유치진의 <흑룡강>－‘민족협화’ 및 그 균열의 의미

Abstract

Yu Chijin’s play <Heirongjiang> depicts the birth of ‘Manchukuo’ through cooperation of various peoples including the Koreans, and in this process, describes the relationships between the Koreans and such diverse peoples as Chinese, Manchurians, Mongolians and Japanese. Furthermore, the play tries to inspire ‘National Reconciliation’ or the founding ideal or ‘Manchukuo’. In the novel, the Koreans have formed multi-layered relationships with the Chinese of various social statuses such as land owners, farmers, merchants and Northeast China Army soldiers, while being closely related with such minority peoples as Manchurians, Mongolians and Japanese. This study attempted to examine Yu Chijin’s view of the rupture of ‘National Reconciliation’, noting such inter-people relations and mutual perception, and therey, discuss the implications of such a rupture.The novel ‘Heirongjiang’ emphasizes that the Koreans residing in Manchu were the people of merit in the development of Manchu and foundation of ‘Manchukuo’ and thereby, contends that the Koreans residing in Manchu should have the sufficient rights to live in Manchu/Manchukuo, and then, suggests the ways to secure such rights. The ways he suggests should be pursuit of Japanese political ideologies ‘National Reconciliation’ and Greater East Asia Coprosperity and resolution of the conflict between Koreas and the majority people of Manchukuo or Chinese. Besides, the play argues that in order to resolve the conflicts, the Koreans should insist on their rights to life based on their merits of developing Manchuria and ‘cooperation for the foundation of Manchukuo, while hinting that the Koreans should caution themselves against the Japanese. In short, ’the National Reconciliation’ championed by Yu Chijin through this play would well lead toward ‘the reconciliation’ centered about Korean’s benefits. Another important aspect of the play is that Yu Chijin (‘Heirongjiang’) emphasizes the benefits of the Koreans residing in Manchu taking advantage of the Japanese colonial logics or ‘Manchukuo’ and ‘Greater East Asia Co-prosperity’. Hence, the National Reconciliation could not but expose a crack if the Koreans’ benefits should not be warranted. Since this play was performed in 1941 or 9 years after the foundation of Manchukuo, such a rupture would indirectly suggest the gap between ideal and reality of Manchukuo or the illusion of Manchukuo. Such a gap would be the rupture of author’s ideal in the process of the specific practice or the national drama. All such ruptures or sense of gap would result from his accommodation of the Japanese colonial logic from the perspective of a Korean residing in the peninsula or Manchu. In other words, he practiced the national drama, while not completely internalizing Japanese colonial logic.