기교주의 논쟁의 시론(詩論)적 의의

Abstract

In the middle of 1930’s, Kim-kirim, Im-hwa, and Park-yongchul, three poet-critics debated about the problem of mannerism in Korean contemporary poetry. This study examines the poetic value of their critical argument. The important point at issue of debates between Kim-kirim and Im-hwa was its own history and modernity of Korean poetry. They shared common opinions in modern poetry and regarded it as an aesthetic reflection of fall and decline of the bourgeoisie. In their eyes, the widening of bourgeois decadence was an essence of modernity of contemporary poetry. They thought alike that a new trend of 1930’s Korean poetry was another artistic form of widespread decadence in the bourgeois civilization. The hidden issue of argument between Im-hwa and Park-yongchul was to do with poetic embodiment and concept difference of ‘mannerism’ and ‘technic’. Park criticized that Im did not fully understand aesthetic characteristics of poetic language. Park emphasized a special relationship between sense and feeling in poetic embodiment. According to him, a expression of feeling turns into a poem by virtue of poetic structuralization, namely the formalization of sense. By Park, the focus of their debates was changed from ‘technic’ to ‘technology’, and the latter in poetry creation was defined as an ability of dealing with a medium. After Mannerism Argument, Im-hwa published a few of criticism about language theory because he realized that it was an important problem to explain the meaning and significance of ‘technology’ in poetry creation. Concentrating on the dialectical synthesis of content and form in poetry, Kim-kirim renamed ‘modernism’ to ‘mannerism’ and began to pay attention to the combination of poetry and science, or the scientification of poetics.