정전의 문화사: 해방후 『국어』 교과서와 문학정전

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the aspects of literary canons found through screening and representation after the emancipation with ‘textbooks’. In particular, mainly with textbooks published in the first and second curricula from 1955 until 1973, this author has analyzed the curricula, textbooks, and reading culture, and so on multilaterally. First of all, in the basic objectives of those curricula, ‘literary education’ is weakened, but instead, literature is used mainly as ‘reading materials’ or ‘educational materials’. Rather than aesthetic understanding of ‘literary works’, it is often utilized as the materials of linguistic activities, so the criteria of ‘literary aspects’ are postcured. In other words, in the aspects of those curricula, the detailed evaluation or criteria of literary works are not highlighted importantly. However, things are different in the stratum of editing ‘textbooks’. In the same curricula, textbooks were revised, but it was subtly linked with the fact that national policy was urgently announced. For example, diplomatic normalization between South Korea and Japan or Saemaeul Movement can be included in those cases. This either made the unit itself deleted or changed or new text included, and national policy was reflected even up to the level of vocabulary. Also, screened writers repeatedly appeared in a certain range. Comparing the textbooks with government designated textbooks including authorized textbooks, we can see that particular groups of writers were selected repeatedly. The critical variable influencing this repeated screening was history of modern literature in Korea, and we can see that not just ‘textbooks’ themselves but ideolized knowledge exerted influence independently. Also, in the reading culture, students read world literature as must-read, and this alsocan be understood as the process that ‘textbooks’ were complemented and extended in connection to the school entrance system. For example, after the emancipation, within the relations among dynamic powers including the education system, textbooks, or reading culture, literary canons’ genealogy and list were formed, and within that, ‘canons’ were used as a medium to represent the range and genealogy rather than the list selected itself.