한국 근대에서 단일민족 신화의 역사적 형성 과정
A Study on the Historical Formation Process of the Myth on the Ethnic Homogeneity in Modern Korea
0
조회
0
다운로드
18
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study looks into when the deep-rooted conception of the ethnic homogeneity of being one race of Dangoon began and how this conception has become a common sense and myth among contemporary Korean. Based on the empirical investigation of this conception, this paper presents the results as below： First, the conception of the ethnic homogeneity is the invention of tradition in the modern as the result of the nationalism after the opening of the country in the late 1900s. Accordingly, this view challenges the common belief spread in the field of Korean history that such a view has existed for more than 1300 years since it was formed right after the unification of three Kingdoms by Shilla and completed in Korea dynasty. This is because it was impossible to unify all the people in a top-down manner with such a concept during the premodern era when there was explicit class discrimination. Furthermore, the idea of Koreans being the race of Dangoon originated from the theory of Three Koreas during the Chosun Dynasty also stems from the theory of the civilization based on the perspectives of Chinese and its neighboring races. Accordingly, such a view does not mean that all the people in the Chosun Dynasty were homogeneously tied to one blood or race. Second, the formation of the concept of the ethnic homogeneity began in the age of the enlightenment (1905-1910) after the Russo- Japanese War. The intellectuals in the Chosun Dynasty had no choice but to make a desperate effort to create the myth of‘ one-race’after realizing their destiny after Japan won against Russia, which provides a good rationale that the term of ‘ethnicity’and the nationalism as an ideology had been formed at the age of the Enlightenment right after the Russo-Japanese War. In other words, instead of being loyal to a king, it was necessary to create a grand and robust view of the ‘ethnicity’as a key signifier to mobilize the people though the discursive practices during the Enlightenment period. This is the very reason that the idea of‘ one-race’has been used as a means to homogenize the Korean people by homogenize them as a group sharing a common destiny. Third, it is also possible that the idea of‘ one-race’formulated in the age of the Enlightenment was due to the Japanese’view of‘ onerace’influenced by the theory of organic nation or ethnic particularities based on the German’s romantic nationalism or political theories. The main body in the Enlightenment movement constructed an‘ holy race’in which all Koreans are the descendants of Dangoon, they created a myth of all Koreans sharing the same blood and history. Fourth, the idea of the ethnic homogeneity functioned as the symbol of resistant nationalism against the Japanese in the colonial period. As North Korea made an effort to bolster their hegemony by spreading the propaganda of finding the Dangoon tomb after the Cold War, both South and North Korea have used this view of‘ one-race’ as the tool to ensure their identity as a modern state or their political power and domination. Last, the idea of Koreans as ‘one-race of Han with the same blood, language, and culture’is repeatedly recycled in social studies in elementary and secondary textbooks and transforms the people’s memory on their history on a massive scale. Such a practice has turned the conception of the ethnic homogeneity as a trans-historical hyper-reality and a mythicized collective memory.
Abstract
This study looks into when the deep-rooted conception of the ethnic homogeneity of being one race of Dangoon began and how this conception has become a common sense and myth among contemporary Korean. Based on the empirical investigation of this conception, this paper presents the results as below： First, the conception of the ethnic homogeneity is the invention of tradition in the modern as the result of the nationalism after the opening of the country in the late 1900s. Accordingly, this view challenges the common belief spread in the field of Korean history that such a view has existed for more than 1300 years since it was formed right after the unification of three Kingdoms by Shilla and completed in Korea dynasty. This is because it was impossible to unify all the people in a top-down manner with such a concept during the premodern era when there was explicit class discrimination. Furthermore, the idea of Koreans being the race of Dangoon originated from the theory of Three Koreas during the Chosun Dynasty also stems from the theory of the civilization based on the perspectives of Chinese and its neighboring races. Accordingly, such a view does not mean that all the people in the Chosun Dynasty were homogeneously tied to one blood or race. Second, the formation of the concept of the ethnic homogeneity began in the age of the enlightenment (1905-1910) after the Russo- Japanese War. The intellectuals in the Chosun Dynasty had no choice but to make a desperate effort to create the myth of‘ one-race’after realizing their destiny after Japan won against Russia, which provides a good rationale that the term of ‘ethnicity’and the nationalism as an ideology had been formed at the age of the Enlightenment right after the Russo-Japanese War. In other words, instead of being loyal to a king, it was necessary to create a grand and robust view of the ‘ethnicity’as a key signifier to mobilize the people though the discursive practices during the Enlightenment period. This is the very reason that the idea of‘ one-race’has been used as a means to homogenize the Korean people by homogenize them as a group sharing a common destiny. Third, it is also possible that the idea of‘ one-race’formulated in the age of the Enlightenment was due to the Japanese’view of‘ onerace’influenced by the theory of organic nation or ethnic particularities based on the German’s romantic nationalism or political theories. The main body in the Enlightenment movement constructed an‘ holy race’in which all Koreans are the descendants of Dangoon, they created a myth of all Koreans sharing the same blood and history. Fourth, the idea of the ethnic homogeneity functioned as the symbol of resistant nationalism against the Japanese in the colonial period. As North Korea made an effort to bolster their hegemony by spreading the propaganda of finding the Dangoon tomb after the Cold War, both South and North Korea have used this view of‘ one-race’ as the tool to ensure their identity as a modern state or their political power and domination. Last, the idea of Koreans as ‘one-race of Han with the same blood, language, and culture’is repeatedly recycled in social studies in elementary and secondary textbooks and transforms the people’s memory on their history on a massive scale. Such a practice has turned the conception of the ethnic homogeneity as a trans-historical hyper-reality and a mythicized collective memory.
참고문헌 (76)
- "교육인적자원부보도자료, 다문화가정품에안는교육지원대책, 2006년4월28일", ~ (2006)
- 김구, "남북협상에임하는결의표명, 조선일보, 1948년4월17일자", 조선일보, ~ (1948)
- 안재홍, "유엔조선임시위원단의 내조와 국민의 태도에 대해 방송, 조선일보, 1948 년 1월 8일자", ~ (1948)
- 고미숙, "18세기에서20세기초민족담론의변이양상", 현대문학의연구, 13 (1999)
- 고자카이도시아키, "민족은없다" (2003), 뿌리와이파리
- 권보드레, "동포의역사적경험과정치성 in : 근대계몽기지식개념의수용과그변용" (2004), 소명출판
- 권용기, "독립신문에나타난‘동포’의검토", 한국사상사학, 12 (1999)
- 김동택, "近代 國民과 國家槪念의 수용에 관한 硏究", 대동문화연구, 41, pp.357~388 (2002), 대동문화연구원
- 김동택, "역사용어바로쓰기：동포와형제", 역사비평, 73 (2005)
- 김동택, "大韓每日申報에 나타난 ‘民族’ 槪念에 관한 硏究", 대동문화연구, (61), pp.405~434 (2008), 대동문화연구원
- 김명식, "朝鮮民族起源의文化的考察", 삼천리, 7(1) (1935)
- 김수자, "해방이후 우익 민족 담론의 공고화 과정(1945~1953) ― 일간지를 중심으로 ―", 역사학보, 198(198), pp.89~114 (2008), 역사학회
- 김영희, "대한제국기개신유학자들의언론사상과양계초", 한국언론학보, 43(4) (1999)
- 김현숙, "한말‘민족’의탄생과민족주의담론의창출：민족주의역사서술을중심으로", 동양정치사상사, 5(1) (2006)
- 노태돈, "한국민족형성시기에대한검토", 역사비평, 21 (1992)
- 노태돈, "단군과고조선사에대한이해 in : 단군과고조선사" (2000), 사계절
- 박기현, "우리역사를바꾼귀화성씨" (2007), 역사의아침
- 박노자, "개화기의국민담론과그속의타자들 in : 근대계몽기지식개념의수용과 변용" (2004), 소명출판
- 박정심, "한국 근대지식인의 ‘근대성’인식Ⅰ - 문명인종민족담론을 중심으로", 동양철학연구, (52), pp.111~139 (2007), 동양철학연구회
- 박찬승, "20세기한국국가주의의기원", 한국사연구, 117 (2002)
- 백낙준, "한국개신교사, 1832~1910" (1973), 연세대학교출판부
- 백동현, "러·일전쟁전후‘민족’용어의등장과민족인식", 한국사학보, 10 (2001)
- 백동현, "대한제국기언론매체와근대·민족담론", 내일을여는역사, 19 (2005)
- 백영서, "중국의국민국가와민족문제：형성과변용 in : 근대국민국가와민족문제" (1995), 지식산업사
- 백영서, "양계초의근대성인식과동아시아", 아시아문화, 14 (1998)
- 서영대, "전통시대의단군인식 in : 단군과고조선사" (2000), 사계절
- 서영희, "국가론적측면에서본대한제국의성격 in : 대한제국은근대국가인가" (2006), 푸른역사
- 서중석, "이승만정부초기의일민주의", 진단학보, 83 (1997)
- 손진태, "자서 in : 국사대요", 을유문화사 (1948)
- 송종호, "단일민족환상깨고다문화주의로의‘전환시대’", 민족연구, 30 (2007)
- 신용하, "‘민족’의 사회학적 설명과 ‘상상의 공동체론’ 비판", 한국사회학, 40(1), pp.32~58 (2006), 한국사회학회
- 신채호, "독사신론 in : 신채호" (1979), 한길사
- 에릭홉스봄, "만들어진전통" (2004), 휴머니스트
- 연정은, "안호상의일민주의와정치·교육활동", 역사연구, 12 (2003)
- 오구마에이치, "일본단일민족신화의기원" (2003), 소명출판
- 우남숙, "梁啓超와 신채호의 자유론 비교", 동양정치사상사, 6(1), pp.135~160 (2007), 한국.동양정치사상사학회
- 유영익, "개화파인사들의개신교수용양태 in : 한국근현대사론" (1992), 일조각
- 윤치호, "윤치호일기 5" (1971), 탐구당
- 윤치호, "국역윤치호일기 1" (2001), 연세대학교출판부
- 윤해동, "식민지근대의패러독스" (2007), 휴머니스트
- 이광린, "대한매일신보연구" (1986), 서강대학교인문과학연구소
- 이기동, "민족학적으로본문화계통 in : 한국사1：총설" (2002), 국사편찬위원회
- 이기동, "독자에게드리는글", 한국사시민강좌, 32 (2003), 일조각
- 이병도, "국사의의의 in : 국사와지도이념" (1955), 삼중당
- 이선민, "민족주의, 이제는버려야하나" (2008), 삼성경제연구소
- 이승만, "제1회78차국회본회의에서시정방침연설", 시정월보, 1 (1949)
- 이승만, "일민주의개술" (1949), 일민주의보급회
- 이지명, "담론이론의 시각에서 본 도덕과 민족담론의 양상", 윤리연구, 51(3), pp.17~400 (2002), 한국윤리학회
- 이혜진, "근대계몽기 ‘민족’의 탄생과 ‘국민’의 거처", 인문연구, 50(50), pp.51~80 (2006), 인문과학연구소
- 임종명, "일민주의와대한민국의근대민족국가화", 한국민족운동사연구, 44 (2004)
- 임지현, "민족주의는 반역이다：신화와 허무의 민족주의 담론을 넘어서 in : 민족주의는 반역이다：신화와 허무의 민족주의 담론을 넘어서" (1999), 소나무
- 임지현, "민족담론의스펙트럼：원초성, 근대성, 탈근대성", 안과 밖(영미문학연구), 8 (2000)
- 임지현, "국사의안과밖 in : 국사의신화를넘어서" (2004), 휴머니스트
- 장면, "한국유엔대표, 유엔총회에서 한국승인을 요청하는 연설 내용", 시정월보, 2 (1949)
- 장인성, "인종과민족의사이：동아시아연대론의지역적정체성과‘인종’", 국제정치논총, 40(4) (2000)
- 장인실, "다문화 교육을 위한 교사 교육 교육과정 모형 탐구", 초등교육연구, 21(2), pp.281~305 (2008), 한국초등교육학회
- 전동현, "대한제국기 중국 양계초를 통한 근대적 민권개념의 수용", 중국근현대사연구, 21 (2004)
- 전동현, "淸末 梁啓超의 大韓帝國期 韓國 認識 -亡國 ,自强 槪念을 中心으로-", 중국사연구, (34), pp.139~172 (2005), 중국사학회
- 전성곤, "최남선의불함문화론다시읽기", 역사문제연구, 16 (2006)
- 정선태, "근대계몽기 민족 국민 서사의 정치적 시학", 인문연구, (50), pp.147~172 (2006), 인문과학연구소
- 조정남, "일본의단일민족정책", 민족연구, 7 (2001)
- 주요한, "안도산전집" (1984), 삼중당
- 지수걸, "‘민족’과‘근대’의 이중주 in : 기억과 역사의 투쟁：당대비평 특집호" (2002), 삼인
- 최강민, "단일민족의신화와혼혈인", 어문논집, 35 (2006)
- 최성환, "다문화주의의 개념과 전망 - 문화 형식(이해)의 변동을 중심으로", 철학탐구, 24, pp.287~310 (2008), 중앙철학연구소
- 한경구, "한국적다문화사회의이상과현실：순혈주의와문명론적차별을넘어", 한국사회학회동북아시대위원회용역과제, 7(7) (2007)
- 한경구, "다민족·다문화사회로의전환", 젠더리뷰, 8 (2008)
- 한국언론사연구회, "대한매일신보연구" (2004), 커뮤니케이션북스
- 허동현, "100년전의실패 in : 근대한일관계사연구" (2000), 국학자료원
- 허동현, "대한제국의모델로서의러시아 in : 러일전쟁과동북아의변화" (2005), 선인
- 허동현, "개화기윤치호의해외체험과문화수용", 한국문화연구, 11 (2006)
- 허동현, "대한제국을 어떻게 보아야 하나", 한국사연구, 139(139), pp.247~257 (2007), 한국사연구회
- 허동현, "근현대사와열린민족주의", 우리역사길라잡이, 2 (2008), 국사편찬위원회
- Smith, Anthorny D., "The Ethnic Origin of Nations" (1986), Basil Blackwell Ltd.
- "United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination", ~ (2007)
- "Press Release：Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination considers Report of Republic of Korea, Geneva, 10, August", ~