선군(先軍)사상의 미학화 비판 -2000년 전후 북한문학에 나타난 작가의식과 글쓰기의 변모양상

Abstract

This Study purposed to analyze the transformation looks of writer’s sense and writing in North Korean Literature before and after 2000. A writing style of the writers didn’t go at all out of a party literature, which had intended to overcome the crisis of regime collapse, named ‘a hardship march’. Then, the subject of writing was compelled to an ideology and a policy outside the writing. Especially, ‘a military-first revolutionary literature’ based on ‘the military-first ideology’ has been an essence of the compulsion, which maintained an absolute position in a writing discourse for the last ten years. So, how does the aesthetics of the military-first ideology affect the writing including a creation or a criticism? Internally, the military-first revolutionary literature is changing from the ideology of military-first as a subject matter of the literature to ‘a gun stock aesthetics’ as an aesthetics level. Externally, it is enlarging a part of military literature up to all genres of literature art, so ‘the military-first revolutionary literature’ of a slogan level is spreading theoretically to ‘a theory of military-first literature art’ aiming at the general theory. But, it is thought that there are many problems in restricting only to ‘the aesthetics of the military-first ideology’ through interpreting closely the essence and boundary of the military-first literature. As a result, a novel of Han Ung-bin, which formed the literature matters and ideology with ‘a revolutionary military mind’, and a writing strategy of Han Mi-yeong criticism were analyzed critically to be compelled to the military-first ideology. Instead, through the examples of novels of Byeon Chang-ryul, poems of Lee Jin-cheol and criticism of Lee Dong-su, a recovery towards a realism was demonstrated to be important. Consequently, it is thought that to seek an exit of the military-first literature with a contrived system to upgrade the revolutionary military mind in the level of literature matters, ideology and the aesthetics cannot be an adequate intention. Instead, it would be important to return to a simple realism to describe the lives of various people, who try to live desperately under the severe ordeal of the regime crisis. That’s because it is possible to write really when writing the way the reality is, without the military-first ideology.