『중유일기』와 『열하일기』의 거리, 오마주와 표절 사이

Abstract

Joongyou Ilgi, what Kong Sunghak traveled to China in 1923 and wrote, has a significance in that it contains the image of China in the 20th century. However, on the other hand, there is a serious problem in that there is suspicion of plagiarizing Yeolha Ilgi. When similar phrases appear between the YeonhaengRok(燕行錄, Records of Travels in Qing Dynasty) of the premodern period, they are not all plagiarized. It is very common to gather and organize related data about various information in China, because it is understood to be a kind of accumulation of public knowledge. However, Joongyou Ilgi has a problem in that it uses these verses in his own experience. In this paper, we have presented several examples where the verses are almost similar. but the readers are far less likely to notice the reference to the previous text because the place is not the same and the subject is not the same. Therefore, When Kong writes this book, unlike other YeonhaengRok, we find that he took random verses from Yeolha Ilgi and inserted them into his own writings. So why did he choose Yeolha Ilgi? This is related to how Park Jiwon was perceived by the literati of Kaesung. The Kaesung literati actively accepted the Bukhak(the Thoughts for learning Qing Culture) school, which was led by Park Jiwon. And Kim taegyeong(金澤榮) who was a key figure at that time, published the collection of Park's works several times. Therefore, Park's Yeolha Ilgi was very special to Kong. Kong wrote Joongyou Ilgi with reference to Yeolha Ilgi and brought some passages in the sense of affection similarity and respect. So he made the result of modifying his own book with Park’s writing ability. However, this led to some problems. First, Yeolha Ilgi was written in a clear problem recognition, and by borrowing these verses in part, Joongyou Ilgi was unable to maintain a consistent view. The descriptions were neither new nor meaningful. By inserting Park's expression into his book, Kong’s Joongyou Ilgi, a record of his travel in China in 20th-century, has grown into a shadow of Chinese 18th-century shadows, far from the general perception of China in the 20s.