석정 이정직의 사론(史論) 산문 고찰－주제 의식을 중심으로－

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to analyze Seokjeong Lee Jeong jik’s historical essay (史論) prose and explore the theme consciousness of the writings, and to explain the position of Seokjeong’s historical essays in the history of literature. Lee Jeong jik wrote a large number of historical essays. It is not easy to summarize his historical essays into a few themes. In some works, however, we can find a number of common themes. First, Lee Jeong jik questioned the evaluation of figures in Sima Qian’s Shiji and Ban Gu’s Hanshu, which had been regarded as authentic history, and attempted new evaluations. Rather than reading historical records fragmentarily, he found contradictions in the records through asking questions and answering the questions by himself. This attempt led him to search for a new frame of evaluation for historical figures of China who had been in a solid position. Second, although he spent his whole life in the remote country, Seokjeong pondered deeply over the fact that his going out to the world and his advance withdrawal and his fame would be known to the world. He believed that historical characters were able to unfold their visions only when they were found through others. In the same way, he regarded it crucial to have a timely opportunity to exhibit his talents and to meet a superior with an aesthetic sense. Third, Seokjeong’s view of history was based on the Confucian cyclic view of history, asserting that solutions for contemporary crises can be found in historical cases in the past. What Seokjeong wanted to tell to people in his days, taking edifications from the affairs of Han Emperors Wen and Wu, was read in the context of reality to some degree. As a Confucian scholar, furthermore, he did not give up his ambition for the governance of the nation. Seokjeong Lee Jeong jik was more genuinely interested in literary style than anyone else. He tried to imitate old sages’ writings and revive ‘the spirit of humanity and justice (仁義)’ in the writings. This is not limited to Seokjeong. Many writers in his days tried to overcome national crises relying on the power of writings. Though varying in approach, they all recognized the importance of ‘historical criticism.’ Among them, Seokjeong analyzed historical characters and events of China closely, and showed arguments. As his writings pursued old literary styles, they help us grasp how the Hangujeongmaek Theory evolved during the late Joseon Dynasty. Only after entering the late period of the Joseon Dynasty, historical essays were admitted as literary works, and ‘historical essay’ tended to be regarded as a separate literary style. Only from that period, authors began to write with perceiving the stylistic characteristics of historical essay prose more actively than before. Lee Jeong jik shows that historical essays developed both qualitatively and quantitatively in this flow of history of literature. Of course, we can notice the limitation that the materials of his historical essays were mostly on the transitional period from Chin to Han. Nevertheless, by analyzing a series of events experienced by one person, Seokjeong’s historical essays show expanded theme consciousness compared to earlier ones. Based on the Confucian view of history that history goes in cycles, Seokjeong, with open thinking, criticized newly the figures and events that had long enjoyed absolute authority. With regard to personal problems and crisis of the times as well, he argued that models can be found in historical cases.