이문열과 위화 소설에 나타난 폭력성 비교연구 - 「우리들의 일그러진 영웅」과 「18살에 집을 떠나다」를 중심으로 -
A Comparative study on violence in Lee Mun-yeol and Yu Hua's novel
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
A Comparative study on violence in Lee Mun-yeol and Yu Hua's novel Lee, Mi-Ock This study is going to figure out difference between Yu Hua and Lee Mun-yeol regarding their recognition of violence. It is a meaningful attempt to understand the ideological gap between the two authors and examine the detailed aspects of violence in the two countries which their ideological discourse is grounded on. In the 1980's, Lee Mun-yeol began his journey of literature and created works actively, and it was the period that started with the Gwangju Democratic Movement against the military dictatorship. The 1980's was the period when culture and ideology represented as ‘the National People’s Movement’ were prevalent; however, even in the circumstances, Lee Mun-yeol tried to dig deeply into the ultimate meaning of humans, not historic realism. As what is written on his novels, Lee Mun-yeol did not put his trust in the crowd realizing any true revolution even under the democratic system. He thinks that the people can never be the main agents of history due to their snobbish and selfish nature, and who grasps authority does not matter as authority will spoil, and the people will lead their lives according to that. He maintained that tendency consistently, and it is revealed in other works like 『Son of a Man』, too. On account of his tendency of writing works like that, Lee Mun-yeol was criticized by some critics as being “a conformer to the system”. On the contrary, Yu Hua did show changes gradually. In the 1990's, he transferred from demagogic literature to folk literature. This is not unassociated with Yu Hua’s experience of Tiananmen Massacre in 1989. Although they failed to bring revolution, Yu Hua found individuals’ power and potential through the explosion of the people’s energy and cohesiveness then. Despite that enormous alteration, however, in Yu Hua’s novels, the people are still depicted as the victims of violence within the great tide of history and fragile individuals that can never escape from the bonds of destiny no matter how hard they try. They just appear to suffer pathetically and desperately in order to survive as a human that is more humane. Yu Hua focuses on the people’s joys and sorrows more like this while Lee Mun-yeol pays more attention to snobbery internalized in the crowd. But the aspects of violence cannot but
Abstract
A Comparative study on violence in Lee Mun-yeol and Yu Hua's novel Lee, Mi-Ock This study is going to figure out difference between Yu Hua and Lee Mun-yeol regarding their recognition of violence. It is a meaningful attempt to understand the ideological gap between the two authors and examine the detailed aspects of violence in the two countries which their ideological discourse is grounded on. In the 1980's, Lee Mun-yeol began his journey of literature and created works actively, and it was the period that started with the Gwangju Democratic Movement against the military dictatorship. The 1980's was the period when culture and ideology represented as ‘the National People’s Movement’ were prevalent; however, even in the circumstances, Lee Mun-yeol tried to dig deeply into the ultimate meaning of humans, not historic realism. As what is written on his novels, Lee Mun-yeol did not put his trust in the crowd realizing any true revolution even under the democratic system. He thinks that the people can never be the main agents of history due to their snobbish and selfish nature, and who grasps authority does not matter as authority will spoil, and the people will lead their lives according to that. He maintained that tendency consistently, and it is revealed in other works like 『Son of a Man』, too. On account of his tendency of writing works like that, Lee Mun-yeol was criticized by some critics as being “a conformer to the system”. On the contrary, Yu Hua did show changes gradually. In the 1990's, he transferred from demagogic literature to folk literature. This is not unassociated with Yu Hua’s experience of Tiananmen Massacre in 1989. Although they failed to bring revolution, Yu Hua found individuals’ power and potential through the explosion of the people’s energy and cohesiveness then. Despite that enormous alteration, however, in Yu Hua’s novels, the people are still depicted as the victims of violence within the great tide of history and fragile individuals that can never escape from the bonds of destiny no matter how hard they try. They just appear to suffer pathetically and desperately in order to survive as a human that is more humane. Yu Hua focuses on the people’s joys and sorrows more like this while Lee Mun-yeol pays more attention to snobbery internalized in the crowd. But the aspects of violence cannot but
참고문헌 (41)
- 이문열, "우리들의 일그러진 영웅" (2003), 소담출판사
- 余华, "十八岁出门远行" (1989), 作家出版社
- 귀스타브 르 봉, "군중심리" (2013), 문예출판사
- 로버트 블라이, "무쇠 한스 이야기" (2005), 씨앗을 뿌리는 사람
- 박종성, "한국정치와 정치폭력" (2001), 서울대학교 출판부
- 안철현, "한국현대정치사" (2009), ㈜새로운 사람들
- 朱栋霖, "中国现代文学史" (2007), 北京大学出版社
- 고혜경, "余華 《活着》의 현대사적 해석", 중국학논총, (34), pp.73~95 (2011), 한국중국문화학회
- 김갑수, "황석영, 이문열 그리고 마광수의 시간", 문예중앙, (90) (2000)
- 김경석, "위화의 『18살에 떠나는 길』에 대한 성장소설적 독법 - '탈국가'의 성장서사적 의미를 중심으로", 비교문화연구, 39, pp.83~95 (2015), 비교문화연구소[DOI]
- 김개영, "이문열의 <변경> 연구", 박사, pp.2016
- 김미영, "余華의 소설 ≪活着≫와 張藝謀의 영화 ≪活着≫에 드러난 ‘인생’의 의미 고찰", 虎院論集, 18 (2010), 고려대학교
- 김미옥, "이문열 소설 연구 : 낭만성을 중심으로", 박사, 국어국문학, pp.2005
- 김언하, "영화《인생(活着)》: 중국현대사에 대한 준엄하고 따뜻한 통찰", 중국학, (31), pp.447~466 (2008), 대한중국학회
- 김영, "황석영, 이문열 소설 비교연구 : 이데올로기 분석을 중심으로", 박사, 국어국문학, pp.2005
- 권유리야, "이문열 소설의 식민과 탈식민 연구 : 『시인』, 『영웅시대』, 『변경』을 중심으로", 박사, 국어국문학, pp.2008
- 김정혜, "이문열의 <우리들의 일그러진 영웅>과 십인성의 <해협의 광>과의 비교연구", 일본어문학, 4 (1997), 일본어문학회
- 김중철, "소설의 영상화 과정에 관한 연구 : 유홍종의 <불새>와 이문열의 <익명의 섬>을 중심으로", 박사, 국어국문학, pp.2000
- 김진공, "위화 소설 연구의 몇 가지 문제", 중국현대문학, (50), pp.53~75 (2009), 한국중국현대문학학회
- 김창민, "로아 바스또스의 『사람의 아들 Hijo de hombre』과 이문열의 『사람의 아들』 비교 연구 ― 구원의 문제를 중심으로 ―", 이베로아메리카 연구, 19(1), pp.59~82 (2008), 라틴아메리카연구소[DOI]
- 송성욱, "이문열" (1993), 살림
- 심혜영, "위화(余華)의 『형제(兄弟)』와 ‘두 공간’의 공존", 중국현대문학, (45), pp.241~269 (2008), 한국중국현대문학학회
- 심혜영, "위화(余華)의 『제7일(第七天)』 ― 공간사유, 상상력의 특징과 희망의 정념", 중국현대문학, (82), pp.33~62 (2017), 한국중국현대문학학회
- 오병우, "「我らの歪んだ英雄」と「小さな王国」", 日本學硏究, 33, pp.235~259 (2011), 일본연구소
- 이문열, "소설의 영상화 과정에 관한 연구 -유흥종의 『불새』와 이문열의 『익명의 섬』을 중심으로", 박사, pp.1999
- 이용선, "세사르 바예호의 『빠꼬 융께』와 이문열의 『우리들의 일그러진 영웅』 비교 연구", 스페인어문학, (64), pp.401~429 (2012), 한국스페인어문학회
- 이지영, "이문열 초기 단편 소설의 서사전략 연구", 박사, pp.2006
- 이태동, "이문열" (1996), 서강대학교 출판부
- 이평전, "‘이데올로기’와 ‘폭력’의 관계성 연구 - 1970년대 황석영, 이문열의 소설을 중심으로 -", 인문학연구, 40(2), pp.5~29 (2012), 인문과학연구소[DOI]
- 장순란, "페미니즘 문학비평을 통해 본 남성문인 비교 연구- 이문열의 『선택』과 귄터 그라스의 『넙치』를 중심으로", 비교한국학 Comparative Korean Studies, 20(2), pp.471~500 (2012), 국제비교한국학회[DOI]
- 전영의, "위화의 『형제』에 나타난 광기와 공간의 주체성 연구", 한중인문학연구, (45), pp.367~392 (2014), 한중인문학회
- 전형준, "문학과 영화의 상호성에 대한 연구: <붉은 수수밭>과 <인생>의 영화화를 통해", 중국문학, 53, pp.237~254 (2007), 한국중국어문학회[DOI]
- 최난옥, "이문열의 『황제를 위하여』와 윈 리어우와린의 『평행선상의 민주주의』:한·태 소설에 나타난 카오스 비교", 외국문학연구, (41), pp.491~512 (2011), 외국문학연구소
- 최성은, "예지 안제예프스키의 ？천국의 문？과 이문열의 ？우리들의 일그러진 영웅？ 비교 연구", 동서비교문학저널, (9), pp.107~148 (2003), 한국동서비교문학학회
- 최해수, "이문열의 ？우리들의 일그러진 영웅？과 타니자키 쥰이치로(谷崎潤一郞)의 ？작은 왕국(小さな王國)？ 비교연구- 두 작품의 유사성 비교 고찰을 중심으로", 비교문학, 31 (2003), 한국비교문학회
- 최해수, "이문열의『필론의 돼지』와 오오에켄자부로(大江健三？)의『인간의 양(人間の羊)』의 비교연구 -유사성과 폭력 저항 방식의 차이점을 중심으로 -", 일본연구, 20, pp.263~278 (2003), 일본연구소
- 황정일, "위화(余華) 『제7일』의 평등론", 중국현대문학, (72), pp.1~41 (2015), 한국중국현대문학학회
- 席格, "梦魇中的狂欢——论余华小说叙事中的暴力与死亡", 郑州大学学报(哲学社会科学版) (2003)
- 张瑞英, "论余华小说的暴力审美与死亡叙述" (2006), 文史哲
- 常慧明, "暴力 死亡 生存——论余华创作的先锋性" (2005), 沧州师范专科学校学报
- 许松盛, "论余华小说中的暴力与人性", 青年作家(中外文艺版) (2011)