본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

해방기 시에 나타난 윤리의식과 국가의 문제 -오장환과 서정주의 해방기 시에 대한 비교를 중심으로

The Problems of Ethical Consciousness and the Nation represented in poems in the Liberating period. -Based upon the comparison between Oh Jang-whan's and Seo Jung-joo's poems

0

조회

0

다운로드

14

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류한국어와문학

초록

This paper aims to read poems by Oh Jang-whan and Seo Jung-joo in terms of poetic ethics. Two Poets who belonged to, what we call, Sanegmyeongpa (생명파, the School of Life)), criticized colonial modernity through their aesthetical consciousness of decadence. However, there lied a decisive difference in their ways of returning hometown and of taking action against Japanese colonialism. It is the difference that ended their friendship, and they began to pursue their own perspectives in writing poems in the Liberating period. Oh Jang-whan's poetic subject looked upon himself as an ethical adjudicator, and raised his firm voice of ethical judgement based upon rigid dichotomy of good and evil. Thus, his poetic subject represented the dominating class as an offender(or an enemy), and the dominated class as a victim. So, in Oh's poetic vision, the victim's resentment and revenge against the enemy are justified. Futhermore, his poetic subject tried to reveal the vision that the ethically complete subject turned into Sittichkeit, which would eventually be a socialist state. On the other hand, Seo Jung-joo could not be immune from his pro-Japanese past. However, he realized his desire for self-preservation by relying on men in power(nationalist camp), instead of being introspective towards internal morals. He showed interest in the discourse of Shilla(신라) as a nationalist ideology and summoned the aesthetics of ancient history to embroider the ideology. Especially, his ethics of devotion which was based upon nationalistic view of ethics, was ended in ethics of violence to justify one's sacrifice and devotion as the indispensible for a national community. Oh Jang-whan's and Seo Jung-joo's poetry in the Liberation period show the ideological and aesthetical oppositions between the Left and the Right. One can find that these two poets assume a very radical difference regarding the ethical judgment. At the very core of the difference, there lies the problem of pro-Japanese action and its atonement, and recognition of the fundamentals for the "new country," or Sittlichkeit as such.

Abstract

This paper aims to read poems by Oh Jang-whan and Seo Jung-joo in terms of poetic ethics. Two Poets who belonged to, what we call, Sanegmyeongpa (생명파, the School of Life)), criticized colonial modernity through their aesthetical consciousness of decadence. However, there lied a decisive difference in their ways of returning hometown and of taking action against Japanese colonialism. It is the difference that ended their friendship, and they began to pursue their own perspectives in writing poems in the Liberating period. Oh Jang-whan's poetic subject looked upon himself as an ethical adjudicator, and raised his firm voice of ethical judgement based upon rigid dichotomy of good and evil. Thus, his poetic subject represented the dominating class as an offender(or an enemy), and the dominated class as a victim. So, in Oh's poetic vision, the victim's resentment and revenge against the enemy are justified. Futhermore, his poetic subject tried to reveal the vision that the ethically complete subject turned into Sittichkeit, which would eventually be a socialist state. On the other hand, Seo Jung-joo could not be immune from his pro-Japanese past. However, he realized his desire for self-preservation by relying on men in power(nationalist camp), instead of being introspective towards internal morals. He showed interest in the discourse of Shilla(신라) as a nationalist ideology and summoned the aesthetics of ancient history to embroider the ideology. Especially, his ethics of devotion which was based upon nationalistic view of ethics, was ended in ethics of violence to justify one's sacrifice and devotion as the indispensible for a national community. Oh Jang-whan's and Seo Jung-joo's poetry in the Liberation period show the ideological and aesthetical oppositions between the Left and the Right. One can find that these two poets assume a very radical difference regarding the ethical judgment. At the very core of the difference, there lies the problem of pro-Japanese action and its atonement, and recognition of the fundamentals for the "new country," or Sittlichkeit as such.

참고문헌 (19)

  1. 서정주, "서정주문학전집 1~5" (1972), 일지사
  2. 서정주, "일정말기와 나의 친일시", 신동아 (1992)
  3. 오장환, "오장환 전집" (2002), 실천문학사
  4. 곽명숙, "해방기 한국 시의 미학과 윤리 ― 오장환과 설정식을 중심으로", 한국시학연구, (33), pp.37~67 (2012), 한국시학회[DOI]
  5. 김구, "백범일지" (2002), 돌베개
  6. 김승희, "정신분석적 기호학으로 본 서정주와 오장환의 시세계", 한국문학이론과 비평, 8, pp.190~143 (2000)
  7. 김윤식, "한국현대문학사론" (1988), 한샘
  8. 김용희, "해방이라는 숭고한 대상과 언어적 공황", 국어국문학, 141, pp.367~389 (2005), 국어국문학회
  9. 나종석, "근대적 가족 제도에 대한 헤겔의 윤리적 정당화에 관하여", 동서철학연구, (34), pp.29~55 (2004), 한국동서철학회
  10. 남기혁, "오장환 시의 육체와 퇴폐, 그리고 모럴의 문제-해방 이전의 시 창작을 중심으로", 한국문학이론과 비평, 16(1), pp.155~190 (2012), 한국문학이론과비평학회[DOI]
  11. 남기혁, "서정주의 ‘신라정신’론에 대한 재론 - 윤리의식과 정치적 무의식 비판을 중심으로 -", 한국문화, (54), pp.255~280 (2011), 규장각한국학연구원
  12. 박민규, "衛生의 근대와 生命派:서정주와 오장환의 시", 한국근대문학연구, 1(20), pp.211~240 (2009), 한국근대문학회
  13. 이은정, "시인부락의 모색과 도정", 상허학보, 4, pp.437~473 (1998), 상허학회
  14. 박용찬, "해방기 시의 현실인식과 논리" (2004), 역락
  15. 申範淳, "해방기 시의 리얼리즘 연구 : 시적주체의 이데올로기와 현실성에 대한 기호적 접근", 박사, pp.1990
  16. 이기성, "해방기 시에 나타난 가족주의와 국가주의 — ‘자기비판’ 문제를 중심으로 —", 상허학보, 26, pp.151~194 (2009), 상허학회
  17. 이충진, "칸트의 도덕성과 헤겔의 인륜성", 칸트연구, 6, pp.287~316 (2000), 한국칸트학회
  18. 조극훈, "도덕성과 인륜성 칸트 실천철학에 대한 헤겔의 비판", 칸트연구, 9, pp.181~203 (2002), 한국칸트학회
  19. 최현식, "서정주 시의 근대와 반근대" (2003), 소명출판

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (9건)