<우연히 엿들은 ‘신령들의 제물 품평’> 설화군의 전승 양상과 그 의미

이지영 동아시아고대학회 2011 동아시아고대학 Vol.0 No.26

필자는 <이성계와 산제>, <부정한 제삿밥>, <복 많은 백정 딸>, <소금장수와 딸> 등을 <우연히 엿들은 ‘신령들의 제물 품평’> 설화군으로 통칭하고, 이들 설화에 공통적으로 <신령 품평>이 결합하고 있음에 주목하였다. 그리하여 각 설화의 전승 양상을 통해 <신령 품평>이 나타나는 모습을 점검하였으며 나아가 ‘부정한 제물’에 대한 신령의 신벌과 제사자의 극복 방식이 개별 설화별로 어떻게 달라지는지 살펴보았다. 우선 이들 설화를 제사자가 어떤 신령에게 제사를 드리는지에 따라 <산신 응감>형(A), <조상신 응감>형(B), <삼신 응감>형(C)으로 크게 나누어 이들의 전승 양상을 점검하였는데, 세 유형 모두에 한 사람이 묘(나무)곁에서 잠을 자다가 ‘신령 간 제물 품평’을 우연히 엿들으며, 부정한 제물로 신령이 제사자에게 화복(禍福)을 점지한다는 내용이 공통적으로 나타났다. 다음으로, <신령 품평>의 서사단락을 7개 단락으로 추출한 뒤 이것이 세 유형에 어떻게 나타나고 있는지 살폈다. 그 결과 ‘다시 제사하기’ 대목(단락4, 5, 6)이 대부분 유형에서 누락되어 있었는데, 이는 신령의 성격, 신벌에 대한 제사자의 의식 등의 차이에서 비롯되었으며 그로 인하여 각 설화 유형의 의미를 생산해내고 있다고 보았다. 그리고 세 설화의 주제를 살피기 위한 작업의 하나로서 제사 목적과, 제사 대상이 되는 신령의 성격을 살폈는데, A형에서는 이성계가 즉위야망으로 산신에 제사를 드리고, B형에서는 죽은 부모에 대해 유교식 기제사를 드리며, C형에서는 신생아와 산모를 보호하는 삼신에게 삼밥을 대접하고 있었다. 그런데 각 유형에 부정한 제물에 대한 신령의 벌이 내려지는데, 이에 대한 제사자의 의식에 따라 신벌의 극복양상이 달랐다. 곧 A형의 경우 이성계는 즉위야망으로 다시 재계하여 제사하기를 감행한 뒤 신령으로부터 ‘삼한차지의 복’을 점지 받고 있지만, B형에서는 제사자가 손자화상의 신벌을 감수하면서 제사를 정성껏 지내야 함을 각성하는 계기로 삼는다는 일군의 자료군(<자손에 해 끼치기>형)과, 신벌과 같은 조상신의 위력을 부정하고 오히려 ‘자식의 화상’을 치유하기 위하여 유교에서 음사로 간주되는 ‘다시 제사하기’를 감행한다는 자료군(<다시 제사하기>형)으로 나뉘고 있었다. 또한 C형에서도 신생아와 산모를 보호하는 삼신에 대한 신앙이 강한 탓에 삼신이 내린 신벌을 극복하기 위한 노력을 하지 못하고 결국 신벌을 받는다는 자료군(<부녀상간>형)과, 신벌을 인지한 뒤 박복한 자식을 ‘복 많은 백정 딸’과 혼인시킴으로써 신벌을 극복하고 있는 자료군(<복 점지>형)으로 나뉘고 있었다. 이러한 신벌과 그 극복의 결과로서 제사자가 겪는 화복의 영역이 세 유형별로 서로 다르니 곧 A형은 이성계의 건국과 즉위에, B형은 가계의 지속에, C형은 개인의 욕망 내지는 먹고살기에 걸쳐 있어서, 결국 화복이 각각 ‘건국 및 즉위 → 가계의 지속 → 개인의 욕망 및 생계유지’에 대응하면서 인간에게 영향을 주고 있는 것이다. 끝으로, 세 유형이 제사설화로서 어떤 특징을 지니는지 살폈는데, 모두 ‘제사를 어떻게 지내야 하는가’ 하는 문제를 제기하고 있었다. 특히 <조상신 응감>형이 ‘제사자의 마음과 제물의 정결함’을 가장 강조하고 있어서 제사의 수신서 역할을 담당하고 있다고 보았다. 또한 그 외 유형에도 제사의 정결함이 강조되고 있었다. 세 유형에 <신령 품평>이 결합하게 된 이유를 살폈는데, 첫째는 제사에서 신령이 흠향과 응감했는지를 알고 싶어 하는 사람들의 소원과 욕망을 해소하는 데 적합하고, 둘째 신령 간 대화를 통해 청자의 미래사를 알 수 있을 것이라는 호기심과 믿음을 충족시켜주고 있어서 여러 설화에 결합할 수 있다고 보았다. The tales, that is, <Lee seong-gye and Sanje>, <Filthy offerings>, <A fortunate daughter of a butcher>, <Salter and Daughter> are called <the overhearing ‘divine spirits' criticism on offerings’> folktale-cycle. This tale-cycle combines <criticism of a divine spirit> tale. This paper tries to investigate patterns of combining <the overhearing ‘divine spirits' criticism on offerings’> folktale-cycle with <criticism of a divine spirit> tale, and explore what those tales display meanings. First, I classify those tales into <Mountain spirit's response>type(A), <Ancestor spirit's response>type(B) and <Sam-sin's response>type(C) according to divine performing a religious service, then explore to traditional patterns of the three types. As a result, the three types all contain that a man overhear ‘divine spirits' criticism on offerings’ near a graveyard(or tree) during sleeping at night, and divine spirits give ‘fortune and misfortune’ to man who hold ancestral rites because of filthy offerings. Next, I extract 7 epic paragraphs out of <criticism of a divine spirit> tale, and explore how paragraphs appear in the three types tale. As a result, most of types except A type miss out ‘re-perform a religious service’ part(i.e., paragraph 4,5,6). I understand that this result is caused by the difference of the divine's characteristic and performer's consciousness for a divine punishment, therefore those three types make a tale's meaning. And, for the purpose of the looking at the theme of <the overhearing ‘divine spirits' criticism on offerings’> folktale-cycle, I explore aim of a religious service and divines' characteristic. This work can be summarized in those aspects : 1) In A type, Lee Seong-gye perform a religious service to Mountain spirit for an accession to the throne, but Mountain spirit don't response his effort because of filthy offerings. Then he dare to re-perform a religious service, and achieve his purpose from Mountain spirit in the end. 2) In B type, a man perform ancestral rite, but ancestor spirit don't response for same reasons like A type and punish his son with fire-hurt. However out of this B type, there are two sub-types according to performer's consciousness for a divine punishment. : B-1 sub-type show that a man realize his wrongs by oneself and receive the divine punishment. And B-2 sub-type show that he don't accept the divine punishment and cure fire-hurt of his son after re-performing ancestral rite. 3) In C type, there are a religious service to Sam-sin(the three gods governing childbirth) in two families. One family's offerings are filthy, the other family's offerings are clean. Therefore Sam-sin don't response offerings of the former and punish performer's son with misfortune to the one, but on the other hand, Sam-sin give a great fortune to daughter of the latter. Finally, I explore the characteristic of 3 types. Those tales all make an issue of how to hold ancestral rites. Especially <Mountain spirit's response>type(A) stress the need of the true heart of performer and the cleanness of offerings, and so does the other types. Two are reason of combining <the overhearing ‘divine spirits' criticism on offerings’> folktale-cycle with <criticism of a divine spirit> tale. : 1) Its tale is suitable for solving the hope and desire that men want to know whether divine spirit receive and response a religious service. 2) Its tale satisfy men's curiosity and belief that can guess their future events by overhearing dialogue between divine spirits.

누가 성령론 이해와 평가 -서구 신약학자를 중심으로

허주 ( Ju Hur ) 아세아연합신학대학교 신학연구소 2014 ACTS 신학저널 Vol.19 No.-

This article has critically reviewed the major Western New Testament scholars’ opinions on the Holy Spirit in Luke-Acts since 1970s. I have presented three representative scholars’ understandings of Lukan pneumatology, particularly on the meaning of receiving the Spirit along with other related issues: (1) J. D. G. Dunn, (2) R. P. Menzies, and (3) M. M. B. Turner. According to Dunn, the reception of the Holy Spirit in Luke-Acts is the matrix of Christian life in a manner similar to that found in John and Paul. In contrast, examining both Luke-Acts and the Jewish intertestamental literature, Menzies argued that Jesus and his disciples received the Spirit not as the Spirit of sonship or of new age or covenant, but as a prophetic donum superadditum (i.e., additional gift after being saved) which enables them to accomplish successfully their appointed tasks. In other words, the Spirit in Luke-Acts can be considered the typical Jewish ‘Spirit of prophecy.’ Interestingly enough (but not convincing to me at least) Menzies distinguished three developments of the concept of the Spirit in the early Church to persuade his position. First, Pauline ‘soteriological pneumatology’ possibly influenced by 1QH and Wisdom literature. Second, ‘charismatic pneumatology’ found in the primitive community as for Mark, Matthew, and Q, which took up the Jewish concept of the ‘Spirit of prophecy,’ yet including miracles of healing and exorcism. Third, ‘prophetic pneumatology’ as the typical Jewish concept of the ‘Spirit of prophecy’ irrespective of miracle function, which was found in the Urgemeinde of the non-Pauline early Church inclusive of Luke-Acts. In many respects, Menzies’ basic thesis reminds me of E. Schweizer’s interpretations. Menzies’ sharp analysis of the typical Jewish concept of the Spirit and its development in early Christianity, however, has been severly questioned by Turner. Turner unlike both Schweizer and Menzies maintained that the Jewish ‘Spirit of prophecy’ was associated with miracles, yet was not related to the power of preaching, a perception later developed in Hellenistic-Jewish Christian circles. Thus, Luke, according to Turner, not only adopted the Jewish Spirit of prophecy, but also modified it. As a result, Luke in light of Turner’s perspective understood that receiving the gift of the Spirit was not a donum superadditum in Christian life. Rather it was the sine qua non (i.e., essential condition) of Christian existence. While agreeing that previous scholarship has meaningfully contributed to Lukan pneumatology, I have also noted that their interpretative methodologies were limited to historical criticism, especially redaction criticism. From this point onwards, critical and responsible readers are called to re-visit this ongoing Lukan subject matter for more nuanced and dynamic understanding. By the way, I as a Korean researcher have provided some major contemporary Korean NT scholars’ viewpoints on Lukanpneumatology in footnotes of this paper.

1930年代 後半 林和의 저널리즘論과 批評

김진희 한국어문교육연구회 2016 어문연구(語文硏究) Vol.44 No.2

This study mainly discusses the criticism by Im Hwa on the issues of journalism since the late1930s, critical consciousness of Im Hwa for contemporary journalism, and alternative directions for the crisis of criticism. Im Hwa suggested the vision of contemporary criticism based on the critical discussion on journalism, and with this point of view, he actually analyzed works and criticisms. Im Hwa put forward a discussion of modern journalism both diachronically and synchronically. While emphasizing the liberal spirit through the study of the history and origins of modern journalism, he criticized the permit system and censoring system of the publications, which was the implied warranty of merchantability by Japan and the commercial according to the expansion of marketability. An examination was conducted into the possibility that those problematic realities had brought the loss of critical spirit that should have been essential characteristics of journalism, and also brought the downfall of the magazine and literary criticism. Im Hwa requested critical agents for a creative spirit of criticism. Therefore, the reason why Im Hwa required creative criticism and a high degree of criticism beyond all reality and works to the critics was that he hoped the literary subjects to find out an answer to history of present day and future. 本 硏究는 1930年代 中半 以後 ‘저널리즘’이라는 問題意識 下에 쓰인 林和의 평문들을 중심으로, 저널리즘의 槪念, 당대 저널리즘에 대한 임화의 批判的 認識, 그리고 批評의 危機에 대한 임화의 代案的 방향 등을 논의했다. 임화는 저널리즘에 대한 비판적 논의를 토대로 당대 비평의 방향을 提言했고, 실제 작품 분석과 비판을 수행했다. 임화는 통시적, 공시적으로 근대 저널리즘 고찰을 통해 자유주의 정신을 강조함으로써 당대 일제의 출판물 허가제나 검열제, 그리고 시장성의 확대에 대한 상업성을 비판한다. 그리고 이런 문제적 현실이 저널리즘의 본질적 특성인 현실 비평정신의 상실과 잡지의 몰락, 그리고 문학 비평의 위기 역시 가져왔다고 진단한다. 임화는 이를 극복할 대안으로 비평 주체의 창조적 비평정신을 강조함으로써 현 시대와 미래 역사에 대한 해답을 문학 주체들이 획득하기를 요청했다. 이런 의미에서 1930년대 후반 임화의 저널리즘에 대한 집중적인 탐구와 논의는 상업적․정치적 저널리즘의 폭력성에 대한 비판이었으며 현실에 대한 비평정신의 회복을 토대로 한, 비평가의 주체적인 세계관과 정신의 복권이었다.

김종원의 영화평론 세계론: 시와 회화의 장 그리고 영화사적 탐구의 영화 비평담론

김수남 영상예술학회 2007 영상예술연구 Vol.11 No.-

한국영화비평계의 비평적 탐색들이 한 시대 현실의 진지한 투영보다 관객의 취향에 부합하여 현란하고 무의미한 유채색 글들로 채색되고 있음을 주시해야 할 것이다. 이러한 혼미한 한국영화비평계에서 세계영화계의 동향에 귀를 기울이면서 우리의 저울대로 한국영화를 평가해 온 아나로그세대의 영화평론가들의 존재는 그나마 위안이 된다. 영화평론가이며 영화사학자인 김종원은 한국영화평론사에서 기억되어야 할 1순위 인물로 한국영화평단의 거산(巨山)으로 칭할만하다. 1950년대 후반 이후 한국영화평론계의 중심에서 활동해 왔던 김종원은 한국영화비평의 지평을 여는 큰 재목이었고 영화평론을 통해 ‘좋은영화 보기운동’ 등 건전한 영화문화운동에 앞장 서 왔다. 대쪽같은 양심의 소리로 무장된 그의 글들은 우리영화가 제기하는 한국영화미학 그리고 한국영화의 발전을 저해하는 제도적인 제 문제에 대해 신랄한 비판과 대안을 제시하였다. 특히 초창기 주요한 한국영화사 정리와 영화사적 관점에서 한국영화의 기틀을 재정립하고자 하는 그의 공로는 크게 평가되어야 할 것이다. 김종원은 1937년 제주도 제주시에서 태어났다. 서예가인 김규형과 안창후 사이에서 6남 4녀 중 장남으로 태어났다. 제주제일중학교 3학년 봄에 “비탈길”이라는 시로 제주신문에 게재되면서 어린 시절 한 때 관심을 끌었던 영화인보다 시인의 꿈을 키우기 시작한다. 오현고등학교를 졸업한 김종원은 서라벌예술대학 문예창작과(초급대)에 입학하여 당대 기라성같은 문인들인 김동리, 서정주, 박목월 등의 강의를 들으며 21세 때 <문학예술> 5월호에 시 두편이 추천되어 정식으로 문단에서 활동을 시작한다. 촬영하러 제주도에 내려온 안종화 감독과 만나 영화계와 가까이할 기회를 갖게 된 그는 <자유공론> 11월호에 영화평론 “한국영화평론의 위기와 과제”를 발표하여 영화비평활동을 시작하였다. 1969년부터 <주간조선>문화담당 기자로 활동한 그는 1975년 유신말기 <자유언론수호를 위한 조선일보 언론자유투쟁위원회>에 참여하다가 파면당한 불운한 시대의 양심있는 지성인이었다. 시대의 아픔을 가슴에 새기며 <한국영화평론가협회>회장, <국제영화비평가연맹>한국본부 회장으로 선임되었던 그는 영화평론가로서 <공연윤리위원회> 영화심의위원, <문화공보부>의 자문위원, 한국연극영화TV예술상, 대종상, 청룡상 등의 영화심사위원으로 참여하여 건전한 한국영화를 지키는 한 몫을 당차게 수행하였다. 김종원의 영화비평정신은 바로 주체적인 한국영화문화에 대한 외침이며 한국영화의 뿌리를 잊지않고 영화사적 관점으로 한국영화의 정체성을 세계에 내세울 것을 추구해 온 한국영화비평계의 진정한 논객이었다. 영화비평의 역할이 무엇인가를 반평생 동안 솔선수범하여 온 그의 평문은 영화작품을 보다 잘 이해하고 반응하는 방법으로서 올바른 정보와 통찰력 있는 관찰에 근거하여 탁월한 언어의 구사력으로 타자와의 차별화를 보인다. 김종원은 영화가 볼만한 가치가 있는가? 하는 문제에 답하는 일종의 소비자 옹호역할을 하는 대중언론 비평의식을 기본으로 한국영화의 총체적이며 역사적 통찰력이 요구되는 비평을 추구하였다. 또한 비평의 기능을 확대하는 비평 형식의 다양하고 질적인 면을 모색한 그의 영화평론은 질 높은 영화문화의 창달을 위한 건전한 문명적 사회성을 강조하였다. 또한 김종원의 주체성있는 영화작가의 부활과 한국영화문화 지킴이로서 비평역할은 영화작품평으로서만 가늠할 수 없다. 긴 논문성격의 시사평문 속에 서술된 그의 글들은 변함없이 건전한 한국영화문화와 영화미학의 정체성을 확립하기 위해 국내외 영화계 현실을 검증하면서 오늘에 이르고 있다. 김종원이 반평생동안 추구해 온 리얼리즘의 화두는 시대정신이요 그 소임을 다하는 영화작가정신의 부활이었다. 한국영화사적 관점에서 한국영화를 바라보고 꾸준히 문제점을 제시하면서 해결적인 대안을 주장한 김종원은 영화사를 통한 교훈의 실천과 미래 한국영화의 모습을 예언하고 있었다. A film critic, Jongwon Kim is a poet and filmhistorian and the last analoggeneration’ s film critic. Also he is the first Korean film critic memorized byKorean film audience and a Great Mountain in the world of Korean film critic. He has actived in the center of Korean film critic world after 1959. His strong declaration of conscience to Korean film world has contributed the development of Korean art film. His film critical essays insisted that Korean film maker and audience keep the healthy Korean film culture. Especially his unique viewpoint of Korean film history has tried to establish the origin form of Korean film. He was born in Jaeju iland. He is interesting in poem in middle school andhigh school. After graduated high school he entered in the depapartment of literature class at Serabal Art College and he was debut as a poet but he has began to active as a film critic after he met a director An, Jonghwa. As a film critic Kim, Jongwon actived a jou rnalist in weekly Chosunilbo but he was dismissed because of meeting a member of group fighting law enacted to control press activities. After this accident he has been active various part such as a president in‘ association of Korean film critic’ and‘ Federation ofInternational film critic’ and also a member in various kind of commiteecontact with film policy or film festival. Jongwon KIm’ s spirit of film critic has pursuited for establishing the identyof Korean film and wealty Korean film culture. He shows different style of film critic by taking various kind of knowledge compare to the other film critic. He has insisted on the ideology of social civilization culture for acompolishing the high quality film culture. He also expect that a special film director with subjectivity will appear. Jongwon Kim who has watched Korean film for long time finally he pursues the spirit of times by viewpoint of Korean film history and restoring film director's spirit.

비평가라는 ‘가면’과 ‘접간(接間)’의 형식: 고석규론

조영복 근대서지학회 2023 근대서지 Vol.- No.27

‘Why doesn’t he cry, isn’t he sentimental?’ prompts a series of questions about ‘why did he write that way’, which is also to ask the essence of Ko Seok-gyu’s criticism and the core of his critical writing. The essence and stylistic uniqueness of his critical writing can be inferred through the concepts of form of ‘connecting space(接間)’ and ‘form of longing’ that Koh Seok-gyu himself mentioned. ‘Longing’ is sentimental, but the form is acquired through overcoming sentimentalism, which reveals the dried characteristics of Ko Seok-gyu’s critical style and the essence of criticism as an essay. For critics who ‘write poetry as prose’, the mask of ‘critic’ works as a hidden persona that enables prose, analytic, and academic criticism. It is linked to his essayistic critical style, which is characterized by the entanglement of metaphors that explain and state the story. Poems with the natural rhythm of Korean spoken language, which contain rhythm, meaning and image, are a prerequisite for poetry with ‘internal grammar’ and at the same time a preliminary condition for ‘self-injected critical style’ for the critic’s ‘urge of longing’. Poets who advanced the structure and rhythm of Korean sentences, such as Kim So-wol, Lee Sang, Yun Dong-ju, and Seo Jeong-ju, were caught in the net of linguistic impulses and formal impulses of Go Seok-gyu. If Ko Seok-gyu’s final ‘longing’ was his act of criticism, it had to be ‘the form of connecting space(接間)’ and ‘the form of mask’. 그는 ‘왜 울지 않는가, 센티멘털하지 않는가?’는 곧 ‘왜 그는 그렇게 썼던가’에 대한 질문을 연쇄적으로 불러오는데, 그것은 고석규 비평의 본질과 그의 비평적 글쓰기의 핵심을 묻는 것이기도 하다. 고석규가 스스로 언급한 ‘접간(接間)의 형식’, ‘동경의 형식’이라는 개념은 그의 비평적 글쓰기의 본질과 문체적 고유성을 관통하고 있다. ‘동경’은 감상적이지만 감상주의의 극복을 통해 형식이 획득되며 이는 고석규 비평문체의 건조주의적 특성과 에세이로서의 비평의 본질을 드러낸다. ‘시를 산문으로 쓰는’ 비평가에게 ‘비평가’라는 가면은 산문적이고 분석적이며 학문적인 비평을 가능하게 한 은닉된 페르소나로 작동하는데, 그것은 시인으로서의 고석규의 존재론의 개입을 용인하면서 또 시적 대상어와 그 대상을 설명, 진술하는 메타어의 착종을 특징으로 한 그의 에세이적 비평문체와 연동되어 있다. 리듬과 의미와 이미지를 품은 우리말구어문장체의 자연스런 리듬을 가진 시들은 ‘내적문법’을 가진 시의 전제조건인 동시에 비평가의 ‘동경의 충동’을 위한 ‘자기투입의 비평문체’의 예비적 조건이다. 우리말 문장의 구조와 리듬을 고도화한 시인들, 김소월, 이상, 윤동주, 서정주 등의 시들이 고석규의 언어적 충동과 형식의 충동의 그물망에 포획왼 이유라 하겠다. 고석규의 최종적인 ‘동경’이 그의 비평행위였다면 그것은 ‘접간형식’이자 ‘가면의 형식’이 아니면 안되었고, 그것이 일제시대 임화, 김기림의 비평 및 비평문체와 차이나는 점이었다.

무(無) 개념에 기반한 고석규 비평의 변모 양상과 그 의미

박찬효 이화여자대학교 한국문화연구원 2006 한국문화연구 Vol.11 No.-

고석규는 1950년대 실존주의를 체화하여 비평의식을 전개하였다는 점에서 중요한 비평가이다. 전쟁 후 고석규는 자신이 놓여진 공간을 폐허로 인식하였으나 그 공간을 '새롭게' 채워 넣기 위해 역설적으로 '무(無)'를 이야기하였다. 고석규의 글은 시간이 흘러감에 따라 에세이적 성격에서 벗어나 개념화·구체화되고 있다. 『초극』에서는 자신의 내면을 여과 없이 토로하는 글쓰기를 통해 '무' 개념을 드러내고 있다면, 「시인의 역설」에서는 일제시대 활동했던 시인들의 작품을 분석하면서 '무' 개념을 '역설의 정신'으로 구체화하고 있다. 그리고 「민족문학의 반성」에 이르러서는 지금까지 논의했던 무 개념에 근거하여 비평가의 위치를 점검하고 전통과 세계성의 조화를 통해 한국현대문학이 나아가야 할 방향을 모색하였다. 『초극』에서 고석규는 여백의 심연을 보기 위해 불길 속으로 자신의 몸을 던지는 엠페도클레스의 충동을 보여주고 있다. 「시인의 역설」에서는 윤동주, 이상 등을 평가한 내용이 이전의 비평문과 달라지고 있다. 그 이유는 고석규가 단순히 작품 분석을 의도한 것이 아니라, 작품 분석을 통해 무(無) 개념을 구체적으로 이론화하여 1950년대 우리 문학의 한 방향을 제시하고자 했기 때문이다. 이러한 비평 정신은 1957~1958년에 쓰여진 글에 그대로 이어지고 있다. 고석규의 비평적 관심은 점점 내면→텍스트 내(內)→텍스트 외(外)로 확장되고 있다. 그러나 그렇다고 해서 고석규의 비평 성격이 완전히 변모되고 있다고 말 하기는 어렵다. 비평의 대상은 확장되고 있지만 고석규의 비평은 본질적으로는 무(無) 개념을 기반으로 하고 있다. 즉 글쓰기 방식은 초기와 후기가 차이를 보이고 있으나, 그의 비평문에 일괄적으로 나타난 핵심적 사상은 '무' 개념이었다고 할 수 있다. 고석규 비평의 중요한 특징 중 다른 하나는 '주제'의 의지를 강조한 것이다. 『초극』에서는 불모의 계절을 이겨낼 수 있는 주체의 열정을, 「시인의 역설」에서는 시적자아의 역설 정신을, 「비평가의 교양」,「현실과 문학인의 자각」 등에서는 비평가의 위치와 실천성을 강조하고 있다. 무(無)는 궁극적으로 유(有)로 나아갈 수 있는 무한한 창조력을 잉태하고 있다. 고석규는 폐허의 공간에서 현대문학이 새롭게 꽃필 수 있는 씨앗 만들기를 꿈꾸었다. 고석규의 비평문이 현실적인 실천력을 근본적으로 보여주고 있다고 보기는 어렵지만 점점 그러한 방향으로 전환하고 있다고 말할 수 있다. His importance lies in the fact that he made existentialism as his own self and expressed his unique consciousness of criticism. Some important facts were found during inquiring into his criticism process. After Korean War, hee recognized space as ruins. Paradoxically, he spoke nothingness to fill out new things in such space. As time passed, his writing escaped from essay style and became conceptualized and embodied. In transcendence(초극), he revealed his concept of nothingness by writing raw vent of his inner mind. In "paradox of poet(시인의 역설)", through analyzing poets who wrote in Japanese colony era, he embodied his concept of nothingness as paradox and spirit of paradox. Also in "reflection of national literature(민족문학의 반성)", he wanted to find ways of Korean modern literature through harmonizing tradition and globalism and by finding position of critics based on hitherto argument based on concept of nothingness. This paper wants to look into minutely and newly early criticism through analyzing his desire in transcendence(초극) with impulse in Empedocles who seeks to abyss in blank. In "paradox of poet(시인의 역설)" this paper pays attention to different time point of evaluation on Yun Dong Ju, Lee Sang compared with his pre criticism on them. Here this paper wants to understand why he provide leading direction in 1950s by not limiting only text but theorizing concept of nothingness. Also this paper revealed the fact that his intention continued in his criticism written in 1957~1958. Whole perspective of his criticism paper clarified the fact that his attention of criticism expanded gradually from his inside to inside the text and from inside the text to outside the text. But the above-mentioned fact did not mean his character of criticism was entirely changed. Although object of his criticism was expanded, his criticism based on concept of nothingness. That is to say, his early writing style is different from latter writing style, practical process was expansion and reproduction of concept of nothingness. Also the important character of his criticism was his focus on willingness of 'subject'. In transcendence(초극) he focused zeal of subject who overcome barren season, in "paradox of poet(시인의 역설)" he focused paradox spirit of poetic selfness, in "culture of critics(비평가의 교양)", "awakening of practice and writer(현실과 문학인의 자각)" he focused position and execution of critics. Ultimately nothingness has everlasting creativity to become existence. He dreamed seed making on new modern literature where ruin space loomed. In conclusion, his criticism writing did not show fundamental and practical execution gradually his writing converted to such direction.

형식주의 비평적 관점에서 본 『무정』

한승옥 한국문학이론과비평학회 2008 한국문학이론과 비평 Vol.41 No.-

This paper looks into Moo Jung from the formalistic point of view. Firstly, the paper looks through in a way of aesthetic configuration if the main idea of Moo Jung is related to the image that new critics carefully observe. Then, it observes conflicts in the novel which is the kernel of the narrative structure focuses on relationships between the character and the times, and that of among characters. Lastly, this paper examines how the symbol which plays an important role as expressing the main idea contributes to the internal meaning of the novel. Moo Jung is structured as a competitive form that the surface theme competes with the internal theme; this structure gives tension to the work. The novel’s narration crosses between a pure image and a regrettable vindictive spirit’s image; those images are opposed to each other. The pure image that is expressed by Lee Hyung-sik and Kim Sun-hyung shows the surface theme while the regrettable vindictive spirit’s image that is expressed by Park Young-chae leads the internal theme and forms the kernel of this work. On the surface, the surface theme led by a pure and vivid image seems to be the mainstream of Moo Jung however, the real one is the internal theme that is led by Park Young-chae’s regrettable vindictive spirit’s image. This fact even attracts readers more. The main conflict appears in Moo Jung is a love triangle. Lee Young-sik, a hero of the novel, smarts between Park Young-chae – obligation for old days – and Kim Sun-hyung – benefit for now –and this forms the main conflict. The next conflict that is found in the work is that of main characters that represent the time they live: the death of Park the officer and his sons, suicide of Wal-hwa, the conflict in Young-chae herself who is a gi-saeng or not, the trouble of Byung-wook, and the trouble of Byung-wook’s brother. These conflicts prop up the main conflict, and make internal meaning of the novel more rich and meaningful. In addition, the conflict result from irony shows in the novel: the frustration on patriots’ (Park the office and his companions) wills of accomplishing national salvation versus the higher reality of people who only seek profits and pleasure. While patriots’ wills end with the frustration, people who only seek profits and pleasure all rise to higher social positions or win in reality. The formation of irony is done by winning of falsehood in a battle of truth and falsehood, and of existence in a battle of reason and existence. Irony occurs in the aspect of the formation in personality by Lee Hyung-sik; he is originally a weak character, but eventually he becomes an accomplisher of strong will for national salvation. Throughout this, heterogeneity between the surface theme and the internal theme shows as a conflict; surface themes are establishment of education in the country and the will of enlightenment, and internal themes are lamentation of Young-chae and grief from the loss of her own country. Finally, the paper discusses how a flood relates to the main theme of the novel on the aspect of symbol. This paper looks into Moo Jung from the formalistic point of view. Firstly, the paper looks through in a way of aesthetic configuration if the main idea of Moo Jung is related to the image that new critics carefully observe. Then, it observes conflicts in the novel which is the kernel of the narrative structure focuses on relationships between the character and the times, and that of among characters. Lastly, this paper examines how the symbol which plays an important role as expressing the main idea contributes to the internal meaning of the novel. Moo Jung is structured as a competitive form that the surface theme competes with the internal theme; this structure gives tension to the work. The novel’s narration crosses between a pure image and a regrettable vindictive spirit’s image; those images are opposed to each other. The pure image that is expressed by Lee Hyung-sik and Kim Sun-hyung shows the surface theme while the regrettable vindictive spirit’s image that is expressed by Park Young-chae leads the internal theme and forms the kernel of this work. On the surface, the surface theme led by a pure and vivid image seems to be the mainstream of Moo Jung however, the real one is the internal theme that is led by Park Young-chae’s regrettable vindictive spirit’s image. This fact even attracts readers more. The main conflict appears in Moo Jung is a love triangle. Lee Young-sik, a hero of the novel, smarts between Park Young-chae – obligation for old days – and Kim Sun-hyung – benefit for now –and this forms the main conflict. The next conflict that is found in the work is that of main characters that represent the time they live: the death of Park the officer and his sons, suicide of Wal-hwa, the conflict in Young-chae herself who is a gi-saeng or not, the trouble of Byung-wook, and the trouble of Byung-wook’s brother. These conflicts prop up the main conflict, and make internal meaning of the novel more rich and meaningful. In addition, the conflict result from irony shows in the novel: the frustration on patriots’ (Park the office and his companions) wills of accomplishing national salvation versus the higher reality of people who only seek profits and pleasure. While patriots’ wills end with the frustration, people who only seek profits and pleasure all rise to higher social positions or win in reality. The formation of irony is done by winning of falsehood in a battle of truth and falsehood, and of existence in a battle of reason and existence. Irony occurs in the aspect of the formation in personality by Lee Hyung-sik; he is originally a weak character, but eventually he becomes an accomplisher of strong will for national salvation. Throughout this, heterogeneity between the surface theme and the internal theme shows as a conflict; surface themes are establishment of education in the country and the will of enlightenment, and internal themes are lamentation of Young-chae and grief from the loss of her own country. Finally, the paper discusses how a flood relates to the main theme of the novel on the aspect of symbol.

〈酒肆丈人傳〉과〈郭索傳〉에 나타난 權韠의 作家意識

조도현(Cho Do-hyun) 한국어문학회 2009 語文學 Vol.0 No.106

Kwon Pil is a writer who had raised the status of ancient novels in the late of 16th and the early of 17th century, the important turning point of Joseon Dynasty. He succeeded in remarkable literary accomplishments by revealing his heart through self-examination and satirizing the wrong social aspects. Thanks to his literary talent, he made his fame in his times but, ironically it also made him drove to his death. He was a man of letters, who criticized contradiction of those times with his critical intelligence. In this thesis, I have reconfigured Kwon, Pil’s his attitudes in life and his literary world with two of his works, 〈JusaJanginJeon(주사장인전)〉 and 〈GuakSakJeon(곽삭전)〉. Even though these are not the main stream of his literature, they are well represented with his spirit of criticism and satire. The times he lived was before and after of Japanese Invasion of Korea in 1592. At that time, there were various changes in many aspects, especially in appearance of diverse writers and their words and description way as narrative literature had been flourish. For that example, there were other writers in his days, Huh Gyun and Jo Wi-Han. Both of them were remarkable authors in history of novel. Like arts, literature can get synergistic effects through leading a main stream of literature by some group of writers. And these could be done with interacting each other. Actually, the literary interaction between them made the former term which literary fiction could afford to leap after the 17th century. In this atmosphere, Kwon Pil produced brilliant achievements and broadened out his literary realm in descriptive literature as well as lyric letters which had been considered only for the gentry. He left four descriptive letters, which played an important connecting role between the former fictions and the later ones in literature history of ancient times. From then on, novel literature not only had extended denotation but contributed to raising its quality. Specially, Kwon showed very high quality in art character with unique expressive ways of morphology in his each work. 〈JusaJanginJeon〉 and 〈GuakSakJeon〉 are different from his other works such as 〈JusangJeon〉 and 〈WigyeongchunJeon〉. That is, he sublimated the beauty of satire and criticism by allegorically illuminating the motif with pretext and personification. This means he accepted the traditional descriptive expression ways and bridged the later new types of literature like allegorical story and personification story. Literature tends to show the spirit of times and the way a writer reacts because it is from his personality and his outlook on the world with letters. In this point, 〈JusaJanginJeon〉 and 〈GuakSakJeon〉 have characteristics in common that seriously criticized and satirized the society in those days. A flash of wit of Kwon’s literary talent was figured, as it is, in literary words with his experience and insight. Also, he did not limit the boundary of literature. Therefore, 〈JusaJanginJeon〉 and 〈GuakSakJeon〉 are the best works that represented author awareness on his satirical and critical spirit.

사효(師孝)의 윤리와 출가정신의 딜레마 : 한암(漢岩)의 「선사경허화상행장(先師鏡虛和尙行狀)」을 중심으로

김호성 韓國佛敎硏究院 2013 불교연구 Vol.38 No.-

이 글은 불교의 출가정신이 무엇인지를 탐색하는 일련의 논문 중 하나이다. 종래의 연구를 통해서, 불교의 출가정신은 인도의 바라문교/힌두교와 중국의 유교가 공유하는 '효(孝) 이데올로기'를 탈피하는 것으로 파악하였다. 이는 역설적으로 인도에서나 중국을 비롯한 유교적 지배질서가 통용되었던 동아시아의 불교는 '효 이데올로기'를 맞닥뜨리지 않을 수 없었으며, 그로부터 많은 압박을 받지 않을 수 없었음을 의미하는 것이었다. 그 압박에 대하여 불교에서는 호교론을 다양한 측면에서 전개하지만, 이 글은 그런 움직임에 보다도 유교적 효가 얼마나 깊이 압박하고 있는가, 그럼으로써 불교 안에 유교적 효담론이 얼마나 깊이 내면화되어 있었던가 하는 점을 살펴보고자 한다. 그러한 하나의 사례로서 한암이 스승 경허의 삶을 정리하고 평가한 「행장」 속에서, 윤리적으로 문제되고 있는 경허의 행위를 그가 어떻게 말하고 있는가 하는 것을 살펴보았다. 거기에서 한암은 스승에 대한 효, 즉 사효(師孝)의 윤리가 주는 무게와 함께 '법'의 옹호를 위해서는 스승의 행위를 후학들이 따라하지 못하도록 경계해야 한다는 이중의 과제를 다 이루고자 한다. 그 결과 한암은 한편으로는 승화 내지 미화를 하면서, 다른 한편으로는 비록 '저자의 의도'는 아니었지만 '미필적 비판'으로 수용(受容)될 수 있는 후학에의 경계를 동시에 행한다. 이러한 한암의 딜레마는 출가정신의 견지(堅持)가 얼마나 어려운 일인가 하는 점을 말하기에 부족하지 않은 것이었다. In 1931, venerable Hanam wrote an article 「Seonsa-Gyeongheo-Hwasang-Haengj ang 先師鏡虛和尙行狀(A Critical Biography of the late master Gyeongheo, 「Haengjang」 for the rest)」 which arranges and evaluate his late master venerable Gyeongheo's whole life. This 「Haengjang」, however, compared to other kinds of Haengjang, connotes an uncommon part which appraises the meaning of his master's Haeng-li(行履, deeds) especially about not keeping away from liquor and women upon occasion. Thereafter, this part gets a name 'Boon-Byul-Haeng-Li-Boon (分別行履分)' by a translator(Yeonnam). By conventional, there have suggested some opinions about this stance of Hanam's appraisal of his master Gyeongheo in the 'Boon-Byul-Haeng-Li-Boon (分別行履分)'. Some opinions were that Hanam had glorified or sublimated his master's deed, and others, in contrast, were that he had criticized or took moderate views. Then what position indeed he stood with his master? Most of all, in this article, the key issue can be suggested as organizing my own point of view. Therefore I tried to put this part in the third chapter that can be the core section. At first, I tried to categorize the whole text of 'Boon-Byul-Haeng-Li-Boon (分別行履分)', because in my opinion, those disagreements of conventional scholars could be due to the lack of getting a wide view of the text. This categorization is presented by a table which shows the whole and parts of the text at the same time. Through this process, I could find out two facts. The first one is that there are two layers in which the word 'Haeng-li(deed)' of Gyeongheo that Hanam suggested. One can be said as an extensive interpretation, which includes not only liquor and women issues(酒色) in a narrow sense bringing up religious precepts but also mingling himself in the secular world (同塵行) which is considered to be worthy of the highest admiration. By using same word 'Haeng-li (deed)'on both of those superordinate and subordinate concepts, Hanam caused confusion. However, it was the result of great deliberation to euphemize it avoiding the word like 'liquor and women(酒色)' or 'violation the precepts(犯戒)'. Because he wanted to fulfill his duty as a disciple to his master. The second one is that Hanam made some mentions which can be regarded as sublimation or glorification on appraising his master's 'Haeng-li(deed) in narrow sense'. Especially in the sentence "If one is not fully enlightened, how can he be free from trifling matters?", we can read his intention to glorify his master's deed in a narrow sense even though Lee Neunghwa(李能和) criticized it as 'violation the precepts'. However in the same time Hanam said that "Learn Gyeongheo's teachings, but do not follow his deed" for his future information. It conforms with the teachings of the Buddhist canon saying "Lean on the dhammas, not on a person". In this mention which can be regarded as a 'discipline for his younger pupils', we can hardly find an intention to criticize his master's deed. In other words, the 'intention of the author' was not for criticism. Though he could not criticize his master, he wanted to address to his younger pupils not to imitate rashly after his master's deed if they are not fully enlightened like his master. Thereby, Hanam set up a radius of action of the pupils. That is, he segregated and sealed them from venerable Gyeongheo. However, it also had the opposite effect that Gyeongheo was segregated and sealed from them. Even though Hanam didn't mean it, the pupils/readers could feel as if he criticized his master. I would call this effect as "the willful criticism". Hanam's appraisals of venerable Gyeongheo have multiple layers which can be referred to 'the glorification/sublimation, the discipline for his younger pupils, and the willful criticism' and so on. Because those layers were not considered synthetically, Hanam could not avoid criticizing from others at that time. The 「Haengjang」, which was asked by Mangong(滿空) to write, was rejected to be included in the 『Gyeongheo-Jip(Collected Works of venerable Gyongheo)』. It might be probably due to the appraisals by the 'Deoksoong Clan at that time' or the 'editors at that time' that Hanam didn't fulfill his 'duty as a disciple'. They might felt the 'willful criticism' which I mentioned above. On the other hand, by criticizing Gyeongheo's 『Beop-hwa(法話)』, Seokjeon(石顚) achieved the effects of criticizing Hanam as well. It could be regarded as an indirect criticism and I examined about it in the fourth chapter. Through the third and the fourth chapter, we can notice that the disciple Hanam was in a dilemma of two axises. One axis is influenced by the Confucian ethics which a disciple cannot criticize his master, that is the discipular piety(師孝), the duty for one's master. The other axis is the duty of protecting the 'dhamma'. This 'dhamma' can be collide with a 'person' according to circumstances. That is why the Canon says that "Lean on the dhammas, not on a person". Especially in Seon Buddhist tradition, they emphasize not to be bound by anything, saying "When you meet the Buddha, Kill him and when you meet your master, kill him." In this context, it can be made a judgement that it is more important to advocate the dhamma than the ethics of the discipular piety. Besides, Gyeongheo, who is appraised by Hanam in this 『Haengjang』, also address this advocation of the 'dhamma'. Because Gyeongheo illuminated in his 『Seoryong-Hwasang-Haengjang(瑞龍和尙行狀)』 that "There is no reason to write the 『Haengjang』 if you do not improve the three disciplines of precept, mindfulness, and wisdom". This Gyeongheo's 'philosophy of Haengjang' has handed down to Hanam intactly as we examined in the second chapter. That is why Hanam could not avoid mentioning 'the discipline for his younger pupils' because he wanted to follow his master's 'philosophy of Haengjang'. Nonetheless, the

기혹논문 2 : 남명 조식의 “물” 인식과 인문정신

정우락 ( Woo Rak Jung ) 경북대학교 영남문화연구원 2014 嶺南學 Vol.0 No.26

본고는 南冥曺植이 ‘물’을 어떻게 인식하고 있으며, 이를 통해 그의 인문정신을 살펴보기 위한 것이다. 물에는 淸과 濁, 止와 流, 安과 激등 모순적인 것이 함께 존재한다. 남명은 이러한 물의 성질을 섬세하게 관찰하면서 여기서 촉발되는 문학적 상상력을 펼쳤다. 그의 물 인식은 다양하지만 주로 물이 본질적으로 지니고 있는 세척성과 원천성, 그리고 巖險性을 주목하였다. 여기에 입각하여 그는 자신의 수양과 학문, 그리고 민본에 대한 생각을 물의 이미지에 투사시켜 작품화했다. 이것은 다시 자신의 경의정신과 실천정신, 그리고 비판정신 등으로 확대시켜나갔다. 이러한 확대에도 물은 그 이면에서 깊이 작용하고 있었다. 남명의 인문정신은 민본사상에 입각한 비판성이 핵심이다. 그는 인간다움을 침해하는 일체의 폭압에 맞서 군주의 실정은 물론이고, 관리의 탐학, 선비의 실절 등을 두루 비판하였다. 이 가운데 군주의 실정은 비판의 주요 대상이 되었다. 군주는 당대의 위기를 만든 최종 책임자이기 때문이다. 비판적 인문정신을 보유하고 있었던 남명, 그 정신의 근원에는 비판적 수양론이 있었다. 즉 그가 ‘存養省察’을 모두 강조하고 있지만, 이 가운데 성찰에 방점이 놓인다는 것이다. 이것은 남명의 수양론이 ‘修: 알人慾’과 ‘養: 存天理’에서 전자에 더욱 밀착되었다는 이야기가 된다. 우리는 여기서 현실주의로 열려있었던 남명 인문정신의 근원을 발견할 수 있다. This study set out to investigate how Nammyeong Jo Shik perceived"water" and thus his humanistic spirit. Water contains contradictoryqualities in it including Clean and cloudy, stop and flows, andcomfortable and intensity. Nammyeong closely observed thosequalities of water and exercised his literary imagination derived fromthem. Although he had various perceptions of water, he mainly focusedon the essential cleaning, original, and dangerous qualities of water. Based on them, he projected his ideas of cultivation, study, andorientation toward people onto the images of water, turned them intoworks, expanded them to his spirits of respect, practice, and criticism. Water was working deep in those expansions. The core of his humanistic spirit is criticism based on thepeople-oriented ideology. Standing up against the oppression of abody infringing humanness, he widely criticized the maladministrationof monarchs, greed of officials, and loss of scholars` integrity. Themain target of his criticisms was the maladministration of monarchsbecause they were ultimately responsible for the crises of the times. Nammyeong had a critical humanistic spirit, whose origin was hiscritical Su Yang theory. That is, he emphasized both "Jonyang(存養)"and "Seongchal(省察)" with a side point to the latter, which means thathis Su Yang theory was closer to "Su: stopping human greed" than to"Yang: preserving the natural law. " Here, one can discover the originof his humanistic spirit open to realism.