평양부(협의)회의 동상이몽과 부영전기 ‘재사영화’(1927~1937)

주동빈(JOO, DONGBIN) 역사학회 2020 역사학보 Vol.0 No.248

This article examines why the municipalization of electricity in Pyongyang was the financial basis for local self-government, and how local wealthy men, who had restricted suffrage during the colonial period, recognized municipalized electricity in colonial Korea. First, this article analyzes Pyongyang electricity as, even during the municipalized period, subordinate to the affiliate of the Oriental Colonization Company, focusing on power charges and enterprise forms. Second, this singular decision to municipalize electricity in colonial Korea (1927) was difficult to reverse for the Government-General, but the process of re-privatization (1937) showed the limit/critical point of “public opinion” in the municipal assembly of colonial Korea. Finally, during the municipalized period, local opinion was divided and unable to oppose re-privatization. Generally, in Pyongyang, local wealthy Japanese sought to lower other taxes by opposing lower power rates. Korean capitalists pursued lower power rates more than municipalization, but Korean lawyers agreed to use power rates as “social policy.” In the 1930s, Korean-language newspapers, managed by Korean elites and associating with local opinion, aggressively defended municipalized electricity in Pyongyang as the financial basis for local self-governance. However, they could not win on an uneven playing field.

1920년대 경성부 상수도 생활용수 계량제 시행과정과 식민지‘공공성’

주동빈(Joo, Dongbin) 한국사연구회 2016 한국사연구 Vol.- No.173

한국근대사 2세대 연구자의 식민지 부르주아 연구 총결산 -이승렬, 『근대 시민의 형성과 대한민국』, 그물, 2021-

주동빈(Joo, Dong bin) 독립기념관 한국독립운동사연구소 2022 한국독립운동사연구 Vol.- No.78

『조선의 농촌위생』(1940)의 조선 농촌 여성노동력 인식 다시 읽기 ― 부제(副題) ‘사회위생학적 조사’의 해명을 중심으로

주동빈 ( Joo Dongbin ) 한국사회사학회 2020 사회와 역사 Vol.0 No.126

『조선의 농촌위생』(1940년 출간)은 조선 농촌에 대한 의학부 학생들의 ‘사회위생학’적 조사의 결과물이었다. 조선인이 중심이 되어 쓰인 이 연구는, 조선을 주로 일본·중국과 비교하였다. 특히 농촌 여성들과 접촉하기 위해서 조선인 여자의학 전문학교 학생들도 참여했다. 저자들은 도시/농촌과 남성/여성을 달리 분석했다. 조선 농촌 여성 중 어머니/아내는 출산 전후에 휴식 없이 일하는 ‘가정노예’의 상태에 있다고 분석했다. 또한 농촌의 빈곤 속에서 외지돈벌이가 일상화되었고, 외지돈벌이를 나간 딸들의 반수는 ‘행방불명’이라지만 실제는 ‘인신매매’되었으리라 보았다. 저자들은 식민지 조선 농촌 여성노동력의 위상을 동아시아적 특성으로서 ‘가정노예’와 ‘인신매매’로 인식하면서도, 비교 연구를 통해 일본 본국 정부의 여성노동에 대한 ‘제도적 교정’을 염두에 두면서 조선 내의 제도적 ‘부재’를 암시했다. 식민지 조선농촌의 여성이 가진 ‘젠더적·계급적 위치’를 볼 때, 1936년의 이 조사 중 당대인이 인식한 ‘가정노예론’과 ‘행방불명=인신매매’론은 주목된다. Rural Hygiene of Chosun (1940) was the result of a “social hygiene” survey of medical students. Conducted primarily by Koreans, the study compared colonial Korea with Japan and China. The inclusion of Korean female medical students provided close contact with women in rural areas. The researchers used different methods of analyzing urban/rural areas and men/women. They analyzed the mother/wife of rural regions of colonial Korea premised on “household slavery”: working without a break before and after childbirth. They asserted that “migrant working” (出稼労働) tied to rural poverty, where half of the daughters were of a “missing population” of those who were victims of human-trafficking. The authors recognized rural female labor in colonial Korea as household slaves and human-trafficking victims (a characteristic often affixed to East Asian countries). However, through comparative studies, the use of phrases in the study suggests that they were keen on the absence of labor laws in colonial Korea while aware of Japan’s institutional efforts and “improvement” of women’s labor. Given the gender and class of women in rural areas of colonial Korea, it is worth noting that contemporaries in 1936 accepted the concept of “household slavery” and the interpretation of missing populations as human-trafficking

「平壤對岸市街計畫」의 중단(1919~1923)과 조선인 시가 우선 개발로의 귀결

주동빈(Joo Dongbin) 도시사학회 2021 도시연구 Vol.- No.28

「平壤對岸市街計畫」은 오늘날 동평양에 대한 식민지기 평양의 첫 교외 시가계획이었다. 첫째, 식민지 조선에서 원산도시계획안(1921)보다 앞선 것이었다. 계획은 당대 만철부속지 및 도쿄·오사카 등을 참고했고, 주요 재원은 대일본제당 등 대기업 대상의 부 영업세였다. 둘째, 남만주철도㈜의 조선철도 위탁경영기(1917~25) 평원선 계획과, 동양척식㈜계 회사 조선전기흥업의 무연탄 채취, 화력발전, 황산암모늄 생산 계획과 맞닿아 있었다. 조선인을 의식했지만, 위치상 일본인 대기업과 일본인을 위한 계획이었다. 셋째, 반면 제국·조선 단위에서 만철의 조선철도 합병 실패와 평원선 노선 변동, 전흥의 황산암모늄 생산 실패, 대일본제당 등 대기업의 부역 편입 반대 청원 과 재원 부족, 수해 등 연쇄적 엇박자가 났다. 대신 새로운 평원선 연선이며 개발비용이 낮다는 이유로, 1929년 조선인 시가 인근의 서평양 교외 시가계획이 먼저 이루어졌다. The “Pyongyang Opposite Shore Town Plan” or “East Pyongyang” as it is known today, was the first suburban town plan of Pyongyang during the colonial period. This plan preceded the Wonsan City Plan (1921) in colonial Korea. Town plans in the South Manchuria Railway (SMR) Zone, Tokyo, and Osaka were used as references. Its main financial resources were municipal business taxes for large companies like Dai-Nippon Sugar (DNS). It was linked to the Pyongwon Line plan during SMR’s consignment management of the Chosen Government Railway (Sentesu), and the Chosen Denki Kogyo Company (CDKC)— the affiliate of the Oriental Development Company—aiming to collect anthracite, develop thermal power, and produce ammonium sulfate. The plan considered Korean people living in Pyongyang. However, it was purposely planned for large Japanese companies and the Japanese people. The plan had many flaws such as SMR’s failure to merge the Sentesu, causing the change in the Pyongwon Line route, CDKC’s failure to produce ammonium sulfate, the lack of financial resources caused by the opposition of the DNS, and damage caused by floods. Instead of this plan, proximity to the new Pyongwon Line and low development costs led to the implementation of the suburban town plan in 1929 near the Korean district that is West Pyongyang today.

3·1운동 초기 경성시위에 대한 세대론적 분석

주동빈(Joo Dongbin) 연세대학교 국학연구원 2018 동방학지 Vol.184 No.-

본고는 3·1운동 초기 경성시위에서 지식인들의 세대별 운동방식에 나타난 ‘비동시성의 동시성’을 고찰했다. 조선인 지식인들에게 3·1운동은 식민지기 예외적인 ‘기동전적 상황’이었다. 경성은 식민권력의 정치적·물리적 무게중심이자 인쇄소·학교가 밀집한 공론의 중심지이기도 했다. 이 점에서 초기 경성시위는 조선인 지식인들에게 ‘공통경험’의 발원지였다. 청년 지식인으로서 ‘在京학생’은 능동적으로 대중시위를 조직하고 지도했다. 그들은 기숙사·하숙집·교회 등 ‘집합적 생활공간’에서 시위를 모의했다. 또한 1일 행진시 덕수궁에서 조의를 표하거나 각국 영사관에 독립의 의사를 전달하기도 했지만, 행렬을 지휘하면서 총독부 청사로 행진을 시도했다. 또한 2차 시위인 5일 시위에서는 종로에서 모이지 않고 ‘경성의 현관’인 남대문역(현재 서울역)에서 군중을 모았다. 그리고 비록 남대문에서 저지되었지만, 총독부 청사를 향했던 것으로 보인다. 반면 1일 시위 이후에도 기성세대 지식인으로서 ‘京中유림’과 ‘在京유력자’들은 대중시위를 조직하기보다 소위 ‘민족대표 33인’의 운동방식에 규정되었다. 학생 2차시위가 있던 5일 ‘京中유림’은 청량리 고종 반우식에서 순종에게 복위를 요청하는 상소문을 올렸다. 그러나 총독부 경찰이 두려워했던 것은 낭독으로 인한 ‘대중 선동’이었다. 12일 조선민족대동단의 규합하에 일부 목사, ‘京中유림’이 일으킨 장서 사건도, ‘33인’의 후계자를 자임하며 총독에게 청원서를 바치고 불특정 군중에게 자신들의 대의를 호소했다. ‘청년-학생’들의 ‘대중시위’ 조직과 지도는 초기 경성시위의 중요한 특징이었고, 이 점에서 종래 기성세대 중심의 공론 형성은 3·1운동을 분기점으로 중대한 전환점을 맞이했다. 그점에서 ‘3·1운동 세대’의 등장을 논할 수 있다. 다만 3·1운동 당시의 청년은 그 이후의 청년은 아니었다. 이후 지식인들은 한반도 내의 정치체와 대중의 역할을 두고 분화했다. This article considered ‘the contemporaneity of the uncontemporary’ that appeared in the intellectuals’ generational campaign methods during the Kyongsong(京城) demonstration at the beginning of the March 1st Independence Movement. This movement was an exceptional ‘maneuver warfare situation’ during the colonial period. Kyongsong was the colonial power’s political and physical center as well as the center of public opinions. Students structured and supervised a public demonstration. They plotted a demonstration in ‘collective living spaces’ like dormitories, boarding houses, and churches. And they attempted to march to the Governor-General Building on March 1st, and it seems like they were heading there on 5th. But even after the demonstration on March 1st, Confucian scholars and influential figures in Kyongsong were defined by the demonstration method of ‘the 33 Korean leaders’ as the intellectuals of the older generation, instead of staging a mass demonstration. Consequently, the traditional formation of public opinions around the older generation met its critical turning point. It is possible to discuss the emergence of ‘the generation of the March 1st Independence Movement.’ Yet, the youth during this movement were not the same as the youth thereafter. Since then, the intellectuals were divided based on the political system and the roles of the public within the Korean peninsula.

조선총독부 4대 도시계획서(1930~1931)와 對岸 市街 치수

주동빈(Joo, Dong-Bin) 고려사학회 2024 한국사학보 Vol.- No.95

수돗물 분배의 정치경제학 : 1920년대 경성의 계층별 수돗물 사용량 변화와 수돗물 필수재 담론의 정치성

주동빈 ( Joo Dongbin ) 역사문제연구소 2017 역사문제연구 Vol.21 No.2

The supply of tap water was the largest enterprise run by city administrations in colonial Korea. Amidst general changes in colonial governance, Kyongsungbu(the colonial Seoul City) ― the center of the colonial public sphere ― introduced the Residential Water Metering System in September 1924. The “regressive” nature of the metering system ren-dered it class-discriminatory. The change in tap water consumption following the new me-tering system diverged among different classes. The evidently wealthy users of home water-pipes and private common taps were consuming about ten cubic meters of water per household every month when the new metering system was introduced. Such a figure was high even by the standards of large cities in Japan. Meanwhile, the amount of water from public taps used by the urban poor decreased drastically. Under the flat-rate pricing scheme, public tap users consumed seven to eight cubic meters of water per household every month. In the new metering system, public tap users were classified into users of “union taps” (those belonging to tap water tax associations) and “the contract work system” (those who purchased water from water sellers). The amount of water consumed monthly by these two groups dropped to four to five and one to two cubic meters per household, respectively. As the latter amount was just enough for drinking water, it had to be supplemented by substitute sources of water such as wells, rivers, and fountains. One colonial police officer went so far as to criticize the metering system as an “unpardonable act” for urban policing. On the other hand, the Korean media interpreted the class-discriminatory consequences of the metering system in the context of ethnic discrimination. Despite their strategic differences, colonial officials who opposed the metering system and the Korean media shared the discourse on tap water as a necessity good on the common assumption that utility provision enhances the authority of colonial governance. However, the conditions of life among the lower classes were distanced from how colonial officials and elites perceived them. Contrary to treaty ports, colonial Seoul was a 'tradi-tional city' with an abundance of substitutes for tap water. Such a spatio-temporal specific-ity of colonial Seoul reduced the plausibility of the discourse on tap water as a necessity good. Still, consumer opinions on whether tap water counts as a necessity good depended on a range of factors such as ethnicity, exposure to western education, the geographic spe-cificity of each city, the presence of a sewage system, and the degree of industrialization, urbanization, and demographic agglomeration. Also, in a context where the access to clean water was gradually being reduced in the process of urbanization, the problem of tap water provision contained the potential to integrate into comprehensive urban movements.