『국민문학』의 신진 비평 담론 연구
A Study on the discourse of the a new critics of the "kukmin-munhak(國民文學)"
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The leading role of the "kukmin-munhak(國民文學)" was changed at the 1943. Before 1943, Choi-jae-seo, Kim-jong-han, and other authors, full fledged led the pro-Japanese literary circles, after 1943,young writers started to appear on the pro-Japanese literacy circles. The young writers had the three characteristics. Firstly, they thought political more important than literary value. Secondly, They thought naturally that korean writer created work with the japanese. Lastly,They readily accepted japan's sprit. They went in to the renovated pro-Japanese literary circles under the shelter of authorities. But the new critic had a contradiction in their theory. Their theory contained meaning that korean should get rid of the modern western culture, and Seriously korean should learn the japanese culture, the core of the sprit of “仕奉(つかまつる)”, that means service of japanese emperor. But They expressed their theory in the modern western style of language. Their theory's contents did not match up at their theory's form.
Abstract
The leading role of the "kukmin-munhak(國民文學)" was changed at the 1943. Before 1943, Choi-jae-seo, Kim-jong-han, and other authors, full fledged led the pro-Japanese literary circles, after 1943,young writers started to appear on the pro-Japanese literacy circles. The young writers had the three characteristics. Firstly, they thought political more important than literary value. Secondly, They thought naturally that korean writer created work with the japanese. Lastly,They readily accepted japan's sprit. They went in to the renovated pro-Japanese literary circles under the shelter of authorities. But the new critic had a contradiction in their theory. Their theory contained meaning that korean should get rid of the modern western culture, and Seriously korean should learn the japanese culture, the core of the sprit of “仕奉(つかまつる)”, that means service of japanese emperor. But They expressed their theory in the modern western style of language. Their theory's contents did not match up at their theory's form.
참고문헌 (19)
- "국민문학 , 녹기 , 삼천리 , 문예 등", ~
- 고봉준, "전형기 비평의 논리와 국민문학론 - 최재서의 비평을 중심으로", 한국근대문학연구, pp.41~58 (2003), 한국근대문학회
- 김윤식, "최재서의 국민문학 과 사토 키요시 교수" (2009), 역락
- 김재용, "협력과 저항" (2004), 소명출판
- 노상래, "『국민문학』 소재 한국작가의 일본어 소설 연구", 한민족어문학(구 영남어문학), (44), pp.353~412 (2004), 한민족어문학회
- 박광현, "조선문인협회와 ‘내지인 반도작가’", 현대소설연구, (43), pp.79~111 (2010), 한국현대소설학회
- 박광현, "식민지 ‘제국대학’의 설립을 둘러싼 경합의 양상과 교수진의 유형", 일본학, 28, pp.203~236 (2009), 동국대학교 일본학 연구소
- 신지영, "『국민문학』좌담회의 양가성과 발화게임", 민족문학사연구, (40), pp.278~309 (2009), 민족문학사학회
- 윤대석, "식민지 국민문학론" (2006), 역락
- 이원동, "완전한 존재를 향한 불가능한 꿈 - 최재서의 ‘국민문학’ 담론의 심리 구조 -", 어문론총, 52(52), pp.261~285 (2010), 한국문학언어학회
- 전설영, "식민지 말기 국민문학론의 국민 되기의 논리와 문학적 의미－최재서의 ｢받들어 모시는 문학｣을 중심으로", 사이間SAI, (9), pp.357~389 (2010), 국제한국문학문화학회
- 정선태, "일제 말기 ‘국민문학’과 새로운 ‘국민’의 상상 - 조선문인협회 현상소설 입선작 <연락선>과 <형제>를 중심으로", 한국현대문학연구, (29), pp.351~379 (2009), 한국현대문학회
- 천정환, "일제말기의 작가의식과 ‘나’의 형상화", 현대소설연구, 43(43), pp.35~78 (2010), 한국현대소설학회
- 후지이다케시, "번역과 주체" (2005), 이산
- 쑨커, "다케우치 요시미라는 물음" (2007), 그린비
- 다케우치 요시미, "일본과 아시아" (2006), 소명출판
- 이글턴, 테리, "미학사상" (1999), 한신문화사
- 이글턴,테리, "민족주의 : 아이러니와 참여, 민족주의, 식민주의 문학" (2011), 인간사랑
- 지젝, 슬라보예, "이데올로기라는 숭고한 대상" (2002), 인간사랑