민족 영화 담론, 그 의미와 이슈들

Abstract

The more full-fledged and profound discourses on the national cinema in South Korea must be needed, because a current transnational reality led by capitalism makes it more difficult for us to answer what role cinema plays in the construction of the cultural boundary and national identity. I will thus critically examine how to define the term “national cinema” after an introduction of the discourses on national cinema in the western film theory and construct a subject in national cinemas, as well as the dynamics between Hollywood cinema as the global dominant one in a transnational age and other national cinemas and the relationship of national cinema and transnational one. I hope such an approach would contribute to the productive discussion on national cinema including the identity of Korean cinema. Under the influence of anti-essentialism with regard to the national since the late 1980s, the historical conceptualization and critical study on national cinema have been more accomplished. During the period, the issues such as the role of a nation-state in both film production and reception and the relationship between cinema and ideology necessary for a nation-state’s building and maintenance were raised, and the discussion was consequently focused on what role cinema plays in the construction of a nation, national identity and national culture. In order to escape from being trapped in the limited conceptualization in terms of a nation and productively approach national cinema, the concept ‘the national’ has been highlighted. That was the result that a nation-state and national identity were reconceptualized in a way of the constructive, the non-essentialist and the contradictory by anti-essentialists. The question on national cinema has been shifted from ‘what is the relationship between cinema and nation?’ to ‘how is the national in cinema constructed?’, just as the problematic from ‘what is a nation?’ to ‘how is a nation constructed?’. In a phenomena of a globalization, both transnational power and sub-national, local power are strengthened and the cultural hybridity of a nation-state is highly recognized, while the sovereignty of a nation-state is weakened. What influence would such a change give on cinema’s construction of the national and cultural boundaries as well as the concept of a nation or a state? What would happen to the location of an address when cinema is regularly produced, circulated and consumed across the national boundaries?I here attempt to explore the transition in terms of three frameworks, the relationship between Hollywood cinema as the most representative transnational one and other national cinemas, the third cinema, and trans-Asian cinema.