조선 후기 주변 인식의 변화와 소통의 가능성 - 18세기 연행록과 북학파를 중심으로 -

Abstract

Yonhaeng-gi(documentary literature of China) had a significant influence onChoson intellectual life besides the transferring of information. One example ofthis influence was in relation to the traditional recognition of China and theother, on the contrary, in changing this recognition by presenting thetransformation of China. Yonhaeng-gi, written in the early eighteenth century,had a tendency to introduce news objectively, to analyze political situations, tolook retrospectively at the Ming dynasty, and to assert a self-confident view thatwhile the Chinese under Manchurian control had changed their dress we hadnot. Many parts of Yonhaeng-gi followed previous ones and were discussedcontinuously, so they expressed a common notion—often prejudiced—aboutChina. But new styles in writing were gradually appearing in the late eighteenthcentury. ‘Bukhak-pa,’who wrote the masterpieces of Yonhaeng-gi, appreciatedthe political stability and the development of the Qing dynasty, his workscorrecting common prejudices, revealed historical facts, and insisted on the newparadigm of neighboring countries. The leaders of this new tendency are, as isgenerally known, Hong Tae-yong, Pak Chi-won and Pak Che-ga. Though theyshared the outline that we should accept the advanced civilization of Qing, theroots of their thought and the aims of their affirmation of Qing culture weredifferent. Hong Tae-yong believed that every being has its own sense if we look at it inthe universal way, so we should affirm a view of the otherness and avoidegocentrism. Pak Chi-won fundamentally agreed with Hong Tae-yong’s thought,but he eventually aimed at self-renovation. On the other hand, in the case of PakChe-ga, the standard of superiority was clear, because he regarded the standard,not as Choson civilization but that of Qing. Though he insisted aggressively onthe need to accept Qing culture, discrimination between one and the otherremained unchanged. We need to re-appreciate the recognition of otherness in the thought of HongTae-yong and Pak Chi-won. Undoubtedly, it is difficult to substitute directly, buttheir meaning of otherness was so wide-ranging, from the individual to nature,that it now inspires us with the affirmative prospect of mutual understanding.