노동–자본의 뫼비우스 띠와 2010년대 후반 한국소설의 일·노동：향후 서사 속 노동의 문제설정 방식에 대한 단상을 겸하여

Abstract

The purpose of this article is two. First, it examines the way in which ‘labor-capital’ conditions relate to narratives in the late 2010s. To this end, it examines how the labor-capital relationship today is consciously and unconsciously negotiating within the text. This calls for a review of the conditions of today’s work·labor and the feature of the times. What this article pays special attention to is the way humans are smoothly collusion with today’s systems. In addition, the labor-capital relationship shows a complexity that cannot be reduced to a simple hostility. The activity and subjectivity on human beings is also faltering. This is related to the aspect in which the character of the protagonist of a work·labor novel is created in terms of the creative methods. The character of the novel is largely determined by the system he·she belongs to and what he·she does. Secondly, this article attempts to suggest that the method of problem-setting labor in the narrative should be different. The work·labor novels dealt with in this article are conflicting and troubled between the “despite” and “dignity” surrounding work. And in the end, he·she longs to leap toward ‘dignity’. In this respect, it is not very different from the work·labor narratives of the past. However, this view of work is based on the modern values of “human=bios=dignity=active=subject=individual=self-reliance=mental and physical health.” This naturally has “animal=zoe=desperation=passive=object=dependence=disability= disease=aging” as a constitutive outside. And the normativeness of labor has been pursued while sublation this constitutive outside. Therefore, the right to work·labor was soon equated with citizenship. However, at this time, it is easy to miss out on numerous activities and affects that cannot be reduced to wage labor. It is also easy to block the imagination of outside the capitalist system, which is based on the problem of distribution of rights. In other words, it is clear that labor is a problem of citizenship in reality. But at the same time, work·labor must also be connected to other relationships and imaginations of the world. Ultimately, it should be the cautious conclusion of this article and the beginning of another theme to question the modern labor-centeredness.