature for English Language Learning and Teaching

Tae-Eun Kim 한국영어어문교육학회 2008 영어어문교육 Vol.14 No.3

  This study aims to review and analyze the articles focused on using literature for English Language Learning and Teaching (ELLT) in the primary Korean journals. A total of 38 literature-related articles out of 2,183 have been published in the 7 prominent Korean journals from 1998 to 2007. The researcher investigated these articles based on various external dimensions-number and percentage of the literature-related articles published, year of publication, participants of study, research methodology, type of study, and type of literature genre used. In addition, the articles were classified under the two subject domains--(a) three elements involved in the transaction with literature (i.e., reader, literary text, and context) and (b) language development through literature experiences. The study revealed that although the interest in using literature for ELLT has become more amplified in recent years, the remarkably small number of the literature-related articles (1.74%) was published during 1998-2007. The genre of literature investigated in the reviewed studies or appeared in English textbooks was mainly fiction; in contrast, relatively little attention was paid to nonfiction. Such unbalanced exposure to literature genre could keep English language learners from developing the awareness of two contrasting, but underlying, texts-narrative and expository texts. In addition, the reviewed studies of the past decade were devoted to mainly explore how using literature is associated with reader, literary text, and context and assure that literature experiences help English language learners attain reading achievement, vocabulary growth, and improvement in listening and speaking.

"사회"의 문학,반행동주의,아카데미즘: 1950년대 『사상계』의 문학성 인식과 최재서의 전략

정영진 ( Yeong Jin Jeong ) 민족문학사학회.민족문학사연구소 2012 민족문학사연구 Vol.48 No.-

Jae-seo Choi did not published his works in other literary magazines but continuously did in <Sasanggye (World of Thoughts)> mainly on the literary theory in terms of a theory. The college students majoring in literature in the 1950`s were influenced by the trend of the time that studied literature as the ``knowledge and idea`` in the academic aspect which is based on the distrust toward the literary circles. Choi emphasized the ``ideas`` in the literature by emphasizing the characteristic of the anti- activist and introspective ``intelligence`` and the sense of identity of literary people and intellects. He hoped literature to realize the complete humanity capable of overcoming the crisis of the times and comprehensive humanity. His literary theory of order and integration suggested the humanism as critical spirit or the anti-activist humanism rather than activist humanism. Choi`s academic literary theory supported the awareness of ``literary values`` which was thought out through the cultural strategy of <Sasanggye>, the educational magazine for intellects that pursued the modernization in all aspects, as the intra-literary principle. The autonomy of literature when he pursued the complete literature of integration and order and the literature as the humanism that aims for comprehensive and complete humanity indicates the integration of the literature itself into the society rather than the liberation from the society. In other words, Choi summarized the aesthetic norms of the literature which achieves the idea he regarded through <Sasanggye> or the zeitgeist and it was the response to the awareness of ``literary values`` in <Sasanggye> that emphasized the role of literature as the faculty in charge of humanity. The emphasis is placed on the aspect that the theoretical literary theory of Choi which supported the awareness of literary value in <Sasanggye> occupied a contrasting position against the collusion of the authority of the literary circles and literary knowledge centering on literary magazines. The academic literary theory of Choi indirectly revealed the closedness of the literary group by showing whether the literature can establish a relationship with the social reality as a unique system. This is the reason Choi could compromise with the strategy of <Sasanggye> of inducing intelligent public into modernization and social integration project through literature.

소외 시대의 문학사 - 김현의 문학사에 나타난 개인의 위상

허선애 경희대학교 인문학연구원 2021 인문학연구 Vol.- No.49

The goal of this article is to reveal the individual revealed in Kim Hyun’s literature history. The History of Korean Literature reflects the desire of intellectuals in the 1970s for independent modern times. Kim Hyun tried to show through literary history that modern individuals existed from the late Joseon Dynasty. At this time, the modern individual presented by Kim can be said to be a human being proven through epistemological intelligence, that is, the ability to recognize the backside of the world that the general public does not see. In Kim’s description, it was a contradiction of the family system of the Joseon Dynasty to confront modern individuals, but it can be seen that Kim Hyun is not aware of it even though the way to escape it is pre-modern. In Yeom Sang-seop, you can identify the individual as the epistemological intelligence that Kim imagines. Kim defines ethnic literature, realism, and modern individuals as those who can read the backside of the world differently and achieve ethnicity, reality, and modernity against his wil” in the process. For Kim, it was possible to investigate such as “against his will” that individuals were ethnic, and personal things were universal. For Kim, who was making such a logical leap, it was for the people in itself, but conversely, for the people, it was inevitable to fail. This is because Kim saw that he could reach the abstract ideology of the nation only by bypassing individuals at the level of the phenomenon. Kim, who used individuals as the fundamental unit of literature and knowledge, suggests focusing on the truth at this individual level in the Status of Korean literature as an authenticite. His view of literature begins to give individuals excessive meaning that personal truth can become universal truth in the process of reading. Kim, who sees faithfulness to individuals as authenticity, no longer mentions the ‘social structure’ as an object perceived by modern individuals. Instead, the creativity of literature, novelty, not imitating the existing, becomes important to him. If it was a contradictory family system that suppressed and alienated individuals in the History of Korean Literature, suppressing literary people in the late Joseon Dynasty in the status of Korean literature was a creative tradition of existing literature. The structural contradiction of society was understood as a condition for a modern individual to exercise creativity, and instead, he recognized the oppression and denied the so-called “daily life” that could not move toward the novelty of literature. 이 글은 김윤식·김현의 『한국문학사』(1972-1973 연재)와 김현의 『한국문학의 위상』(1975-1977 연재)을 통해 김현의 문학사에 나타난 개인의 위상을 확인하고자 한다. 『한국문학사』는 1970년대 지식인이 품었던 주체적 근대를 향한 열망을 반영하고 있는데, 김현 또한 조선 후기부터 근대적 개인이 존재하였음을 문학사를 통해 보이고자 했다. 이때 김현이 부조하는 근대적 개인은 인식론적 지성, 즉 일반인이 보지 못하는 세계의 이면을 알아차리는 능력을 통해 증명되는 존재다. 김현의 서술에서 근대적 개인이 대결하는 것은 조선시대 가족제도의 모순이었는데, 이를 벗어나는 방식이 전근대적이라 할 수 있음에도 김현은 이를 자각하지 못하고 있다. 한편, 1920년대 작가, 특히 염상섭에게서 김현이 상상하는 인식론적 지성으로서의 개인을 확인할 수 있다. 김현은 민족문학자, 리얼리스트, 근대적 개인을 모두 세계의 이면을 남다르게 읽을 수 있으며, 그 과정에서 “자신의 의사에 반하여” 민족성, 리얼리티, 근대성을 성취하는 자로 정의하고 있다. “자신의 의사에 반하여”와 같은 수사가 가능했던 것은 김현에게 개인은 곧 민족이었으며, 개인적인 것은 곧 보편적인 것이었기 때문이다. 이 같은 논리적 비약을 감행하는 김현에게 개인을 위하는 것은 그 자체로 민족을 향한 것이었지만, 역으로 민족을 위하는 것은 필연적으로 실패할 수밖에 없었다. 이는 김현이 현상 차원에 있는 개인을 우회함으로써만 민족이라는 추상적 이념에 도달할 수 있다고 보았기 때문이다. 개인을 문학과 지식의 근본 단위로 삼았던 김현은 『한국문학의 위상』에서 이 개인적 차원의 진실에 집중하는 것을 성실성(authenticite)로 제시한다. 개인적 진실이 독서의 과정에서 보편적 진실이 될 수 있다는 그의 문학관은 개인에게 과잉된 의미를 부여하기 시작한다. 개인에 충실한 것을 진정성으로 보는 김현은 근대적 개인이 인식하는 대상으로서의 ‘사회 구조’를 더이상 언급하지 않는다. 대신 그에게는 문학의 창조성, 기존의 것을 모방하는 것이 아닌 새로움이 중요해진다. 『한국문학사』에서 개인을 억압하고 소외시켰던 것이 모순된 가족제도였다면, 『한국문학의 위상』에서 조선 후기 문인을 억압하는 것은 기존 문학의 창조적 전통이었다. 사회의 구조적 모순은 근대적 개인이 창조성을 발휘할 수 있는 조건으로 이해되었으며, 대신 그는 억압을 알지 못하는 자, 그 억압을 인식하여 문학의 새로움으로 나아갈 수 없는 일상인을 부정하게 된다.

문학미디어론과 고전문학 연구의 지평 -실존적인 문학상, 운동하는 문학사를 위하여-

임형택 ( Hyeong Taek Im ) 겨레어문학회 2015 겨레어문학 Vol.55 No.-

이 글은 필자가 최근에 제출한, 문학의 변환에 관한 연구이론인 문학미디어론을 고전문학 연구의 방법론으로 적용해본 것이다. 먼저 다음과같은 문학미디어의 개념과 주요 논리를 해설적으로 제시하였다(1~2장). (1)형식개념: 문학미디어=문학의 미디어+문학이라는 미디어, (2)중심적문학미디어의 전환: 세계←구술←문자←영상, (3)미디어의 작동: 표현-저장-소통. 그러고서 세 가지 측면에서 고전문학 연구에 적용해 보았다(3장). 첫째, 문학미디어론에 의해 현장성 재구의 합리적 근거가 제시될 수 있음이 주장되었다. 오늘날 전해지는 고전문학은 문자화를 거치면서 본래의 현장성은 상실된 상태이다. 하지만 미디어-테크놀로지에 의해, 똑같을 수는 없지만 현장의 원리와 미학을 되살릴 수는 있을 것이다. 이때 문학미디어론을 통해 분석되는 미디어 시학과 미학이 적절한 지침을 제공해주리라 기대된다. 둘째, 오늘날 고전문학은 현재화 및 세계화 요청을 강하게 받고 있다. 미디어-테크놀로지에 의해 지구는 하나가 됐으며 그 환경에서 개별 민족의 독특한 문학 및 예술.문화가 부각되고 있는 실정이다. 글로컬 콘텐츠로서의 고전문학 갱신이 필요한 것이다. 그것은 서사와 시각적 요소를 한국(적)인 것으로 취한다고 달성되는 게 아니다. 그 장르, 그 양식의 핵심적 기제에 영향을 미침으로써 진정한 글로컬 콘텐츠로서의 의의를 획득할 수 있을 것이기 때문이다. 문학미디어론은 이와 같은 변환의 본질적 지점을 파고들게 된다. 그것은 결국 미디어 변환의 문제이기 때문이다. 셋째 문학미디어론을 통하여 , 그 목적에 더욱 충실한 학교(초중고) 고전문학 교육의 지침과 방법이 모색될 수 있다. 고전문학 텍스트들에는 아주 다양한 미디어 변환 지점들과 요소들이 망라돼있다. 적실한 교육효과를 기하기 위해서는 그러한 내용들이 분석되고 전달되어야 한다. 내용을 해제하는 정도로는 교육적 효과가 크게 기대될 수 없는 것이다. 오늘날과 상이한 미디어들과 그 변환의 국면과 양상을 이해함으로써 학생들은 내용상의 미학에도 좀 더 적극적으로 접근할 수 있으리라고 생각된다. 이상은 고전문학 텍스트에 실존적 기운을 불어넣는 일이며, 미디어라는 일관된 시각과 방법으로 문학사를 관통하는 일이다. 문학미디어(론)은 계속 다듬어져야 하겠지만, 무엇보다도 문학사 서술과 구성의 논리로 우선 제안되고 토론될 필요가 있다고 판단된다. This paper is the application of Literature.media theory that the present writer have submitted lately as a method of study on classical literature. Firstly this paper explained the concept and primary logics of Literature.media theory(chapter 1~2).: (1)formal concept: literature.media=media of literature+literature as media, (2)the conversion of the central literature.media: the world←orality ←letter←technical picture, (3)the operation of media: expression. storage.communication. And then this paper applied them to study on classical literature in three aspects(chapter3). The First, it was insisted that the reasonable base to reconstitute the fields can be submitted by literature.media theory. The classical literature passed down today had lost the original traits of fields because of literation. But we can revive the principles and aesthetics of the fields by media.technology. Then literature.media theory can submit proper guidelines to the process of revival. The Second, today classical literature is requested its present and globalization strongly. Now earth has been one by media. technology. In the condition, each national literature, art andculture are being magnified. Therefore classical literature need to renew as glocal contents. It cannot be achieved simply by taking Korean narrative or visual elements. Something influencing the main mechanism of the genres and the styles can acquire the meaning of true glocal contents. Literature .media theory penetrates the essence points of the changes. Because they are the matter of changing media after all. The third, the purposeful principles and methods of educating classical literature can be groped through literature.media theory. There are very diverse points and elements of changing media in the texts of classical literature. They must be analyzed and educated for the purposeful effects. Because the powerful education effects cannot be expected in the level of releasing contents. By understanding the situations and aspects of changing media, students may approach actively the aesthetics of contents also. All this, it``s the works to inspire existent vitality, go through literary history by the consistent standpoints and methods named media. Literature.media theory must be refined continuously, but first of all suggested and discussed as the description and constituent logic of literary history.

What Research Says About Using Literature for English Language Learning and Teaching

김태은 한국영어어문교육학회 2008 영어어문교육 Vol.14 No.3

This study aims to review and analyze the articles focused on using literature for English Language Learning and Teaching (ELLT) in the primary Korean journals. A total of 38 literature-related articles out of 2,183 have been published in the 7 prominent Korean journals from 1998 to 2007. The researcher investigated these articles based on various external dimensions—number and percentage of the literature-related articles published, year of publication, participants of study, research methodology, type of study, and type of literature genre used. In addition, the articles were classified under the two subject domains—(a) three elements involved in the transaction with literature (i.e., reader, literary text, and context) and (b) language development through literature experiences. The study revealed that although the interest in using literature for ELLT has become more amplified in recent years, the remarkably small number of the literature-related articles (1.74%) was published during 1998-2007. The genre of literature investigated in the reviewed studies or appeared in English textbooks was mainly fiction; in contrast, relatively little attention was paid to nonfiction. Such unbalanced exposure to literature genre could keep English language learners from developing the awareness of two contrasting, but underlying, texts—narrative and expository texts. In addition, the reviewed studies of the past decade were devoted to mainly explore how using literature is associated with reader, literary text, and context and assure that literature experiences help English language learners attain reading achievement, vocabulary growth, and improvement in listening and speaking.

흔들리는 열도, 그래도 문학

김계자 서울대학교 일본연구소 2016 일본비평 Vol.- No.15

From rapid economic growth to low and minus growth, post-war Japan who pursued phantasm of “growth” came to an end. Modern Japan is quaking due to economic polarization problems, endless disasters, and continuous conservative shift. During this period, what role did literature play? This article examines sensational literary works and followed phenomena at the time of economic depression and reconsiders the actual meaning of literature in modern Japan. Two outstanding keywords of modern Japanese literature are healing and humor. A series of novels about gourmet have prevailed recently, because they provide consolation in anxiety of modern society. However, they need close watch on their patterns of consumption as simple fantasies without revealing the fundamental structure of pain. The novel Flame by Matayoshi Naoki created a noticeable sensation in the literary world in 2015, illustrating humor with materials from comedy entertainment. The success of this novel shows one characteristic of modern literature, which is an act of literary consumption as an industrial content. In addition, novels describing the agony of people that comes from economic depression and criticizing closed society have also succeeded. Especially, since 2010 “literary award on the street” has introduced novels that depicted the experience of homeless people, and such movement is expected to evoke the proper meaning of literature by relativizing the standardized mainstream literature and to propose the possibility of literature as a place for horizontal communication among common readers. Since the collapse of economic bubble, modern Japanese literature is struggling to describe the problems that cannot stay in the individual area. Miyabe Miyuki’s detective novels are noticeable examples. If a certain literature is requested in spite of economic depression, such literature can be considered as in the form nearest to the proper meaning of literature.

대학의 교양교과로서 ‘문학’ 교육의 현황과 전망

안미영 한국교양교육학회 2021 교양교육연구 Vol.15 No.4

This article seeks ways in which to educate literature as part of the liberal arts curriculum for universities. In response to changes in the university's curriculum and system, this article examined the current status of liberal arts “literature” courses, Also, this article explored the methods used in the teaching of literature courses as basic studies. Literary works have been used as useful teaching materials in early writing education, and classical texts have achieved their goals by utilizing proven literary works. In cultural education, literary works are also used as a primary source and as part of media education. In terms of the university system, the Humanities departments have begun to disappear. Literary education has resulted in a situation in which liberal arts have to take charge, and so now it is necessary to ask questions regarding the identity of literature and to examine the methods of teaching literature education. Before this article discussed the methods involved with literature education as a basic study, we looked at the prior discussions on literature education as liberal arts education. Interest in literature education began in the mid-1980s, and research became active around 2010. Interest in and research on literature education as liberal arts education has also been gradually increasing, and a series of facts suggest the legitimacy of literature subjects as basic studies, along with a willingness to actively communicate with the changed educational environment. In order to better understand the methods of teaching literature education at the university level, this article examined the link between secondary and university education. The current secondary education curriculum was revised in 2015, and both secondary and higher education implement competency education for talent development required by the times, and the ultimate goal is the same. However, since literature must reach the achievement standards designated through textbooks in the middle school curriculum, there is a limit to internalize the literature. Literature education in universities shall take into account the university's talent award and educational goals, but may develop literary skills by maximizing the experience of actively interpreting and enjoying literature through various teaching methods. In liberal arts education at universities, literature courses should be able to capture academic universality and achievements as basic studies. Literature courses should be teach to read the narratives of media that form diverse cultures and cultivate interpretations that can allow our students to discover the value of the times in which they live. The particular language of literature should be understood and the theoretical basis for understanding and enjoying the flow of human history and civilization should be taught through Mimesis (reenactment), narrative and plot, point of view and the speaker, critical methodology, and the literature itself. Through a self-reliant and active interpretation of the work, one should be able to identify the literary principles embodied in the work, and tell what discourse the work has created in the lives of one's contemporaries. 이 글은 대학의 교양교과로서 문학 교육 방법을 모색한 것이다. 대학의 교육과정과 제도 변화에상응하여 교양 ‘문학’ 교과의 현황을 살펴보고 기초학문으로서 문학 교과의 교육 방법을 탐구한 것이다. 유관 교과와 관련하여 문학 작품은 글쓰기 교육에서 일찍부터 유용한 강의자료로 활용되었고, 고전교과에서는 검증된 문학작품을 활용하여 교과목표를 달성하고 있다. 문화 교육에서도 문학작품은 미디어 교육의 1차 자료로 활용되고 있다. 대학 제도의 측면에서 문학 전공 학과들이 사장되기 시작했으며, 문학 교육은 교양에서 담당해야하는 상황이 초래되었다. 이에 문학의 정체성을 되묻고 교육방법에대한 점검이 필요하다. 기초학문으로서 문학 교육방법을 논하기 앞서, 교양교육으로서 문학 교육에 관한 선행논의들을 살펴보았다. 교양으로서 문학교육에 대한 관심은 1980년대 중반부터 일기 시작하여 2010년을 전후하여연구가 활발해졌다. 교양교육으로서 문학교육에 대한 관심과 연구도 점진적으로 늘어나고 있는데 일련의 사실은 기초학문으로 문학 교과에 대한 당위성과 현실 변화에 대한 소통 의지를 시사한다. 대학교육에서 문학 교육의 정체성과 방법을 모색하기 위해 전단계인 중등교육과정과 대학교육 간의연계성을 점검해 보았다. 현행 중등교육과정은 2015년 개정되었으며, 중등교육과 고등(대학)교육 모두시대가 요구하는 인재배양을 위한 역량교육을 시행하고 있으며 지향하는 궁극의 목표는 동일하다. 다만 중등교육과정에서 문학은 교과서를 통해 지정된 성취기준에 도달해야 하므로, 문학을 내면화하는데 한계가 있다. 이에 대학에서 문학 교육은 대학의 인재상과 교육목표 등을 고려하되, 다양한 교수법을통해 문학을 적극적으로 해석하고 향유할 수 있는 체험을 극대화하여 문학능력을 기를 수 있다. 대학 교양교육에서 문학 교과는 기초학문으로서 학술적 보편성과 성과를 담아낼 수 있어야 한다. 다양한 문화를 형성하는 미디어의 서사를 읽어내고, 시대의 가치를 발견할 수 있는 해석안을 배양해야한다. 문학의 언어를 이해하고, 미메시스(재현), 서사와 플롯, 시점과 화자, 비평방법론, 문예사조를통해 인류의 역사와 문명의 흐름을 이해하고 향유할 수 있는 이론적 기반을 교육시킬 수 있어야 한다. 작품에 대한 주체적이고 적극적인 해석 활동을 통해 작품에 구현된 문학 원리를 파악하고, 작품이던진 화두가 자신과 동시대 삶에 어떠한 담론을 만들어 나가는지 말할 수 있어야 한다.

The Meaning of the Research of Diasporic Literature: Focusing on the Ethics of Diasporic Literature of the Korean in Japan

Inseop Shin 건국대학교 아시아·디아스포라 연구소 2015 International Journal of Diaspora&Cultural Critici Vol.5 No.1

Literature of Korean diaspora in Japan is generally referred to as the “literature of Joseon People in Japan,” the “literature of Koreans in Japan,” or the Korean-Japanese literature” and has been targeted for numerous studies. What significance does it have to call and categorize the literary field―which can be easily constituted as “literature of Joseon people in Japan,” or as “Korean-Japanese literature” ―as the “literature of Korean diaspora in Japan?” The literature of Korean diaspora in Japan refers to literary activities, carried out by the Korean diaspora active in Japan. Likewise, at every place worldwide where the Korean diaspora lives, such as China, Russia, or the US, the literature of diaspora exists. The name of the country to which they migrated can be added to the name of the literary field, indicating the regional area where they are active. The first point made in this presentation is to discuss the ethics surrounding such an indication by names. Each literature of Korean diaspora forms the literature of diaspora through numerous interactions with one another in terms of cultures of countries they have migrated to. For instance, the literature by the Korean Chinese is still written in Korean, whereas ‘Zainichi’ in Japan complete their literary works in Japanese. Therefore, the literature of Korean diaspora involves different forms of Korean literature depending on regions and is diverse in its characteristics. Among such various characteristics, a discussion on the unique characteristics of the literature of Korean diaspora in Japan in the framework of “ethics” is the second point made in the presentation. These two issues basically start with the precondition that the literature of diaspora involves ethical issues. Of course, every literary work relates to ethics. However, as the literature of diaspora is based on more than two different regions and cultures, the issue of the existence of life is further stressed. Accordingly, exploring the existence of the diasporic literature is directly linked to ethics.

Literature as a Global Theory

이택광(Taek-Gwang Lee) 한국비평이론학회 2023 비평과이론 Vol.28 No.3

이 논문은 문학의 세계화와 그 정치적 의미에 대해 논의하면서 문학은 시대를 초월하거나 고대의 것이 아니라 역사적, 언어적, 문화적 맥락에 깊이 뿌리내린 현대적 발명품이라고 주장한다. 다시 말해서 '문학'은 자명한 보편적인 개념이 아니라 유럽에서 발생한 특수한 쓰기의 개념이라는 점을 증명하고자 하는 것이다. 예를 들어 일본에서 '문학'으로 번역되는 '문학'(文学)이라는 단어는 나츠메 소세키가 영미문학을 접하기 전에는 다른 의미로 사용되었다. 소세키는 자신의 문학론에서 중국고전과 영어 문학 작품을 문학이라는 하나의 정의에 포함시키는 것이 어려웠다고 고백하고 있다. 소세키가 인정한 중국 고전과 영문학 사이에서 발견할 수 있는 이런 차이는 문학이 보편적인 쓰기의 형식이 아니라 근대성과 관련된 특정 스타일의 쓰기라는 사실을 증명하는 사례이다. 문학은 자명한 것도 아니고 특정한 지식체계를 통해 인식되어야하는 근대적 쓰기 방식이다. 따라서 문학의 세계화는 유럽에서 발생한 이런 특수한 쓰기의 방식이 다른 지역으로 보편화한 것이라고 보아야한다. 따라서 이 과정에서 유럽의 문학적 형식과 개념을 다양한 문화적 맥락에 맞게 조정하는 과정은 필수적이었다. 이 과정은 소외된 문화에 패권적 문화적 가치를 강요할 수 있기 때문에 종종 정치적 함의를 내포할 수밖에 없었다. 이런 맥락에서 이 논문은 자크 랑시에르의 논의를 차용해서 정치 문학 같은 것은 존재하지 않고 오직 문학적인 정치만 존재한다는 점을 밝히고자 한다. 쓰기의 양식은 근대화의 양가성을 고스란히 보여주는 예증이다. 이는 문학이 단순히 정치적 선전을 위한 도구가 아니라 다양한 정치적 이슈를 탐구하고 도전하는 데 사용될 수 있는 복잡하고 다면적인 현상이라는 사실을 의미한다. This essay discusses the globalization of literature and its political implications, arguing that literature is not timeless or ahistorical but a modern invention deeply rooted in its historical, linguistic, and cultural context.I begin my arguments by pointing out that “literature” is not universal but a specifically European concept. In Japan, for example, the word “bungaku” (文学), which is translated as “literature”, had a different meaning before Soseki encountered English literature. Soseki confessed that he found it challenging to subsume Chinese classics and English literary works under a single definition of literature. This discrepancy between Chinese and English literature, Soseki argued, is because literature is not simply a collection of writings but a specific style of writing associated with modernity. Literature is not self-explanatory but requires a certain level of cultural literacy to understand. Therefore, the globalisation of literature is not simply a process of spreading European literary culture to other parts of the world. Instead, it adapts European literary forms and concepts to different cultural contexts. This process is often fraught with political implications, as it can involve imposing hegemonic cultural values on marginalized cultures. I conclude by arguing that there is no such thing as political literature, but only literary politics. The style of writing as such is the ambiguous process of modernisation. This means that literature is not simply a tool for political propaganda but rather a complex and multifaceted phenomenon that can be used to explore and challenge a wide range of political issues.

조연현 비평에서 ‘문학’과 ‘정치’ : 일제 말기와 전후 비평을 중심으로

고봉준(Ko Bong-jun) 한국근대문학회 2010 한국근대문학연구 Vol.11 No.2

한국문학사에서 문학과 정치의 관계는 다음의 세 가지 방식으로 논의되어 왔다. 첫째, 문학이 민족적?민중적 현실의 반영이며, 따라서 문학은 현실의 문제에 대해서 적극적으로 개입해야 하고, 현실의 변화에 대한 문학의 역할이 존재한다는 입장. 둘째, 문학은 정치?종교?도덕 같은 제영역과의 거리로 정의되며, 때문에 특정한 정치적 입장이 문학을 지배할때 문학은 고유의 가치와 기능을 상실한다는 입장. 셋째, 문학은 정치로부터 분리되어 존재하되, 문학의 가치는 인간의 존재와 삶의 진실을 해명하는 데 있다는 입장. 조연현의 비평은 세 번째 입장에 속한다. 문협정통파의 대표적 비평가인 조연현의 비평관은 흔히 사상적인 측면에서는 ‘생리’와 ‘구경적인 것’을 매개로 한 근대의 초극으로, 문학적인 측면에서는 순수문학론으로서의 휴머니즘으로 요약된다. 그리고 이러한 두 측면을 떠받치고 있는 문학적 입장이 바로 ‘문학’과 ‘정치’의 거리였다. 조연현은 한편으로는 문학과 정치의 분리라는 논리를 내세워 이데올로기적인 선명성을 강조한 좌익의 공식주의 문학론과의 차별성을 확보하려 했고, 또 한편으로는 ‘생리’를 내세워 “구경적 생의 형식”을 주장하고 문학을 종교의 수준에 근접시킨 김동리와의 차별성을 획득하려 했다. 그러나 해방 이전, 즉 일제말기에 조연현은 일제 파시즘에 동조하는 입장에서 다수의 비평을 발표했는데, 흥미롭게도 그 비평들에서도 그는 문학은 ‘작품’을 중시해야 한다는 입장을 견지했으며, 이러한 입장은 해방기와 전후에도 계속 유지되었다. 한편 조연현의 비평은 중요한 개념들의 계열화를 함축하고 있다. <근대-이성절대주의/합리만능주의-논리-정치>의 계열과 <현대-파토스적 욕망/실존적 요구-생리-문학>의 계열이 그것이다. 여기에서 ‘정치’가 ‘논리’와 동일한 계열에 속하듯이, ‘문학’은 인간의 파토스적 욕망과 실존적 요구에 관계하는 ‘생리’에 속하는 것으로 설정된다. 이는 ‘인간’과 ‘생리’가 ‘문학’과 ‘정치’가 결합되는 것을 막아준다는 것을 의미한다. 이런 점에서 ‘인간-생리-작품’은 동일하게 ‘문학’과 ‘정치’의 연관성을 순화시켜주는예술적 안전장치로 기능한다. 그런데 이러한 가치의 계열화는 몇 가지 심각한 문제를 낳는데, 첫째, ‘문학’과 ‘정치’의 분리를 텍스트의 차원에 고정시킴으로써 작가의 정치 참여나 작품의 이데올로기적 기능에 대해서는 말하지 않는다는 점, 둘째, ‘민족’, ‘전통’, ‘휴머니즘’ 같은 근대적 가치들을 매개로 근대를 초극한다는 형용모순을 노출한다는 점, 셋째, 두 계열을 대립적으로 이해함으로써 ‘생리’, ‘전통’ 같은 비논리적 대상을 현대(근대의 초극)에 위치시키게 된다는 점 등이다. In history of Korean literature, relationship between literature and politics has been discussed in mainly three branches as follows. First view claims that literature reflects ethnic aspect of reality as well as views of the mass public. According to this view, literature plays certain roles in changing the reality. Second perspective gauges status of literature by its distance from other areas of politics, religions and ethics. Thus, literature risks losing unique value and functions when political interests take over. Last view sees that literature is separated from politics, and its value lies in illuminating human existence and truths of life. Cho Yeon-hyeon’s critiques followed the last position. Cho Yeon-hyeon was a representative critic of the orthodox school of the literary association. In terms of ideology, his critique can be understood as transcendence of modernity through medium of ‘physiology’ and ‘pursuit of over common fate of the mankind.’ In literary aspect, his work was grounded in humanism as part of the theory of pure literature. Literary standing that supported these two aspects can be measured by distance between ‘literature’ and ‘politics.’ On one hand, Cho made efforts to secure independent identity of his critiques, apart from communist literary theory that emphasized ideological clarity, by dividing literary and political arenas. On the other hand, Cho put forth ‘physiology’ and emphasized ‘way of living that pursues to overcome common fate of the mankind,’ in an effort to differentiate his ideas from Kim Dong-ri who brought literature closer to realm of religion. Prior to liberation from the Japanese occupation, Cho published a series of critiques that sympathized with Japanese fascism. Interestingly, in these critiques, he maintained a position to put focus on ‘literary work’ in discussing literature; such perspective sustained through period of liberation and post-war eras. Cho Yeon-hyeon’s critiques implied a discourse on categorizing important literary concepts: they included <modern-absolute reason/rationalism-logic-politics> and <contemporary-desire of pathos-existential needs-physiology-literature>. Just as ‘politics’ and ‘logic’ fall into the same category, ‘literature’ is understood as belonging to ‘physiology’ that deals with human being’s desires of pathos and existential needs. In other words, ‘human needs’ and ‘physiology’ help to prevent collusion between ‘literature’ and ‘politics.’ In this regard, ‘human-physiology-literary work’ functions as an artistic buffer that weakens links between ‘literature’ and ‘politics.’ However, this kind of categorization of values accompanies grave problems. Firstly, it fixates separation of ‘literature’ and ‘politics’ on a level of texts, neglecting to consider writers’ political activities or ideological functions of literary works. Secondly, a matter of oxymoron arises as the argument tries to overcome modernity with modern values such as ‘ethnicity’, ‘tradition’ and ‘humanism.’ Lastly, by juxtaposing the two categories as antagonistic, illogical subjects such as ‘physiology’ and ‘tradition’ are placed in realm of contemporary value, that is, transcendence of modernity.