중국 ‘신좌파(新左派)’의 대중문화 담론 고찰 ― 재현된 계급적 대중문화 담론과 좌파 지식인
‘Mass Culture’ Discourse from the Perspective of the Chinese New Left: Reproduced Class Mass Culture Discourse and the New Left Intellectuals
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This thesis is to critically investigate mass culture discourse that the Chinese ‘New Left’ proposed. The ‘New Left’ fundamentally views mass culture as middle class or white collar. This provision of class is to aim at criticizing mass culture using culture of specific class. Mass culture discourse of the ‘New Left’ includes Frankfurt’s critical theory, especially notion of culture industry functions as a mainly theoretical resource. Critical theory that considers the production subject as culture industry understands receiving subject as passive and mechanical existence. As a result, criticism of mass culture and audience as passive(or negative) objects are placed in the discourse structure. Mao Dun defined mass culture as petit bourgeois's culture and criticized their low quality tastes. He chose a negative word, ‘petit bourgeois’ instead of ‘the mass’ word to keep his imaginary(or significant) ‘the mass’. Despite the difference of historical context, the New Left and Mao Dun's mass culture discourse consist of very similar logistic system. In this aspect, criticism of mass culture that the New Left and socialistic intellectuals progressed in the 1930's is placed in a continual line. However, for them, negative recognition of this mass culture(or the mass) shares hidden ideological effects which affirm the discourse subjects, or intellectuals. That is, it exists that the more criticized petit bourgeois is, the more distinct social function and role are. The main characteristic which mass culture discourse of the New Left has is revealed as ‘politicalism’ and ‘counterculture’. Political attitudes demanding macropolitical practices are that the New Left himself criticizes ‘academic politics’. But paradoxically, they don’t free themselves from academic politics. Unlike socialistic intellectuals, their discourse has countercultural characteristic with the boundary which can't include socialistic future society in their discourse inner.
Abstract
This thesis is to critically investigate mass culture discourse that the Chinese ‘New Left’ proposed. The ‘New Left’ fundamentally views mass culture as middle class or white collar. This provision of class is to aim at criticizing mass culture using culture of specific class. Mass culture discourse of the ‘New Left’ includes Frankfurt’s critical theory, especially notion of culture industry functions as a mainly theoretical resource. Critical theory that considers the production subject as culture industry understands receiving subject as passive and mechanical existence. As a result, criticism of mass culture and audience as passive(or negative) objects are placed in the discourse structure. Mao Dun defined mass culture as petit bourgeois's culture and criticized their low quality tastes. He chose a negative word, ‘petit bourgeois’ instead of ‘the mass’ word to keep his imaginary(or significant) ‘the mass’. Despite the difference of historical context, the New Left and Mao Dun's mass culture discourse consist of very similar logistic system. In this aspect, criticism of mass culture that the New Left and socialistic intellectuals progressed in the 1930's is placed in a continual line. However, for them, negative recognition of this mass culture(or the mass) shares hidden ideological effects which affirm the discourse subjects, or intellectuals. That is, it exists that the more criticized petit bourgeois is, the more distinct social function and role are. The main characteristic which mass culture discourse of the New Left has is revealed as ‘politicalism’ and ‘counterculture’. Political attitudes demanding macropolitical practices are that the New Left himself criticizes ‘academic politics’. But paradoxically, they don’t free themselves from academic politics. Unlike socialistic intellectuals, their discourse has countercultural characteristic with the boundary which can't include socialistic future society in their discourse inner.
참고문헌 (32)
- 조경란, "중국 지식인의 현대성 담론과 아시아 구상-왕후이의 학문 주체화 전략에 대한 평가와 비판", 역사비평, (72), pp.360~387 (2005), 역사문제연구소
- 신광영, "한국의 계급과 불평등" (2004), 을유문화사
- John Storey, "문화연구와 문화이론" (1995), 현실문화연구
- John Fiske, "Understanding popular culture" (1989), Unwin Hyman
- John Fiske, "대중문화의 이해" (2005), 경문사
- John Fiske, "理解大衆文化" (2006), 中央編譯出版社
- Joseph Heath, "혁명을 팝니다" (2009), 마티
- Henry A. Giroux, "교사는 지성인이다" (2003), 아침이슬
- Michael Hardt, "제국" (2007), 이학사
- Michael Hardt, "帝國-全球化的政治秩序" (2005), 江蘇人民出版社
- Theodor W. Adorno, "계몽의 변증법" (2008), 문학과지성사
- Tony Bennett, "대중성과 대중문화의 정치학. in: 문화, 일상, 대중: 문화에 관한 8개의 탐구" (2007), 한나래
- 汪暉, "새로운 아시아를 상상한다" (2003), 창비
- 戴錦華, "숨겨진 서사―1990년대 중국대중문화 읽기" (2007), 숙명여자대학교
- 戴錦華, "大衆文化的隱形政治學", 天涯, (2) (1999)
- 戴錦華, "隱形書寫: 九十年代中國文化硏究⋅序" (1999), 江蘇人民出版社
- 茅盾, "從牯嶺到東京", 小說月報, 19(10) (1928)
- 茅盾, "封建的小市民文藝", 東方雜誌, 30(3) (1933)
- 茅盾, "我走過的道路(上)" (1997), 人民文學出版社
- 惕若, "小市民文藝讀物的岐路", 文學, 3(2) (1934), 文學社
- 愷, "奢侈的消閒的文藝刊物", 文學, 4(3) (1935), 文學社
- 高丙中, "精英文化⋅大衆文化⋅民間文化: 中國文化的群體差異及其變遷", 社會科學戰線, (2) (1996)
- 韓少功, "哪一種‘大衆’?", 讀書, (2) (1997)
- 曠新年, "作爲文化想象的‘大衆’", 讀書, (2) (1997)
- 曠新年, "文化硏究這件‘弔帶衫’", 天涯, (1) (2003)
- 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", 思想文綜, (1) (1999), 曁南大學出版社
- 薛毅, "文化硏究的陷穽", 天涯, (1) (2003)
- 李澤厚, "告別革命-回望二十世紀中國" (1995), 天地圖書有限公司
- 徐賁, "文化批評往何處去: 一九八九年後的中國文化討論" (1998), 天地圖書有限公司
- 陶東風, "當代中國的文化批評" (2006), 北京大學出版社
- Ferdinand Toennies, "共同體與社會" (1999), 商務印書館
- Jim McGuigan, "Cultural Populism" (1992), Routledge
