루쉰 연구자들은 왜 잡문에 주목하는가

朴姿映(Park, Ja-young) 중국어문학연구회 2015 중국어문학논집 Vol.0 No.91

The main focus of interpretation of Luxun since 2000s is on Zawen, which was chiefly attacked by “Disconnection (Dunalie)” Declaration group. Late Luxun and his Zawen writing, that was disregarded by scholars since New Era, was reconsidered in the mood of this kind of provocation, and took an important place in Luxun research since 2000s. Zawen was highly acclaimed by the interpretation of revolutionist Luxun before 1980s. Meanwhile, it was ignored by scholars for the same reason. This paper investigates what kind of focus is the research on Zawen on since 2000s and examines what position this focus occupies in the discourse of Luxun research. It historicizes the context of Luxun research which is scattered since 2000s, and gains the proper interpretation position. Luxun’s Zawen research of early 2000s subverted pre-existing research tendency, which emphasized practice and political issue of Zawen, and applied the Liberalistic perspective. This kind of Liberalistic interpretation created discourse on literary and political values regarding Zawen. While discourse on literary value of Zawen rethought the relationship between literature and politics against liberalist Luxun interpretation, the “Returning(Huixin)” discourse raised issues of ideal and resistance which disappeared in the realm of Luxun research since 1980s, reappraising Dakeuchi Yoshimi effects. Luxun’s Zawen research tendency since 2000s called the relation between Liberty, Literature and Politics into questions. The new Luxun research stands at the start point of questions regarding these relationship and enters into the deeper and specific research regarding Zawen.

잡문은 어떻게 ‘문학’이 되었나?

홍준형(Hong, junhyong) 한국중어중문학회 2017 中語中文學 Vol.0 No.68

In the 1930s, the position of the Zawen was greatly improved and various discussions surrounding the Zawen were made in earnest. In the meantime, the names that have been variously called “雜感”, “短評”, “隨感”, “隨筆”, “短文”, “雜文” were gradually unified into “雜文”, The legitimacy of the Zawen was basically established. In this process, Lu Xun was the person who was constantly at the center of the discussion. This is because the form of the Zawen itself is not based on any abstract literacy, but rather through the process of discovery and composition of Lu Xun’s personal writing practice and experience. That is why almost all the discussions about the 1930s’ writings were directly or indirectly linked to Lu Xun or through Lu Xun’s theory. This process of birth of a Zawen created by the combination of the political reality of Chinese society and the individual literary choice created a new form of literature that combining personal practice, behavior, and the commission of the times in how literature is involved in reality. In addition, this process proceeded through the discourse struggle with the forces that differed in literary cognition and attitude, leading to a fundamental criticism of the literary system that dominated the literary field at that time. However, on the other hand, the process of literaryization based on these personalities and contemporaneity, rather than a common form, takes Lu Xun’s writing practice and experience as almost the only criterion, has made it difficult to build a stable form of harmony and oepo with independent literary style. As a result, any discussions about Zawen became basically impossible to escape from the boundaries of Lu Xun, and Lu Xun’s writing practice and the theoretical contents became the most authoritative discourse explaining the legitimacy of the Zawen.

이화(李華)와 원결(元結)의 ‘잡문(雜文)’에 대한 문체혁신

조은상 ( Cho Eun-sang ) 대구가톨릭대학교 인문과학연구소 2018 인문과학연구 Vol.0 No.35

‘Zawen(雜文)’ is a style in a Chinese classical prose, and it refers to a new form and character sentence that does not belong to any prose style. Although ‘Zawen’ began in the Han Dynasty, but before the Tang Dynasty did not universally popular. After the writer of Tang Dynasty made ‘Zawen’, literary ‘Zawen’ have appeared. Among the many writers, Li Hua(李華) and Yuan Jie(元結)’s contribution is the largest. Previous ‘Zawen’ writing not only confined to the argumentative or amoebaean essay, but also only related to political issues. But Li Hua and Yuan Jie was different. They not only wrote many ‘Zawen’, but also expanded the ‘Zawen’ topics. Their efforts formed a peak of ‘Zawen’ creation, but did not become short-lived. It is a reform that is close to style innovation. The style innovation of the ‘Zawen’ led by Li Hua and Yuan Jie was not only in these but also in the middle and late of the Tang Dynasty, and it was the heyday of the creation of the ‘Zawen’. Next, many literary artists(such as Du Guji(獨孤及)·Liu Yuxi(劉禹錫)·Li Gao(李翱)·Bai Juyi(白居易)·du Mu(杜牧)·Sun Qiao(孫樵)·Luo Yin(羅隱)·Pi Rixiu(皮日休)·Lu Guimong(陸龜蒙)) created the ‘Zawen’. Especially Han Yu(韓愈) and Liu Zongyuan(柳宗元) inherited Their ‘Zawen’, so left many ‘Zawen’ masterpiece. Based on this point, Li Hua and Yuan Jie set a foothold for the prime of creating a ‘zawen’, and we can use them as an example of how to led the innovation.

루쉰과 취추바이의 공동 잡문에 대한 미학적 검토

조현국(Jo, Hyun-Kuk)(趙顯國) 대한중국학회 2021 중국학 Vol.75 No.-

본고는 1930년대에 루쉰과 취추바이가 합작한 잡문의 미학적 의미를 고찰하는 것이다. 루쉰과 취추바이의 공동 잡문 미학은 ‘집단주의’와 ‘예술의 정치화’로 요약할 수 있다. ‘집단주의’는 ‘지식인의 대중화’로 개괄할 수 있는데, 이는 대중을 계몽해야 할 대상으로 여기는 지식인의 우월감을 버리고 거대한 군중의 세계에서 그들과 함께 문학과 혁명을 추구해야 한다는 것을 의미한다. 공동 잡문의 ‘예술의 정치화’는 ‘예술성을 띤 논설(포이통)’이라는 대목에서 찾아볼 수 있다. 이는 공동 잡문이 사회의 중대한 일상적 사건에 대해 영향력을 행사하기에 매우 적합한 문체로 개발된 것이며, 예술성에 기초한 무기로서의 글쓰기였다는 것을 의미한다. This paper examines the aesthetic meaning of Zawen that Luxun and Quqiubai collaborated in the 1930s. The aesthetics of Zawen collaborated by Luxun and Quqiubai can be abbreviated as ‘collectivism’ and ‘politicization of art’. ‘Collectivism’ can be summarized as ‘popularization of intellectuals’, which means that intellectuals should abandon their superiority that regards the public as the object to enlighten and pursue literature and revolution with them in a world of huge crowds. The ‘politicalization of art’ in the collarorated Zawen can be found in the passage ‘artistic discourse (Feuilleton)’. This means that the collaborated Zawen was developed in a style that was very suitable for influencing important everyday events in society, and it was writing as a weapon based on artistry. By means of such collectivism and the politicization of art, Zawen collaborated by Luxun and Quqiubai responded to the political aesthetics of fascism, while attemped to push the stagnant cultural movement of The Left Coalition of Writers to a new level.

논문(論文) : 상하이 시기 루쉰의 글쓰기에 나타난 일상성에 관하여

성옥례 중국어문연구회 2015 中國語文論叢 Vol.0 No.68

Lu Xun, the writer representing Chinese modern literature, left Beijing and settled down Shanghai since 1928. At that time, Shanghai was one of the most developed commercial and capitalist city in China, for which lots of people still feel nostalgic in these days. Besides, since there were settlements of variety countries, many progressive personage could easily find their refuges in the city under harsh political oppression of KMT(Kuomintang, 國民黨). Until 1936 when clouds of war was gathering over China and Japan, Lu Xun kept up his literary life as a writer in Shanghai. His most significant literary activity in those days was writing Zawen(雜文). He published articles continuously to present his views on contemporary social phenomena at various media. Most of them were related with circumstances of literary world or literary controversy, but after all he expressed his will to participate and practice through them. Lu Xun`s Zawen not only provide us with scenes of everyday life and its significance of contemporary writers including himself but also indicate their political intentions behind daily life of Shanghainese at that time. Moreover, he also wrote Zawen to present “creative and active dailiness” against political intentions of capitalism, imperialism and KMT. His Zawen suggested dailiness for literary material as well as for literary practice by writing, which made readers consider trivial daily lives tenaciously.

??迅?文中的?刺形象

구문규 한국중국현대문학학회 2004 中國現代文學 Vol.0 No.31

】A Study on the Satire Character Series of "Zawen" Text in LuxunGu, MoonKyu

로신(魯迅) 「잡문(雜文)」의(義) 예술적(藝術的) 가치(價値)에 대(對)한 고찰(考察) -「잡문(雜文) 속에 나타나는 수사기교(修辭技巧)의 기법(技法)을 중심(中心)으로

리주민 ( Ju Min Lee ) 한국중국산문학회 2014 중국산문연구집간 Vol.4 No.-

It was the most difficult period and war was a big issue when Luxun was writing “Zawen” actively in his career. Luxun``s creatively in his writing was based on realism. Luxun``s back ground of his writing, he was able to pass on his idea to people who desire of enlightenment and he was able to accomplished his languages-tic art by analyzing his thoughts with authentic vocabularies and various expressions. Because of Luxun``s Zawen, his work takes an important position in Chinese modern literature.

论"对问"、"七"体以及其与汉赋之关係

이정림 중국인문학회 2019 中國人文科學 Vol.0 No.71

This paper studies the process of classifying works of Duiwen对问 and Qi七 style as a single literary style, and their differentiating between the stylistic characteristics and the Fu赋 forms. In the WenxindiaolongㆍZawen, the Duiwen and Qi types of works were classified as a group of works with the use of splendid rhetorical expressions respectively. However, These groups of works also have aspects that are common to both the form and the content with Fu style. The literary classifications were made by the creation of numerous works from the Han漢 to the Liuchao六朝, and were promoted by the need for an anthology collection. Although Duiwen and Qi style can be attributed to the large categories of Fu, it is necessary to expand into more specific and detailed research on the unique style of these works in terms of form and content, and the ongoing creative phenomena of these types of works since DongHan東漢.

루쉰의 ‘곡필(曲筆)’과 ‘유활(油滑)’의 서사 ― 근대소설(novel)의 한계와 파탄

이보경 중국어문학연구회 2019 중국어문학논집 Vol.0 No.115

This essay explores Lu Xun’s concepts of modern fiction, that is “novel.” Regarding his artistic accomplishments of “Divorce” in his collection Wandering (1926), Lu Xun was satisfied with a level of reluctance. After publishing this short story, Lu Xun was coincidentally no more creating works of so-called modern fiction genre. I wanted to deliberate on the reasons for his retiring from modern fiction by examining the concepts such as “distortion” (qubi) and “facetiousness” (youhua). Lu Xun talked about “distortion” and “facetiousness” respectively in the prefaces to Call to Arms (1923) and Old Tales Retold (1935). In general, “distortion” is rendered as simile, symbol and metaphor, while “facetiousness” is as disruption of language or parody. In this essay, I interpret the concepts as something more than simple literary techniques, showing Lu Xun’s understanding of the modern fiction genre. First, “distortion” denotes the disruption of the writing principles of modern fiction. Even though Lu Xun writes it was unavoidable choice out of the general’s order, he must have realized the limits of modern fiction genre. For this reason, Lu Xun made an experiment to modern fiction genre with his particular method of “facetiousness” and brought forth a termination to the genre. “Distortion” and “facetiousness” lie neither in the immaturity of the modern nor in Lu Xun’s immaturity in handling the modern fiction genre. This is rather a reflection of the limits of modern fiction with its origin in the West. The realization of the limits of modern fiction and his subsequent efforts for its disruption resulted in a new form of literary prose, miscellaneous essays (zawen). Interpretations of “distortion” and “facetiousness” result in one thing as follows: the miscellaneous essays are perhaps what Lu Xun as a modern being found most appropriate for conveying his own literary characteristics.

두 시각의 종합 : 魯迅과 瞿秋白의 ‘共同雜文’에 대한 일고찰

조현국 한국중국문화학회 2016 中國學論叢 Vol.0 No.52

. 본고에서는 魯迅과 瞿秋白이 1933년 3월부터 4월 사이에 合作한 雜文을 ‘共同雜文’으로 명명하고 이들의 合作 양상과 방식에 대해 고찰하였다. 魯迅과 瞿秋白의 ‘共同雜文’은 ‘9‧18 事變’ 이후 급변하는 중국 정세, 특히 南京國民政府의 ‘不抵抗主義’의 실상을 폭로하고 풍자했다. 이와 같은 ‘共同雜文’의 신속한 대응 양상은 저널리즘의 ‘취재’와 ‘편집’이라는 메커니즘 방식을 통해 당시 ‘중국적 현실’을 더욱 리얼하게 담아내면서 공동잡문의 ‘전투성’을 높였다. 곧 瞿秋白이 어떤 사건을 취재하여 기사를 쓰는 ‘기자’의 역할을 했다면, 魯迅은 그 ‘기사’를 다시 검토하고 취재기자의 관점을 더욱 부각시키거나 수정하는 ‘편집자’ 역할을 하는 방식으로 당시 급변하는 중국 정국에 대응해갔다는 것이다. 이런 점에서 이들의 ‘共同雜文’은 중국 공산주의 혁명가로서 첨예한 중국 현실과 직접 부딪치면서 형성된 瞿秋白의 날카로운 현실 감각에서 길어 올린 ‘기사’와 비록 그 혁명의 현장에서 한발 떨어져 있었지만 누구보다도 민감하고 깊이 있게 중국적 현실을 통찰하고 있던 魯迅의 ‘편집적 시각’이 종합되어 빚어진 것이라 할 수 있다. 이렇게 두 시각이 종합되어 ‘진실’에 가까운 ‘현실’이 독자들에게 전달됨으로써 魯迅과 瞿秋白이 합작한 ‘共同雜文’은 이른바 당시 암울한 중국 정국을 타파하는 더욱더 강력한 ‘투창’과 ‘비수’로 작용할 수 있었다.