역사의 거울에 비춰 본 한국인 정체성
Korean Identity Reflected In The Mirror Of History
0
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
For Koreans, the twenty-first century coincides, internationally, with the advent of the era of globalization and, nationally, with the emergence of a multicultural society. And this has made it imperative for us to reconsider our definition of who or what we Koreans are. Korean as an identity is a historically established concept, for it is not something we were born with but something we have become. The German philosopher F. Nietzsche once said that what is historical is not an object of definition but an object of interpretation; only what is not historical, thus, can be defined. In each period, people wrote their own version of 'Korean history' with which we can catch a glimpse of their idea of who Koreans are. Therefore, even if we cannot define Korean identity in any way, we should be still able to explain it through the history of the historical writings that dealt with the problem. It is only a recent or a modern phenomena that Koreans have started to define their identity in terms of the concept “nation" generally understood as a racially and culturally homeogenous group. To understand how our group identity was perceived before the modern age, we need to examine how the official history of each period was written. During the time of the dynasties, the official history was called ”Jeong-sa"(正史) and since the rise of the modern national state, it has been referred to as “Guk-sa"(國史). At the center of the transformation of historical discourse from “Jeong-sa" to “Guk-sa", there lies the change in the understanding of who Koreans are as the subject of Korean history. Therefore, the purposes of this paper are to (1) explain Korean identity with a genealogical analysis of historical discourse; (2) reconsider the question of who we are in relation to the emergence of a multicultural society in twenty-first-century Korea.
Abstract
For Koreans, the twenty-first century coincides, internationally, with the advent of the era of globalization and, nationally, with the emergence of a multicultural society. And this has made it imperative for us to reconsider our definition of who or what we Koreans are. Korean as an identity is a historically established concept, for it is not something we were born with but something we have become. The German philosopher F. Nietzsche once said that what is historical is not an object of definition but an object of interpretation; only what is not historical, thus, can be defined. In each period, people wrote their own version of 'Korean history' with which we can catch a glimpse of their idea of who Koreans are. Therefore, even if we cannot define Korean identity in any way, we should be still able to explain it through the history of the historical writings that dealt with the problem. It is only a recent or a modern phenomena that Koreans have started to define their identity in terms of the concept “nation" generally understood as a racially and culturally homeogenous group. To understand how our group identity was perceived before the modern age, we need to examine how the official history of each period was written. During the time of the dynasties, the official history was called ”Jeong-sa"(正史) and since the rise of the modern national state, it has been referred to as “Guk-sa"(國史). At the center of the transformation of historical discourse from “Jeong-sa" to “Guk-sa", there lies the change in the understanding of who Koreans are as the subject of Korean history. Therefore, the purposes of this paper are to (1) explain Korean identity with a genealogical analysis of historical discourse; (2) reconsider the question of who we are in relation to the emergence of a multicultural society in twenty-first-century Korea.
참고문헌 (17)
- 기어츠, 클리퍼드, "문화의 해석" (1998), 까치
- 金基鳳, "한국 근대 역사개념의 성립 ―‘국사’의 탄생과 신채호의 민족사학―", 韓國史學史學報, (12), pp.217~245 (2005), 한국사학사학회
- 김문식, "18세기 후반 정암 안정복의 기자 인식", 한국실학연구, 2, pp.25~53 (2000)
- 김문식, "星湖 李瀷의 箕子 인식", 퇴계학과 유교문화, (33), pp.65~90 (2003), 퇴계연구소
- 김태영, "조선성리학의 역사상" (2006), 경희대 출판국
- 도면회, ""국사는 어떻게 구성되었는가? - 한국 근대역사학의 창출과 통사체계의 확립" in: 역사학의 세기: 20세기 한국과 일본의 역사학" (2009), 휴머니스트
- 리파이유, 로테르, "컬처 코드" (2009), 리더스북
- 박지원, "태학유관록", 열하일기, ~
- 박찬승, "고려ㆍ조선시대의 역사의식과 문화정체성론", 韓國史學史學報, 10(10), pp.5~35 (2004), 한국사학사학회
- 베레비, 데이비드, "우리와 그들: 무리짓기에 대한 착각" (2007), 에코리브르
- 유봉학, "개혁과 갈등의 시대-정조와 19세기" (2009), 신구문화사
- 임형택, "문명의식과 실학" (2009), 돌베개
- 정민, "18세기 조선 지식인의 발견" (2007), 휴머니스트
- 추아, 에이미, "제국의 미래" (2008), 비아북
- "인조실록, 인조 17년 12월 26일", ~
- "태조실록, 태조 원년 8월 11일", ~
- "고종순종실록 36권, 광무 1년 10월 11일", ~
