근대시기 환동해지역 인권의 위상학 - 1920년대 프롤레타리아 혁명문학을 중심으로

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to re-think of the proletarian literature as the narrative of human rights. Accordingly, this paper is concerning the topology of human rights showed in 1920's proletarian literature especially from four countries, Chosun, China, Japan and Russia. These four countries are adjacent to East Sea Rim. In Russia the proletarian literature based on Socilalist human rights paradigm during modern era performed a vital role in creating the proletaria into the subject of the revolution. In this paper I am willing to discuss this creating process as a connection with the production of space. The East Sea Rim was the peripheral space which lagged economically behind compared to other North-East Asia region. Such peripheral spaces were made up to revolutionary space in revolutionary literature. i.e., The issue of proletarian human rights were symbolically re-emerged in that East Sea Rim space which was generally backward. In this point of view it had the ironic meaning. The proletarian revolutionary literature in modern era had the significant value as the historical data to understand the politics of human rights which existed in North-East Asia in the same time. But on the narrative of human rights of such revolutionary literature the intrinsic paradigm of human right was being operated. That was dichotomized paradigm of the relationship between repressive powers and resistant powers. The subject of the revolution was described in the literature as a being who subverted these dichotomized power system. What we know through this was that we could understand the class struggle to be the human rights struggle. But in the actual literature work the narrative of the human rights struggle was re-emerged like multi-layered. i.e., in case of Japan and Russia who already formed a nation-state the class inequality was the mainstream, but on the other hand in Chosun and China who was a colony or semi-colony the issue of class was not separated from that of nation. This is the case of what the politics of human rights is not a simple problem but the complex one. What we recognize the 1920's revolutionary literature as the narrative of human rights has a significant meaning to provide us with a clear and lucid cognition frame in regard to post-modern politics of human rights. But the narrative of human rights of the revolutionary literature proved it's own limitation by rulling the life of 'the part of no parts'(in French 'les sans-parts) who was existing around the edge of the human rights out of the process of making the proletaria the subject of the narrative of human rights.