90년대 마광수 필화사건의 담론사 - 푸코의 ‘담론창설자’라는 저자-기능의 고고학 -
Korean 90s History of Discourse: Ma Gwangsu’s Case of Literary Persecution - Foucault’s ‘Discourse Founder’: The Archaeology of Author- Function -
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
90년대 한국을 휩쓴 필화사건이 발생한 조건에서, ‘저자’라는 주체의 기능이 어떻게 작동 했는지, 그리고 마광수라는 특정 저자의 텍스트가 담론의 질서 속에서 어떤 위치를 차지하게 되었는지 살펴보고자 한다. 하나의 사건을 분석함으로써, 특정 시대와 장소가 구성한 담론의 힘(권력, pouvoir, Macht)이 어떤 장치와 메커니즘 속에 작동하는지 확인할 수 있다. 특히 마광수 저작에 나타난 특수한 형식의 성적 논의는 한국의 성담론, 개인 주체의 등장, 자유와 쾌락, 행복이라는 유토피아적 세계를 상상하고 구현하도록 촉발하며, 반대되는 주장 과의 대립 속에서도 상호 보완적으로 증식했다. 고전적 의미의 ‘모든 텍스트의 아버지’ 역할 을 하는 저자는 사라졌지만, 독자에 의해 소생되고, 투사된 새로운 유형의 저자가 기능하게 되었다. 그렇다면 이러한 새로운 기능을 수행하는 저자는 어떤 메커니즘 속에서 작동하게 되 었는가? 90년대 한국의 담론사에서 우발적으로 발생한 필화사건을 통해 이 과정을 조명하고 자 한다.
Abstract
Sometimes, it feels as if we lose certain forms of subjectivity, such as that of a god-creator or author. This phenomenon was termed ‘the death of the author’ by the French critic Roland Barthes. Yet the very age of readers gave rise to a new concept of authorship, functioning as a newly operated technique. For instance, Foucault proposes the concept of a ‘discourse founder’ who is not only a writer but also the founder of new ideas or discourses. The discourse founder doesn’t belong to an established knowledge system but corresponds to the order of discourse at a particular epistemic moment. The 1990s in Korea marked a turbulent era, characterized by a transition to democratization and the establishment of a civilian government that implemented neoliberal policies across various sectors. In 1992, Ma Gwangsu, a literature professor and writer, was prosecuted for his novel Pleased Sarah, whose main character explores her sexuality independently. His texts feature a variety of sexually bold expressions, including narcissism, fetishism, sadomasochism and non-coital sexual activities, etc. By examining his texts and interviews, one may consider the possibility that he functioned as a discourse founder in 1990s Korea. Did he earn the title of ‘discourse founder’? Did he transform the sexual discourse of the time, and did subsequent generations adopt, modify, or distance themselves from his discourse? If so, what mechanisms were at work? How was it possible to facilitate this specific authorial subjectivity? By investigating this particular event and the condition that allowed it to emerge within the historical context, we can gain insight into how new forms of authorship and subjectivity operate.