1930년대 한중 모더니즘 문학논의 비교고찰

Abstract

The study focuses on acceptance phase of modernism novels both on Korea and China in 1930s, the compared theme, character, and techniques of those modernism novels between the two countries, and the findings are as follows; First, this study covers modernism novels mainly on Korean writers Park tae-won and Chinese writer Mu su-ying, whose novels were utterly different from the past in their formality and technical skill. The theory of modernism was mainly discussed throughout the poetry, relatively weak in novel literature. Park Tae Won and Mu Su-ying more focused on the formality and technical skills of the novel rather than its contents. Of course, due to the cultural situation in Korea at the time, the controversial with theory of Realism versus Modernism was deeply intensified. Thus, the search for novel theory has become more intense. However, the case of China, since the theory of realism has its central position in literary circles; sufficient discussion of modernism has been done locally. At the same time, because of the influence of Japan, the traces of imitation were more evident. Second, the two countries all embraced the miscellaneous theory of Western modernism which was a new literary concept flow worldwide that became a global trend. However, in case of Korea, it was mainly inherited from the confrontation with realism literature (professional literature), opening the horizon of new literature on the premise of breaking with tradition and affecting the development of modernism novel literature theory with the exclusive feature, in the future. On the contrary, in China, it was received as a complementary view point in realism and romanticism literature, and later the trend had been stopped. Third, both forms and techniques have been recognized as the main means of expressing conscious flow, inner monologue technique, montage of technique of film and double exposure method. And a lot of contemporary art techniques that never existed were discussed. However, in Korea, the subject of preference was the first-person view, which was based on autonomy and technique of literature. Meanwhile, in China, the expansion of the painting width by the compound point and the fast rhythm, in other words, the form and theory of psychological analysis of “urban landscape line” were emphasized. Moreover, the psychological theories such as sub-conscious and unconscious (scooping) are especially highlighted. While double exposure methods are highly emphasized along with inner monologue by conscious flow in Korea. Fourth, in language style, pursuing fresh and new sense of language expression, Mu sy-ying's view on Park's pursuit of “fresh and sensitive sense" in “expression, technique, and portrayal" and his admiration for Ryu Nao's “new narrative" are entirely consistent in language style. However, in Korea, because of plenty of usages on the first person viewpoint in novels, which focused on languages self-readiness; the Korean authors emphasized the characteristics of structured linguistic unity by the unity of inner logic of psychology and consciousness. Contrarily, in China, the sense of linguistic unity is emphasized while focusing on the third personal multiple view point. The theory of Korean and Chinese modernism was contradictory to the narrative theory of traditional realism. This shows the gap of narrative technique between the two literatures. A new impulse happened to the literary world which claimed experimentally unique novel forms and techniques. Furthermore, the modernity appeared at the masterpiece of modern novels.