1960~1970년대의 제3세계론과 제3세계문학론

김예림 상허학회 2017 상허학보 Vol.50 No.-

The changes in the existing East-West relations and the new emergence of North- South problems in the 1960s and 1970s marked a turning-point in the Cold War order. At that time, the diplomatic abilities and international position of Korea were questioned and criticized. At the core of this criticism was the idea of ”the third world", the important field in which competition for national interest occurred and in which the confrontation between South and North Korea was translated into action. However, the realistic and ideological category of "the third world" was not always approached from the perspective of utilitarian nationalism (국가주의) or actual profit in the 1960s and 1970s. It is notable that significant awareness and understanding of "the third world" were built by intellectuals at that period. The appearance of new thought was developed by internalization of "the third world-ness" as Korea's very own. This paper explores the theory of the third world and the third world's literature in the 1960s and 1970s. The third world's literature theory shows the context in which "the third world", a social science concept, spilled into the humanities and was cultivated as counter-knowledge. Looking at the theory of neocolonialism and neonationalism, Minjokkyeongjeron (the Theory of National Economy), and Minjokmunhakron (the Theory of National Literature), this paper examines their relationship with the theory of the third world and the third world's literature. In addition, Paik Nak-chung’s theory of the third world's literature is reviewed to suggest that it should be critically reappraised within the problematic framework of “responsibility”. Furthermore, this paper intends to ponder the ways and the reasons why the passion of resistant knowledge produced and pursued by semantic concepts such as nation (민족), minjung (민중), and the third world should be reorganized or revived today. 1960년대~1970년대, 기존의 동서관계에 변화가 일어나고 남북문제가 새롭게 대두하면서 국제 냉전질서는 새로운 전환기를 맞는다. 한국의 외교 능력과 국제적 존재감을 ‘반성적’으로 되돌아보는 움직임이 형성되었는데, 그 핵심에 바로 “제3세계”가 있다. “제3세계”는 국가의 실리가 달린 장이자 남북한 대결이 벌어지는 장이라는 점에서 중요한 의미를 띠게 된다. 그러나 1960~1970년대 한국에서 “제3세계”라는 실체 혹은 이념이 국가주의적 관점에서만 소모된 것은 아니었다. 이 시기가 지성사적으로 중요한 의미를 갖는다면, 그것은 “제3세계”를 둘러싼 인식론적 지평에서 주목할 만한 흐름이 형성되었기 때문이다. 이는 “제3세계”를 대상화하거나 외부화하지 않고 자기화함으로써 출현할 수 있었다. 이 글은 1960~1970년대 제3세계론의 전개를 살펴보고 대화적 관계 속에서 제3세계문학론의 위상을 고찰한다. 제3세계문학론의 장에는 사회과학적 기원을 지닌 “제3세계”라는 논제가 인문학으로 넘어오면서 대항지식으로 구축되어가는 양상이 또렷하게 기록되어 있다. 이 글은 신식민주의론, 네오내셔널리즘, 민족경제론, 민족문학론을 검토하면서 이들이 제3세계론 및 제3세계문학론과 맺는 관계를 규명하고 특히 백낙청의 제3세계문학론을 ‘책임’이라는 문제틀에서 비판적으로 고찰한다. 그리고 ‘민족’, ‘민중’, ‘제3세계’라는 의미론적 단위를 통해 표명되고 추구된 대항지식의 열정이 오늘날 어떻게 재구축되어야 할 것인지를 탐색했다.

제삼세게 영화의 정체성과 가능성: 프레드릭 제임슨의 "민족적 알레고리" 개념의 재고

남수영 문학과영상학회 2008 문학과영상 Vol.9 No.2

In the current configuration of post-modern cultural politics, all countries except the United States are considered as the third world, constituting the third culture. This also partly explains the decline of post-colonial discourse, which has focused on the relations between the first and the third worlds, the center and periphery and the Western subject and the colonial subjects. It is because the strong marginality the third culture once had tends to be obliterated in the name of the post-modern global culture. From this understanding, it is worthwhile to reconsider the infamous argument of Fredric Jameson: "all third-world texts are necessarily allegorical, and they are to be read as national allegories." The apparent essentialism and the very desire for generality in his wording (and the following totalizing effect on patterns of discourse on third world cultural products) have invited rigorous polemics. Among them, it is especially worth remembering Aijaz Amad's insistence that the proper discourse on the third world can be neither directed by such dogmatic guideline nor represented by scholars who have been educated in the West. However, I would like to focus on Jameson’s short response to Amad’s refutation, in which Jameson explains that his contention was in fact addressed to the first world, and intended to offer a way of conceptualizing the relationship of politics and literary activities. To be more specific, he wants to intervene in the first world literary and critical situation in which the individual psychology dominates interpretive modes as well as productive drives, thereby blurring the potentiality for political awareness and actions. By reading Jameson closely, with two exemplary interpretations of Ju Dou (Zhang Yimou, 1989/1990) and Lust, Caution (Ang Lee, 2007), this essay reveals that the concept of national allegory plays an ambivalent role for the discourse of the third world in the present time. In other words, this study proves that the third world can function as a space that remains untainted by and oppositional to those repressive social processes which have homogenized the real and imaginative terrain of the western subject. Realizing such function of the third world (and its interpretive links with nationhood) will be a necessary step for us in playing a significant role in formulating the global culture, either in the middle of mainstream or as a centripetal force of the periphery. Lastly, revealing the validity of "national allegory" for the third world discourse is not to advocate its absolute value or truth, but to try another productive interpretive mode working for both the first and the third worlds, if, that is, there is still valid demarcation between them. Experiment on this ambivalent and alternative methodology of national allegorization is necessary only to prove the possibility of subversion in the awareness of Otherness and the realization of oscillating value in relations, which is much stronger than any dogmatic guideline. In the current configuration of post-modern cultural politics, all countries except the United States are considered as the third world, constituting the third culture. This also partly explains the decline of post-colonial discourse, which has focused on the relations between the first and the third worlds, the center and periphery and the Western subject and the colonial subjects. It is because the strong marginality the third culture once had tends to be obliterated in the name of the post-modern global culture. From this understanding, it is worthwhile to reconsider the infamous argument of Fredric Jameson: "all third-world texts are necessarily allegorical, and they are to be read as national allegories." The apparent essentialism and the very desire for generality in his wording (and the following totalizing effect on patterns of discourse on third world cultural products) have invited rigorous polemics. Among them, it is especially worth remembering Aijaz Amad's insistence that the proper discourse on the third world can be neither directed by such dogmatic guideline nor represented by scholars who have been educated in the West. However, I would like to focus on Jameson’s short response to Amad’s refutation, in which Jameson explains that his contention was in fact addressed to the first world, and intended to offer a way of conceptualizing the relationship of politics and literary activities. To be more specific, he wants to intervene in the first world literary and critical situation in which the individual psychology dominates interpretive modes as well as productive drives, thereby blurring the potentiality for political awareness and actions. By reading Jameson closely, with two exemplary interpretations of Ju Dou (Zhang Yimou, 1989/1990) and Lust, Caution (Ang Lee, 2007), this essay reveals that the concept of national allegory plays an ambivalent role for the discourse of the third world in the present time. In other words, this study proves that the third world can function as a space that remains untainted by and oppositional to those repressive social processes which have homogenized the real and imaginative terrain of the western subject. Realizing such function of the third world (and its interpretive links with nationhood) will be a necessary step for us in playing a significant role in formulating the global culture, either in the middle of mainstream or as a centripetal force of the periphery. Lastly, revealing the validity of "national allegory" for the third world discourse is not to advocate its absolute value or truth, but to try another productive interpretive mode working for both the first and the third worlds, if, that is, there is still valid demarcation between them. Experiment on this ambivalent and alternative methodology of national allegorization is necessary only to prove the possibility of subversion in the awareness of Otherness and the realization of oscillating value in relations, which is much stronger than any dogmatic guideline.

제 3 세계신학자 에큐메니칼협의회 (EATWOT) 의 역사(1976-1992)와 선교신학적 의의와 과제

황흥렬 한국선교신학회 2004 선교신학 Vol.9 No.-

The aim of this artic1e is to introduce the contour of the history of the EATWOT (Ecumenical Association ofThird World Theologians) from 1976 to 1992 and to point out its significance and tasks from the mission perspective. The international conferences of the EATWOT deal with three issues: analysis of reality of the third world, missionary tasks of church, and reformulation of the third world theology. Characteristics of the third world are poverty and oppression. However these issues cannot be reduced to socio-economic matters. The rea1ity of the third world cannot be understood fully until third world theologians are able to account for the cultural is sues Missionary tasks of church include liberating mini stry, social responsibility for local community, suggestion for an a1ternative value system to capitalism, and recovery of Christian spirituality overcoming dichotomy between faith and life, prayer and action, commitment and every day life. Methodology of third world theology is the commitment to liberation and contemplation. Its authenticity depends upon to what extent it relates to rea1ity. The significance of the EATWOT from the mission perspective is, first of all, in that its theological center shifted from history to creation. Secondly, its understanding of the third world was enlarged by adding the aboriginal, the Indians of Latin America, and even gays and lesbians to the people of Asia, Africa and Latin America. Thirdly, it changed its attitude toward women and ferninist theology through which doing theology itself can be changed. Fourthly, not only socioeconornic analysis but also religio-cultural analysis are necessary for understanding the reality. Fifthly, as time passed, it reahzed the significance of spirituality. Important resources of spirituality could come from other religions, women, and the aboriginal. Sixthly, in relation to methodology of doing theology, the committment to struggle for ju stice and liberation was complemented by contemplation. Lastly, the subject of doing theology is not academic theologians but the faith community. One of important tasks of the EATWOT is how to harmonize the socio-econornic approach and religio-cultural one. In principle, every Christian is a theologian. However, without training the faith community and transforrning it into a hermeneutic community, this principle becomes meaningless. Even though the EATWOT declared “ the irruption of the third world", this irruption failed to bear fruits in the world. The changes in the times such as the collapse of the Eastern Socialist countries, the end of the ‘Cold War’ , the neoliberal global capitalism, and globalization resulted in ‘the world without a1ternatives' or ‘the end of history ’ . One of urgent tasks of third world theology is to suggest the alternative world through integrating personal, social, national, and global issues, and being solidarity with various kinds of NGOs at the local, national, regional and globallevel for the sake of globallife community.

방법으로서의 세계문학 -1970년대 외국문학/민족문학 담론과 (탈)후진성 인식을 중심으로-

박연희 한국문학이론과비평학회 2022 한국문학이론과 비평 Vol.94 No.-

This article recounts the literary discussion on the backwardness of Korea after hearing the news that Korea's international status has been upgraded from developing countries to developed countries in 2021. The determination of the status of developed countries in Korea is the result of the categories and standards of UNTAD (UNTAD) member states, and since then, the concept of "third world" has been commercialized and the psychological geography of developed countries has been solidified. In order to examine the boom phenomenon of the third world theory, the topography and characteristics of national literature and foreign literature discourse have been examined so far. This overlaps with the process of preparing discourses and media by the first generation of Korean literature and foreign literature after liberation as foreign literature majors began to criticize Korean literature in earnest since the 1960s. In particular, the composition and perspective of national literature-world literature, which have been continuously discussed in the academic journal, cannot be irrelevant to the prosperity of the branch of comparative literature. In the 1970s, after liberation, first-generation Korean writers such as Kim Dong-wook created an opportunity to systematize the theory and methodology of foreign literature research through the Korean Comparative Literature Society (1959). The institutional search and practice of renewing the status of Korean literature in the unit of comparative literature was due to the judgment that the complex of acceptance of foreign literature has been overcome to some extent. In the history of Korean intelligence, the sad imagination and discourse of world literature and Korean literature were possible by a third world perspective. From the center of Western literature, the possibility of world literature can only be discussed in the vertical relationship between propagation and acceptance, but from a third world perspective, Korean literature and world literature have a horizontal relationship. For this reason, Baek Nak-cheong explained that literature in developed countries is part of potential third-world literature, and then stressed that what is popular is the universality of world literature. However, for Kim Woo-chang, the inherent universality assumed in the third world theory is only an aesthetic imagination. The universality of literature is understood as a totality that is not fixed than the relationship and structure of national literature-world literature itself. The literature theory of those who aimed for world literature and its issues persisted as a possibility and method of universalizing the backwardness of Korean literature. It would not be an exaggeration to say that the efforts to converge into totality and institutional and discourse practices that resist structural contradictions were operated from the perspective of backwardness. 이 글은 2021년에 한국의 국제적 위상이 개발도상국에서 선진국 그룹으로 격상되었다는 소식을 접하며 (탈)후진성에 대한 문학적 논의를 재론한 것이다. 한국에 대한 선진국의 지위 결정은 운크타드(UNTAD, 유엔무역개발회의) 회원국의 범주와 기준에 따른 결과인데, 이후부터 ‘제3세계’ 개념이 상용되고 (탈)후진국의 심상지리가 공고해졌다. 이러한 제3세계론의 붐 현상을 살피기 위해 지금까지 민족문학과 외국문학 담론의 지형과 성격을 살폈다. 이는 1960년대 이후 외국문학 전공자들의 한국문학 비평이 본격화되면서 해방후 1세대 국문학자와 외국문학자들이 한국문학의 탈후진성의 과제에 천착해 담론과 매체를 마련하는 과정과 중첩된다. 특히 학술장에서 지속적으로 논의된 민족문학-세계문학의 구도 및 시각은 비교문학이라는 분과 학문의 번성과 무관할 수 없는데, 1970년대에 이르러 김동욱 등의 해방후 1세대 국문학자들은 <한국비교문학회>(1959)을 통해 외국문학 연구의 이론과 방법론을 체계화하는 계기를 만든다. 비교문학의 단위에서 국문학의 위상을 갱신하는 제도적 모색과 실천은 외국문학의 수용에 대한 콤플렉스가 어느 정도 극복되었다는 판단 때문이었다. 한국 지성사에서 세계문학과 한국문학의 유비적 상상 및 담론은 제3세계적 시각에 의해 가능한 일이었다. 서구문학 중심에서 보면 전파와 수용의 수직적 관계에서만 세계문학의 가능성을 논의할 수 있지만, 제3세계적 시각에서 보면 한국문학과 세계문학은 수평적인 관계를 이룬다. 그런 까닭에 백낙청은 선진국의 문학을 잠재적인 제3세계 문학의 일부라고 설명한 후 민중적인 것이야말로 세계문학의 보편성이라고 강조했다. 반면 김우창에게 제3세계론에서 상정된 내재하는 보편성이란 하나의 미적 가상에 불과하다. 세계문학을 지향한 이들의 문학론과 그 쟁점은 한국문학의 후진성을 보편화의 가능성이자 방법으로서 지속되었다. 전체성으로 수렴되기 위한 노력과 구조적인 모순에 저항하는 제도적, 담론적 실천이란 탈후진성의 시각에서 작동된 것이라 해도 과언이 아닐 것이다.

제3세계의 개념과 인식(1945~1990)

박연희 상허학회 2019 상허학보 Vol.56 No.-

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the awareness of the Cold War by intellectuals who has constituted the narratives of post-colonial identity, especially, trying to trace the formation process of various different subjects and discourses from the perspective of the Third World. Therefore, through the multi-layered courses, that is, all aspects of the notion and awareness of the Third World, that question that the idea of world peace at the age of liberation in a narrow sense and the impact of the Third World and its buildup of worldhood on the and academic and literary circle after 1970s in a broad sense was discussed in detail. The One World by W. L. Willkie published on Shincheonji in 1946 was well-known for its idea of world peace which overcame the ideological confrontation between the Left and the Right during the colonialism. The idea of world peace from the viewpoint of de-westernization was greatly vital in re-recognizing post-colonial discourses of freedom, peace, and equality from the Korean Liberation period to the Korean nationalisms and the American policies on the Third World in 1950s~1960s. In addition, in 1980s~1990s, the discourse of the Third World was perpetuated as an intellectual discourse of the post-Cold War which is expressed as the East-Asian Discourse. 이 논문의 목적은 탈식민적 정체성의 서사를 구성했던 지식인들의 냉전 인식을 재구하는 것이다. 특히 제3세계적 시각에서 여러 상이한 주체와 담론의 형성 과정을 역추적하고자 한다. 따라서 제3세계 개념과 인식의 제(諸)양상이라는 다층적인 경로를 통해 좁게는 해방기 세계평화론, 넓게는 1970년대 이후 학술과 문학 영역에서 제3세계의 영향과 그 세계성의 구축이라는 문제를 상론했다. 1946년 『신천지(新天地)』에 소개된 웬델 루이스 윌키(W. L Willkie)의 『하나의 세계(The One World)』(1943)는 좌우 이념을 극복하는 세계평화론으로 해방기에 널리 회자되었다. 탈서구 중심의 세계평화론은 해방기부터 1950~1960년대 한국의 민족주의, 미국의 제3세계 정책 등에 이르기까지 자유, 평화, 평등 담론의 탈식민성을 재인식하는 데에 중요하다. 그리고 1980~1990년대에 이르면 제3세계론은 동아시아론으로 표방되는 탈냉전 지식담론으로 토착화된다. 제3세계 개념은 종속이론, 사회구성체 이론 등 변혁적 사회이론이 급증하는 시기에 일련의 비판에 직면하며 그 역사적 시효를 다한다. 동아시아론까지 포함해 제3세계론은 냉전 이념에 내재된 서구 중심주의를 적극적인 비판의 대상으로 삼아 왔다. 이 담론적 가치는 비서구 지역의 탈식민기 과정을 보다 넓은 상관관계 속에서 보여주는 것이며, 그런 의미에서 제3세계는 여전히 한국 지식인이 냉전의 양극시대를 극복하고자 개발한 지정학적 대상이자 영역으로 남아 있다. 해방기부터 한국에서 지속적으로 원용된 제3세계의 개념과 인식은 탈냉전 이후 글로벌한 전환기가 초래한 지식장의 변천과 관련하여 재조명될 필요가 있다.

"Chutnificating" National Allegory: Rushdie's Midnignt's Children

김경숙 한국영어영문학회 2008 영어 영문학 Vol.54 No.3

This essay examines Fredric Jameson’s argument of “Third-World literatures as national allegories” by investigating Salman Rushdie’s novel Midnight’s Children, which has often been interpreted as an allegory of national history of post-colonial India. As the Indian Subaltern Studies Group’s example indicates perfectly, in the era of post-colonialism, narrations of histories from the perspective of Third-World countries themselves often contest Eurocentric historiographies and call for a revision/reinterpretation of history/historicism itself. Salman Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children can be read as an attempt to write a history for post-colonial India from the perspective of post-colonial India. More importantly, however, Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children as an alternative historiography critiques Eurocentric concept of not only individual identity but also national identity/history, based on the mirage of monism, homogeneity, and authenticity. On the one hand, Rushdie provides an alternative historicism by endowing his writing with a trope of “pickling” or “chutnification” of history. This “chutnification of history” is a process of writing history from the perspective of the post-colonial Third World outside the Eurocentric historicism as an alternative historiography. One of the most outstanding tropes of Rushdie’s peculiar history-writing can be found in his entwining of personal story with national history. Throughout the novel, history is personalized or individualized; individual’s lives are historicized. On the other hand, Rushdie’s alternative historiography becomes more significant through its blatant questioning of essence, homogeneity, and authenticity. Transcending the myth of authenticity and homogeneity along with the binary oppositions of white/black, men/women, and authentic/ inauthentic, Rushdie presents “multiplicity” as the potential discourse for post-independence India. After all, Rushdie’s project in Midnight’s Children does not just provide a tidy historiography for India as a national allegory. Rather, it disrupts all forms of orthodoxy, authenticity, and homogeneity in historicism and identity politics beyond the question of First World or Third World. This essay examines Fredric Jameson’s argument of “Third-World literatures as national allegories” by investigating Salman Rushdie’s novel Midnight’s Children, which has often been interpreted as an allegory of national history of post-colonial India. As the Indian Subaltern Studies Group’s example indicates perfectly, in the era of post-colonialism, narrations of histories from the perspective of Third-World countries themselves often contest Eurocentric historiographies and call for a revision/reinterpretation of history/historicism itself. Salman Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children can be read as an attempt to write a history for post-colonial India from the perspective of post-colonial India. More importantly, however, Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children as an alternative historiography critiques Eurocentric concept of not only individual identity but also national identity/history, based on the mirage of monism, homogeneity, and authenticity. On the one hand, Rushdie provides an alternative historicism by endowing his writing with a trope of “pickling” or “chutnification” of history. This “chutnification of history” is a process of writing history from the perspective of the post-colonial Third World outside the Eurocentric historicism as an alternative historiography. One of the most outstanding tropes of Rushdie’s peculiar history-writing can be found in his entwining of personal story with national history. Throughout the novel, history is personalized or individualized; individual’s lives are historicized. On the other hand, Rushdie’s alternative historiography becomes more significant through its blatant questioning of essence, homogeneity, and authenticity. Transcending the myth of authenticity and homogeneity along with the binary oppositions of white/black, men/women, and authentic/ inauthentic, Rushdie presents “multiplicity” as the potential discourse for post-independence India. After all, Rushdie’s project in Midnight’s Children does not just provide a tidy historiography for India as a national allegory. Rather, it disrupts all forms of orthodoxy, authenticity, and homogeneity in historicism and identity politics beyond the question of First World or Third World.

비평논문 : 홉스봄의 시선: 제국주의와 "제3세계"

김택현 ( Taek Hyeon Kim ) 영국사학회 2013 영국연구 Vol.30 No.-

마르크스주의 역사가 홉스봄에게 제국주의는 비서구 영토에 대한 서구의 정치적, 경제적, 문화적 침탈 이전에 단일한 세계 경제의 확립이었고, 제국주의에 의한 식민 지배는 세계사의 일부일 뿐이었다. 또한 그는 유럽에서 러시아 혁명이 발발하기 전까지 서구의 식민 지배에 대한 식민지민들의 저항을 시대착오적인 것으로 간주한다. 홉스봄은 제국주의의 역사적 경험을 공유한 ‘제3세계’가 제2차 세계대전 이후의 냉전기에 서구 자본주의 경제의 유례없는 성장에 힘입어 비로소 경제발전을 이루어내고 근대 세계로 진입하게 되었다고 주장한다. 아울러 ‘제3세계’는 사회혁명의 가능성이 상실된 서구와 달리 사회혁명의 가능성을 보여준 곳이었고, 그 사회혁명은 자본주의적 근대로의 전환을 위한 것이었다고 규정한다. 제국주의와 ‘제3세계’에 대한 홉스봄의 이러한 시선은 마르크스주의적인 것이라기보다는 역사 과정을 전근대로부터 서구적 근대로의 발전이라는 단일한 과정으로 보고 있는 서구 중심적인 부르주아적 근대주의자, 발전주의자의 시선이며, 그러한 시선 하에서 ‘제3세계’는 늘 서구에 뒤처지고 서구를 뒤따라가는 서구의 ‘타자’ 자리에 위치한다. Hobsbawm, a world-famous Marxist historian, suggests that the rapid development and expansion of capitalism led to the formation of the world history in the late nineteenth century after the modern world had been shaped by the Industrial Revolution and the French Revolution. He understands imperialism, above all, as a moment of the creation of a single global economy, even if he recognizes it was employed as a common policy by European governments to occupy and exploit the territories of the non-West. In this context, he considers imperial colonialism as a small part of the course of the world history. Moreover, for him, the anti-colonial struggles in the non-Western world in the period prior to the Russian Revolution were just anachronic because they were far from being a step for modernity. Hobsbawm argues that ‘the Third World’ countries had been in a state of underdevelopment due to the colonial dominance of the West for a long time, but some of those backward countries finally experienced the transition from pre-modern to modern world in the midst of unprecedented growth and prosperity of capitalist economy in the era of Cold War. But he deplores that social revolutions were no longer possible in the West. For him, ‘the Third World’ was a substitute of the West or a supplementary place because the possibility of social revolution remained only in ‘the Third World’. Ironically enough, however, the celebrated Marxist historian expects not a counter-capitalist or socialist revolution but a kind of bourgeois one in ‘the Third World’. His eyes on imperialism and ‘the Third World’ are thus focused on Eurocentrism, capitalist development and modernization all of which undergird much of his thought of history itself. According to these ways of thinking, history is a linear, singular, and universal course of development from pre-modern to Western-styled modern eras. That is, all of regional histories in the globe are understood as local versions of European history in spite of their own historical temporalities and cultural differences. In his historical thought, ‘the Third World’ is forced to be positioned as the subordinated ‘Other’ of the West.

『사상계』의 「움직이는 세계」에 나타난 리저널리즘의 계보와 트랜스내셔널/로컬의 젠더

김복순 한국문학이론과비평학회 2020 한국문학이론과 비평 Vol.88 No.-

"Umjigineun Segeo(Moving World's events)" is a fixed column in the form of a "special" column, which maintained from No. 27 (1955.10) to No. 161 (66.9) in the Magazine "Sasanggye". As you can see from the phrase 'moving world,' this special column did not see the 'world' as a fixed object. In other words, we saw the relationship between transnational/local and Regionalism fluidly. It was confirmed that 'the concurrency of world history' and ‘specificity’ were confirmed. "Sasanggye" became the ‘world’ ‘critic’ by itself through "Umjigineun Segeo“ It could have roughly five genealogy concerning regionalism. In the first genealogy, almost as the formula, anti-Communism worked as a priority, leading to a tendency for Third World Regionalism to be ‘deleted.’ Regionalism was functioning as a platform for anti-Communism. A bad woman frame was used. The frame reflects the special characteristics of Korea, which is connected to the division of Korea under the global Cold War system. In the second genealogy, the sexual metaphor of liberalism / communism = human / non-human = masculinity / feminity was derived under the ‘priority of cold war theory.’ It was established as masculinity to prevent communism and protect the free world, and it was assumed that only men were the subjects that could achieve a democratic society. The reason for "Umjigineun Segeo" for neutrality (neutralization) is complexed. The 'complexity of gaze' has been identified. Gender diversity reflected the ‘American’ and decolonist views colliding and navigating. It was also interpreted that the conventional genderization did not settle because the situation in neutral countries was fluid. In the fourth genealogy, which showed the priority of development, transnational resistance was seen, but was very few in number, and rather ‘the American gaze’ was overwhelmingly shown. In the fifth genealogy in which ‘Korea’ was included as the ‘world’ category, the perception that the third world was "equivalent" to the U.S. and the Soviet Union was expressed. Ironically, it has confirmed that development theory has enabled a new form of anti-colonialism and anti-imperialism. The fourth and fifth genealogies were masculine. "Umjigineun Segeo" shows the unfortunate combination of third world theory and gender, development theory and gender. 「움직이는 세계」는 『사상계』의 ‘특집’ 형태의 고정란으로서, 27호(1955.10)부터 161호(66.9)까지 유지되었다. 여기서는 ‘세계’를 고정된 대상으로 보지 않았다. 「움직이는 세계」를 매개로 『사상계』는 스스로 ‘세계’ ‘비평가’가 된다. 「움직이는 세계」의 가장 큰 특징은 ‘세계사적 동시성’과 ‘구체성’이다. 「움직이는 세계」는 리저널리즘과 관련하여 대략 5계보로 나눌 수 있었다. 첫 번째 계보에서는 거의 공식처럼, 반공주의가 우선성으로 작동하면서 제3세계 리저널리즘이 ‘삭제’되고 있었다. 리저널리즘이 반공주의를 위한 플랫폼으로 기능하고 있었으며, ‘반제’가 약화되어 있어 ‘아시아의 재중심화’는 요원한 과제가 된다. ‘나쁜 여자 프레임’이 활용되고 있었으며, 여성은 반공이란 대의를 위해 ‘성애화된 몸’이 되거나, 공산주의 이념을 ‘텅 빈 이데올로기’로 만들기 위해 ‘동원’된 도구에 불과했다. 나쁜 여자 프레임은 세계냉전체제 -분단한국의 한국적 특수성을 반영한다. 두 번째 계보에서는 ‘냉전론 우선성’ 아래 트랜스로컬리티보다 트랜스내셔널리티에 침윤되어 있었다. 자유/공산=인간/비인간=남성성/여성성의 성적 은유가 도출되어 있었으며, 공산주의를 막고 자유세계를 지키는 일이 남성성으로 자리매김되어 있었다. 남성의 국가책임자 역할이 ‘남성성’의 주요한 물적 토대임을 지시해 주고 있으며, 국가·사회의 안보가 ‘젠더 문제’로 환원되어 있었다. 중립(화)에 대한 「움직이는 세계」의 사유는 중층적이었다. ‘시선의 복합성’이 확인되는 바, 탈식민화 시선일 때는 현명한 태도로, 공산주의와 관련될 때는 부정적으로, 강한 아시아로 묘사될 때는 ‘공존’을 강조하였다. ‘중립-공산주의’일 때는 ‘여성’으로, 탈식민화와 ‘강한 아시아’의 경우 ‘남성’으로 젠더화되어 있었다. 이러한 젠더의 다양성은 ‘미국적’ 시선과 탈식민적 시선이 충돌·길항하는 양상을 반영하는 것이었다. 중립국의 정세가 유동적인 탓에 관습적인 성별 젠더화가 정착하지 않은 것으로 해석되었다. 발전론 우선성을 보인 네 번째 계보에서는 트랜스로컬의 저항이 목도되지만 숫적으로 매우 적었다. ‘미국의 시선’이 압도적이었음에도 종속적 사유에 매몰되어 있다고 볼 수 없었다. ‘한국’이 ‘세계’ 범주로 포함된 다섯 번째 계보에서는 제3세계가 미·소와 ‘대등’하다는 인식이 표출되었다. 여기서는 통일론을 유보하고, 반공을 넘어 ‘승공’을 지향하고 있었다. ‘제3세계-한국’은 미국식 발전모델을 수용하면서도 자신의 정체성을 송두리째 몰수당하지는 않았다. 이러한 사실은 아이러니하게도 발전론이 새로운 형태의 반식민주의·반제국주의를 가능케 했다는 점을 확인시켜 준다. 네 번째와 다섯 번째 계보는 남성젠더적이었다. 『사상계』의 일반논문과 달리 보수화되어 있었으며, 이중적이고 모순된 태도를 지니고 있었다. 「움직이는 세계」를 통해 『사상계』는 ‘세계’의 ‘비평가’가 되어 보려는 의지를 드높였지만, 여성은 ‘그림자’에 불과했으며, 그 이름마저 ‘빼앗긴’ 상태였다. 「움직이는 세계」는 제3세계론과 젠더, 발전론과 젠더의 불행한 결합을 보여주었다. 이로써 발전론의제와 젠더의제의 통합은 훗날의 과제로 미뤄지게 된다.

글로벌 시대의 서발턴: 제3세계 여성난민들

이효선 한국동서비교문학학회 2023 동서 비교문학저널 Vol.- No.63

Exit West by Mohsin Hamid and How I Became a North Korean by Krys Lee are refugee novels set in different regions and cultures; however, they both expose the subaltern status of refugee women from the Third World. The protagonists of both works are two refugee women, Nadia and Jangmi, who, as women, are hopeful for sexual liberation and the liberation of the First World. However, while they are only viewed as vulnerable subjects and victims of local patriarchy, their other identity as refugees from the Third World lacks agency and suffers from alienation when they are subjected to prejudices against refugees. In other words, the new society is an ambivalent space for them that, on the one hand, affords them as women to enjoy greater sexual liberation and freedom than the society they came from. On the other hand, as refugees from Third World countries, however, they are expected to remain mute in the face of discrimination, prejudiced language, and hostile looks. To avoid experiencing worst-case scenarios such as deportation, their best option is to express inexhaustible gratitude for what they have been given and strive to be flawlessly assimilated subjects, while ignoring their refugee identity, which suffers from injustice. Being exposed to the dilemma of having to live with their divided selves and being unable to speak about their problems, Nadia and Jangmi share the question Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak raised about the Third World woman: Can the subaltern speak? This paper endeavors to contextualize the refugee experiences of Nadia and Jangmi in relation to Spivak's question about the Third World woman. The paper will then contend that refugee women from the Third World are invisible subalterns as the symbol of the world’s inequality which still exists in the so-called more equally globalized world. .

중국의 영향력 균형(balance of influence) 전략과 제3세계 외교: 과거의 경험, 그리고 오늘날의 함의

김예경 세종연구소 2010 국가전략 Vol.16 No.1

Recently China strengthens charm offensive diplomacy toward the third world. The development of this aggressive diplomacy was perceived as a challenge for the United States' influence on international society. China's such third world diplomacy can be characterized as a great powers' balance of influence strategy that aims to increase influence in the third world. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate China's third world diplomacy in the concept of "balance of influence", and reevaluate China's third world diplomacy in the past within this framework. As a result, this paper will show that China's diplomacy today toward the third world is not different from the past from the respect of its goal and intention. Accordingly neighboring countries states has to make a effort to identify between diplomatic rhetoric and substance. 최근 들어 중국은 제3세계에 대한 외교적 공세를 강화하고 있다. 제3세계에 대한 중국의 적극적인 외교의 전개는 국제사회에 대한 미국의 영향력에 도전으로 인식되는 것이기도 하다. 중국이 제3세계 외교를 강화하고 있는 목적과 의도는 무엇인가. 본 연구는 중국의 제3세계 외교의 주요 목적을 강대국들이 추구하는 영향력 균형 전략으로 규정한다. 그리고 이러한 분석 시각으로 냉전시기 중국의 제3세계 외교의 전개과정과 결과를 재검토해보고, 과거의 경험이 오늘날에 갖는 함의를 도출해 보는 것을 주요 목적으로 한다. 냉전시기 중국이 제3세계 외교가 주변 강대국과 (패권적 의도가 내재된) 영향력 균형의 추구를 특징으로 했던 것처럼, 오늘날 중국의 제3세계 외교에도 이러한 전략적 목적과 의도가 내재되어 있을 수 있다. 실제로 최근 국제사회는 소프트 파워와 같은 다양한 외교적 수단을 이용한 강대국들 간의 치열한 영향력 경쟁이 전개될 가능성이 높아지고 있다. 따라서 주변 약소국들은 공정한 시각과 외교적 자율성을 가지고 이들 강대국들의 외교적 수사와 실제를 구별하려는 노력이 필요하다.