설공찬전 파동의 작품 내외적 맥락 재 고찰 - 용재총화 용천담적 교차 검토를 중심으로 = Reconsideration on the Work’s Internal and External Context Regarding the 『Seolgongchanjeon』 Shock -Focusing on cross-examination over 『Yongjaechonghwa』 and 『Yongcheondamjeokgi』-

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study cross-examined two works recording Chae Su in order to clarify the nature of the 『Seolgongchanjeon』 shock that occurred in the initial reign of King Jungjong. Seong Hyeon recorded an anecdote about his colleague, Chae Su, in 『Yongjaechonghwa』 while Kim An-ro wrote 『Yongcheondamjeokgi』 in exile at the time when 『Yongjaechonghwa』 was published including an anecdote of his father-in-law, Chae Su, in it. In this sense, 『Yongjaechonghwa』 and 『Yongcheondamjeokgi』 work as records on political fluctuations in the 15th and 16th centuries and as cross-narratives to understand Chae Su’s 『Seolgongchanjeon 』. In 『Yongjaechonghwa』, Chae Su is depicted as Sadaebu equipped with literary talent and wit, and in 『Yongcheondamjeokgi』, he highlights Chae Su’s reputation from a son-in-law’s standpoint. This is primarily attributed to the difference of relationship as a friend and son-in-law, but it provides a piece of information that the person named Chae Su was not the owner of unconventional ideas. In the context of 『Yongjaechonghwa』, the ban of 『Seolgongchanjeon』 stems from the gap between narrative verisimilitudity and the form of a traditional narrative, and the context of 『Yongcheondamjeokgi 』 provides the logic that 『Seolgongchanjeon』 is grounded on the true story, which dilutes the unconventionality of the work. In conclusion, by comparing the articles of 『Yongjaechonghwa』 and 『Yongcheondamjeokgi』, this author could learn that the 『Seolgongchanjeon』 shock originated from the perspective of investigating Cha Sue’s ideas to see his political orientation. Also, with 『Yongjaechonghwa』, it was possible to find out newly about the fact that the Chinese envoy, ‘Aebak’, appearing in 『Seolgongchanjeon』 was a real person. This reveals a different perspective from the elements previously presented for the ban of 『Seolgongchanjeon』, for instance, possession or the experience of ghost or the afterworld. This is because such subject matters are frequently mentioned in 『Yongjaechonghwa』, too, and even Seong Hyeon himself describes his own stories about seeing ghosts. Moreover, Chae Su’s story about experiencing ghost in 『Yongcheondamjeokgi』 serves as an anecdote that reinforces the fact that the ban of 『Seolgongchanjeon』 that formed the center of controversy before was not intended but it came from the writer’s own experience. Therefore, cross-examination over 『Yongjaechonghwa』 and 『Yongcheondamjeokgi』 presents multidimensional information about Chae Su and provides new context that is useful to understand 『Seolgongchanjeon』.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 정환국, "？설공찬전(薛公瓚傳)？ 파동과 16세기 소설인식의 추이" 민족문학사연구소 25 : 38-63, 2004

2 이복규, "한글로 읽힌 최초 소설 설공찬전의 이해" 지식과교양 2018

3 "한국고전종합DB"

4 계승범, "중종의 시대-조선의 유교화와 사림운동" 역사비평사 2014

5 김재영, "중종을 움직인 사람들" 한국학술정보 2008

6 김유성, "중종대왕의 병상일지에 대한 고찰" 경산대학교 제한동의학술원 9 (9): 14-25, 1984

7 엄기영, "중종(中宗) 초기의 정국과 <설공찬전> 파동의 추이" 한국고소설학회 (40) : 5-39, 2015

8 이주영, "조선후기 필기 야담 소재 귀신담 연구" 동국대학교 2020

9 김돈, "조선전기 군신권력관계 연구" 서울대 출판부 1997

10 조현설, "조선 전기 귀신이야기에 나타난 神異 인식의 의미" 한국고전문학회 23 : 6-178, 2003

11 강상순, "조선 전기 귀신 이야기에 잠복된 사회적 적대" 민족문화연구원 (56) : 97-136, 2012

12 소인호, "저승체험담의 서사문학적 전개 -초기소설과의 관련 양상을 중심으로" 우리문학회 (27) : 103-130, 2009

13 성현, "용재총화" 휴머니스트 2015

14 김범, "연산군 그 인간과 시대의 내면" 글항아리 55-57, 2010

15 정환국, "기획논문: 17세기 이후 귀신이야기의 변모와 ‘저승’의 이미지 / 논평: 조현설" 한국고전문학회 (31) : 99-128, 2007

16 김안로, "국역 대동야승 3" 민족문화추진회 1985

17 이복규, "『묵재일기』소재 국문본소설 연구" 박이정 21-23, 2018

18 소인호, "<설공찬전> 재고" 안암어문학회 37 : 47-62, 1998

19 정출헌, "16세기 서사문학사의 지평과 그 미학적 층위" 한국민족문화연구소 (26) : 1-38, 2005