식민지 시기의 김기림 비평에 나타난 민족 표상의 성격 재고(再考)

Abstract

This essay studies re-thinking on the nations in the Kim, Ki-rim’s critics. I think that nations in his critics is nationalism, not Nationalism. The Nationalism is close concept. But the nationalism is open concept. Benedict Anderson and Prasenjit Duara thinks that what is nation, who discusses nation, and how say nation. Signifiant nation is imagined communities. So nation is not transcendental or absolute signifiant. But the literacy movement of the Right and the Left trusts ours nation only is true, and others nation is not true unconsciously. In the Kim, Ki-rim’s critics, I research a aspect of imagined communities’s identity. The signifiant nations is experienced and open concept, not transcendental and not-open. All people in the Kim, Ki-rim’s critics is open concept. This thought is important. Many scholars think Kim, Ki-rim of Liberation period is the front of the literacy movement of and the Left, and Kim, Ki-rim writes the critics of the Left. This paper researches the post-colonialnistic aspect of Kim, gi-rim’s criticism and essay that the colonized accept colonizer‘s savoir from 1936 to 1941. His criticism shows acceptance of colonizer‘s savoir and cultural difference. This paper refers Homi Bhabha and John McLeod’s post-colonialnism. This essay show signifiant nations not Nation in the Kim, Ki-rim’s critics of Liberation period(1945~1950). The Nation is transcendental and absolute signifiant, but nations is experienced and relative signifiant. In Kim, Ki-rim’s critics, nations means that he thinks experienced and relative aspects of nation, such as nation’s identification, variety of literacy task and method of literature nationalistic, and alternative idea against movement of the Right.