지역문화콘텐츠의 장기 지속을 위한 인력 양성 방안

Abstract

Although the term of ‘cultural contents’ has been used over 10 years in human studies including Korean literature, there are still many people who ask back what ‘cultural contents’ are. Looking back on the point when literature and cultural contents began to be combined, we can find that there was mutual cooperation between academic and industrial circles having expectation that it would help solve each other’s difficulties. In the beginning, academic discussion was mostly the type of reporting cases to develop cultural contents; however, since there was no proper methodology then, it was just basic-step discussion to grope for better methodology by sharing their trial and error through case report. Yet, this was just mere basic-step discussion, but the ultimate goal is to generalize or theorize individual problems found in each case or draw a structural system from it. Now is about the time for us to move our focus of discussion to more macroscopic and structural problems in order to find out ways to produce high-quality cultural contents. If literature does not include cultural contents as its study area temporarily, it is needed to grope for measures to continue the cases to make literature as cultural contents longer. This article has examined what university should do in order to foster an environment that can develop local cultural contents consistently in the industry of cultural contents. Largely, it can be summed up as education, research, and establishment of infrastructure for social entry. This paper suggests several measures such as educational processes to cultivate expert manpower, research to excavate materials to produce high-quality local cultural contents, and cooperative networks between industrial and academic circles to supply export manpower favorably. However, the measured suggested in this paper are based on limited experiences of some universities, so this discussion exhibits a clear limitation. There could be difficulties in applying those measures to other universities as they are for expansion, and sometimes, such consideration itself may not be impossible. This needs to be regarded as trial an error and continue to be modified and complemented for improvement. It is thought that such process itself is the course to establish sustainable infrastructure for local cultural contents. To point out problems in universities, this study chose as the subject of criticism ‘the storytelling contest’ of a local autonomous entity a little distant. It is quite a safe method for a university to maintain some distance from a local autonomous entity or a company and shoot an arrow of criticism in the name of commercialism or administrative opportunism. However, to do so, the situation is not very favorable in the inside or outside of universities. The field that can provide substantial support from theoretical perspectives should be aided aggressively. ‘Culture’ is not something that can change with an individual or a field but an area requiring far stronger mutual cooperation since ‘cultural contents’ ranging over the area of industry. Even though businesses of local autonomous entities to revive their local culture seem bureaucratic and ineffective or companies related with cultural contents look tinged with commercialism, it may be the time to regard them considerately as partners generating culture that can give impression and happiness to the public living in this era.