1920·30년대 중국 지식인의 ‘대중’ 담론 연구 ― 대중과의 관계 맺기를 통한 지식인의 자리 찾기
‘Public' Discourse Studies of Chinese Intellectuals during 1920-30s: Seeking Positions of Intellectuals through Relationship with the Public
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This thesis involves intellectuals' identity problems through the relationship between intellectuals and the public, which is revealed in public discourse of Chinese intellectuals of 1920-30s. It is because various discourse of intellectuals to the public is necessarily exposed to its distinction by relationship methods between the discourse's production subject 'intellectuals' and the public. Therefore, the relationship between intellectuals and the public focuses on ultimately solving confrontational relationship between the imaginary public and real public by intellectuals. To solve the very confrontation, Ideologies like the Enlightenment and socialism come out. However, these trials to narrow realistic gaps between intellectuals and the public accompany realistic effects, which mean confusion of intellectuals' identity(or individuality), in other words, affirmation and denial to intellectuals' existence. Thus public discourse of intellectuals is to raise an essential question to intellectuals themselves by mediating the public. In those days, recognition of intellectuals exposed from public discourse is largely divided into four patterns: dichotomous attitudes of recognition such as 1)minority and majority, 2)old and new things, 3)bourgeoisie(or feudality) and the proletariat and 4)the West and China. This paradigm is exposed to highly complex combination methods rather than simple types. It not only provides notions of intellectuals, but also has characteristics chosen according to their ideological tendency. Intellectuals' identity problems clearly exposed by relationship with the public are equally applied to Chinese intellectuals after Chinese reform. That's because at present classism of the so-called 'proletariat' disappeared, and the relationship by intellectuals is trying again. But intellectuals' identity problems required by relationship between intellectuals and the public still remain not solved.
Abstract
This thesis involves intellectuals' identity problems through the relationship between intellectuals and the public, which is revealed in public discourse of Chinese intellectuals of 1920-30s. It is because various discourse of intellectuals to the public is necessarily exposed to its distinction by relationship methods between the discourse's production subject 'intellectuals' and the public. Therefore, the relationship between intellectuals and the public focuses on ultimately solving confrontational relationship between the imaginary public and real public by intellectuals. To solve the very confrontation, Ideologies like the Enlightenment and socialism come out. However, these trials to narrow realistic gaps between intellectuals and the public accompany realistic effects, which mean confusion of intellectuals' identity(or individuality), in other words, affirmation and denial to intellectuals' existence. Thus public discourse of intellectuals is to raise an essential question to intellectuals themselves by mediating the public. In those days, recognition of intellectuals exposed from public discourse is largely divided into four patterns: dichotomous attitudes of recognition such as 1)minority and majority, 2)old and new things, 3)bourgeoisie(or feudality) and the proletariat and 4)the West and China. This paradigm is exposed to highly complex combination methods rather than simple types. It not only provides notions of intellectuals, but also has characteristics chosen according to their ideological tendency. Intellectuals' identity problems clearly exposed by relationship with the public are equally applied to Chinese intellectuals after Chinese reform. That's because at present classism of the so-called 'proletariat' disappeared, and the relationship by intellectuals is trying again. But intellectuals' identity problems required by relationship between intellectuals and the public still remain not solved.
참고문헌 (39)
- 조경란, "중국 근현대 사상의 탐색" (2003), 삼인
- 김대환, "중국사회성격논쟁" (1988), 창작과비평사
- 임춘성, "중국근현대문학운동사" (1997), 한길사
- 신광현, "‘문화연구’의 전개와 특징: 개괄적 설명. in: 비평04(2001년 상반기)" (2001), 생각의나무
- Tony Bennett, "대중성과 대중문화의 정치학. in: 문화, 일상, 대중: 문화에 관한 8개의 탐구" (2007), 한나래
- Michael Hardt, "다중" (2008), 세종서적
- Jose Ortega y Gasset, "대중의 반역" (2008), 역사비평사
- 李澤厚, "중국현대사상사론" (2005), 한길사
- 汪暉, "고뇌하는 중국" (2006), 길
- 陳獨秀, "新靑年" (1999), 中州古籍出版社
- 李大釗, "新靑年, 李大釗詩文選集" (1981), 人民文學出版社
- 周作人, "人的文學. in: 新靑年" (1999), 中州古籍出版社
- 仲密, "平民文學", 每週評論, (5) (1919)
- 沈雁氷, "文學和人的關係及中國古來對文學者身分的誤認. in: 文學硏究會資料(上)" (1985), 河南人民出版社
- 兪平伯, "關于民衆文學的討論. in: 文學硏究會資料(上)" (1985), 河南人民出版社
- 鄭伯奇, "國民文學論(上). in: 創造社資料(上)" (1985), 福建人民出版社
- 鄭伯奇, "國民文學論(下). in: 創造社資料(上)" (1985), 福建人民出版社
- 曰歸, "無産階級專政和無産階級的文學. in: 洪水" (1927), 燕京大學圖書館影印
- 成仿吾, "從文學革命到革命文學. in: 創造社資料(上)" (1985), 福建人民出版社
- 達夫, "大衆文藝釋名. in: 大衆文藝" (1928), 燕京大學圖書館影印
- 彭康, "革命文藝與大衆文藝" (1928), 燕京大學圖書館影印
- 魯迅, "文藝的大衆化. in: 大衆文藝論集" (1951), 北京師範大學出版部
- 梁實秋, "文學與大衆", 新月, 2(12) (1930)
- 蘇汶, "‘第三種人’的出路", 現代, 1(6) (1932), 燕京大學圖書館影印
- 黎錦熙, "大衆語眞詮(上)(下)", 申報⋅自由談 (1934)
- 黎錦熙, "序(一)論大衆語(釋名). in: 國語運動史綱" (1934), 商務印書館
- 楊朔, "潼關之夜. in: 延安文藝叢書 第四卷散文卷" (1984), 湖南人民出版社
- 訥維, "思念", 文藝陣地, 3(11) (1939)
- 周揚, "新的現實與文學上的新的任務. in: 文學運動史料選 제4책" (1979), 上海敎育出版社
- 毛澤東, "延安文藝界的整風運動和‘在延安文藝座談會上的講話’的發表. in: 文學運動史料選 제4책" (1979), 上海敎育出版社
- 吳玉章, "以思想革命來紀念抗日五周年" (1954), 新華書店
- 吳曉黎, "作爲關鍵詞的‘大衆’: 對二三十年代中國相關討論的梳理. in: 思想文綜" (1999), 曁南大學出版社
- 文貴良, "大衆話語: 生成之史―三四十年代的文藝大衆化描述之一", 中國現代文學硏究叢刊, (3) (2002)
- 王維國, "‘大衆話語’的轉換與生成", 河北學刊, 24(6) (2004)
- 汪暉, "我們如何成爲‘現代的’?. in: 現代性中國" (2005), 河南大學出版社
- Raymond Williams, "關鍵詞: 文化與社會的詞滙" (2005), 三聯書店
- Jose Ortegay y Gasset, "大衆的反叛" (2004), 吉林人民出版社
- 陶東風, "當代中國的文化批評" (2006), 北京大學出版社
- John Fiske, "Key Concepts in Communication and Cultural Studies" (1994), Routledge
