이 논문에서는 식민지 조선의 프롤레타리아 문예비평의 중요 논자이자 시인으로서 수많은 작품을 남긴 임화가 ‘이식문화론’의 내포와 외연을 보다 명확하게 하는 논의를, 1940년대 전반의 이른바 파시즘 체제 시기에도 별다른 저항의식 없이 전개하고 있다는 점을 확인했다. 그러한 논의를 위해서 그가 필요로 한것은 농민문학 및 그 무대로서의 <만주>라는 공간이며, 또 영화라는 미디어 내지는 테크놀로지였다. 이태준의 단편 소설 「농군」은 1931년에 실제로 만주 만보산 지역에서 일어난 조선인 농민과 중국인 농민과의 충돌사건인 ‘만보산사건’을 그린 작품이다. 이 작품이 발표되자마자 임화는 곧바로 신문 시평에서 작품이 빚어내는 ‘애수와 비애’를 크게 칭찬했고 “한겨레의 수난사의 운명”을 잘 그렸다고 긍정적으로 평가했다. 단편서사시에서 도시의 풍경이나 식민지성의 단면을 잘 그려냈던 그가 농민문학 작품을 적극적으로 평가하는 것은 이 시기에 임화의 문학관이 약간 변화를 보여주고 있는 점과도 관계가 있다. 임화는 평론 「생산소설론」(1940)에서 “소설의 취재를 생산에 한정”함으로써 소설이 상실하고 있는 소재에 대한 지배력이나 세계관을 되찾아야 할 것을 강조한다. 그 대안이 ‘흙의 문학’이며 ‘생활 문학’이었던 것인다. 다만 그 경우에도 식민지 조선의 개척문학, 특히 <만주>를 배경으로 한 작품의 경우 민족 문제가 수반되어 있어야 한다는 점은 그가 칭찬한 이태준의 단편소설 「농군」에서 분명히 드러난다. 임화는 이 작픔에서 ‘비애’와 ‘참상’을 발견한다. 그런데 그것은 이미 ‘비애’나 ‘참상’ 그 자체가 아니다. ‘식민지적 의식’은 두만강을 건너감으로써 이미 ‘식민주의적 무의식’의 발로로서의 역할을 충분히 다하고 있었다. 그리고 이 시기의 임화는 문학평론 이외에도 영화사업이나 출판사업에 관여하면서 몇 가지 영화 평론이나 영화사론을 썼다. 그 중 「조선영화론」은 그의 문화 이식에 관한 생각을 더 구체적으로 이해하는 데 지극히 유용하다. 여기서 임화는 ‘이식’이라는 개념과 ‘모방’이라는 개념을 거의 같은 비중을 두고 사용하고 있다. 그리고 그는 조선 영화의 역사를 작품 내용의 역사로서만 파악하는 태도를 견지한다. 근대기의 ‘모방’이나 ‘이식’을 강조하면서도 그 대상이 아니라 ‘모방’이나 ‘이식’을 하는 ‘제작’ 주체로서의 ‘조선’을 강조한 것이다. 그리고 임화는 당시 화제를 모은 영화 『복지만리』의 예술적 가치를 인정했다. 행복을 찾아서 일본에서 조선으로, 그리고 만주로 유랑하는 조선인 청년들을 묘사한 이 영화에 대해서 임화는 조선 민족의 민족 이동을 서사시적인 화폭으로 파악했다고 하면서 기록 영화로서의 한계와 의의를 동시에 인정했다. 여기서 임화는 그보다 10년 전의 프롤레타리아 문학 전성기에 스스로가 제창했던 것처럼 다시 서사시와 민족을 관련시켜서 이해하는데 의의를 인정하려고 했다. 그는 일찌기 단순한 고유성이나 순수성을 추구하는 민족이 아니라 조선이 식민지 상황에 얼마나 놓여 있는지를 환기시키는 이야기시(단편 서사시)를 그 대안으로 제출했고 스스로도 그러한 시를 많이 발표했다. 그때 시의 무대로서 선택한 것은 서울의 종로나 현해탄이었는데, 10여 년을 거쳐서 임화는 일본, 조선, 만주의 무대를 유랑하고 방랑하는 조선인에게 어느 한 개인의 운명이 아니라 공동체의 운명을 보려고 했던 것이다. 이전의 논의와 다른 점은, 임화가 그러한 상황을 이야기시/서사시적으로 형상화하는 것을 적극적으로 지지하는 것이 아니라, 단지 그 전형성에 동의하고 있을 뿐이라는 점이다. 요컨대 거기서 환기되는 것은, 예술대중화논쟁 당시에 임화가 단편서사시로 제시했듯이 식민지에서의 어떤 혁명적 상황 혹은 저항으로 바꿔 나갈 수 있는 역경이나 극한상태가 아니라, 유랑의 참상을 극복해서 제국(만주/일본)에 순치된 민족의 위상을 묵인하는 상황 제시에 지나지 않았던 것이다. 그것은 피지배민족인 조선 민족을, 식민지로서의 조선을, 자신의 논의에서의 주체(subject: 종속)로 삼은데서 오는 아이러니이다. 그 아이러니는 ＜만주＞의 조선인을 언급하는 것과 동시에 발현됐다. ‘피지배’성을 고발하고 호소하는 것은, 장소가 바뀌면서 그것으로서 또 하나의 제국을 지탱하는 이데올로기가 된 것이다.

This paper exermined that literary Critic Lim Hwa(1908-1953?), who played important rolls in Proletarian Literary Criticism and wrote many proletarian poems in colonial Korea of 1930's, confirmed and clarified his argument of so called 'transplant cultural theory(yishik munhwaron)'in early 1940's. For this argument, he needed some arguments of agrarian literature and 'Manchuria' of its stage, and referred to the argument of media and films at that time. Lee Tae-jun’s fiction "Nonggun (Peasant Soldiers)" (1939) is a work describing Wanbaoshan incidents, which is a conflict between Chinese peasants and Korean peasants actually happened in 1931. As soon as this fiction is published, Lim Hwa referred to it in his review report immediately and evaluated affirmatively that the sadness in this fiction were the historical suffering fate of our Korean people. Although he prefer to drawing city scenery and the landscape of colonial society in his narrative poem, the fact that there are many fictions of agrarian literature in his favorite is related also to change of his literary view in this time. Lim Hwa emphasized in his article “On productive fiction” (Saengsan Soseul ron, 1940) of recovering the controlling power and the view of the world over a subject matter when writing fiction. And his alternative idea was ‘fiction of reclamation’ or imperial agrarian literature. Those fictions must deal with the problem of both Korean nation and ‘Manchurian’ background. They find the sadness in those fictions. However, that kind of sadness is not the sadness itself. Consciousness of anti-colonialism turned into Colonial unconsciousness when it crossed Tumangang river to Manchurian land. Lim Hwa performed. various activities of not only writing literary criticism but also having relationship with film and publication in early 1940’s. "On Korean film" (Choson Yeunghwa ron, 1941) is a very useful article in order to understand his idea of cultural transplant in modern Korea. He used both the concept of a "transplant"(yishik) and the concept of "imitation"(mobang) in almost same meaning in his article. He regarded the Korean film history as a history of the narrative contents of those films. Although he emphasized cultural transplant and imitation, he recognized that the main dynamics of the Korean film history was not the cultural transplant and imitation themselves but the subject of the producing (=transplanting and imitating). And he evaluated the artistic merit of the film “Wonderful land”(Pokchi manri, 1941) the most popular film at that time in the extension top of his argument. This film dealt with Korean youths wandering from Japan to Korea and Manchuria looking for their happiness. He accepted the significance of this film as a historic documentary and praised that it draw the Korean migrant like epic poetry. He tried to associate the epic poetry and the sadness of Korean people again here, as he advocated in the glorious day of proletarian literature ten years ago. Once he submitted the narrative poem as an alternative plan, and also wrote many of such poetry which was not a simple landscape of the purity of Korean people but reminded themselves of the suffering situation of colonial Korea. It was Chongro street or Hyunhae-tan strait that he chose as a stage of his poetry then. Lim Hwa tried to find not an individual fate but the fate of one national community through .the figures of Korean people wandering from Japan to Korea or to Manchuria 10 years later. The only one point different from his argument of 10 years ago is the fact he is not trying to support aggressively of writing those situations as a epical poetry, but only agreeing with the typicality of suffering situation. The story did not arouse a kind of revolutionary situation, adverse circumstances and an extreme situation which could convert to resistance as he wrote it in his epical poetry 10 years ago, but only .confirmed the domesticated nationalism of suffering Korean people by Japan or Manchurian empire. It was an irony derived from set Korean people as a subject people in empire into the subject in his historical argument. That irony emerged at once he referred the Korean people in Manchurian empire. Charging and appealing the being subject could turn into the ideology sustaining the other empire crossing Tumangang river.

This paper exermined that literary Critic Lim Hwa(1908-1953?), who played important rolls in Proletarian Literary Criticism and wrote many proletarian poems in colonial Korea of 1930's, confirmed and clarified his argument of so called 'transplant cultural theory(yishik munhwaron)'in early 1940's. For this argument, he needed some arguments of agrarian literature and 'Manchuria' of its stage, and referred to the argument of media and films at that time. Lee Tae-jun’s fiction "Nonggun (Peasant Soldiers)" (1939) is a work describing Wanbaoshan incidents, which is a conflict between Chinese peasants and Korean peasants actually happened in 1931. As soon as this fiction is published, Lim Hwa referred to it in his review report immediately and evaluated affirmatively that the sadness in this fiction were the historical suffering fate of our Korean people. Although he prefer to drawing city scenery and the landscape of colonial society in his narrative poem, the fact that there are many fictions of agrarian literature in his favorite is related also to change of his literary view in this time. Lim Hwa emphasized in his article “On productive fiction” (Saengsan Soseul ron, 1940) of recovering the controlling power and the view of the world over a subject matter when writing fiction. And his alternative idea was ‘fiction of reclamation’ or imperial agrarian literature. Those fictions must deal with the problem of both Korean nation and ‘Manchurian’ background. They find the sadness in those fictions. However, that kind of sadness is not the sadness itself. Consciousness of anti-colonialism turned into Colonial unconsciousness when it crossed Tumangang river to Manchurian land. Lim Hwa performed. various activities of not only writing literary criticism but also having relationship with film and publication in early 1940’s. "On Korean film" (Choson Yeunghwa ron, 1941) is a very useful article in order to understand his idea of cultural transplant in modern Korea. He used both the concept of a "transplant"(yishik) and the concept of "imitation"(mobang) in almost same meaning in his article. He regarded the Korean film history as a history of the narrative contents of those films. Although he emphasized cultural transplant and imitation, he recognized that the main dynamics of the Korean film history was not the cultural transplant and imitation themselves but the subject of the producing (=transplanting and imitating). And he evaluated the artistic merit of the film “Wonderful land”(Pokchi manri, 1941) the most popular film at that time in the extension top of his argument. This film dealt with Korean youths wandering from Japan to Korea and Manchuria looking for their happiness. He accepted the significance of this film as a historic documentary and praised that it draw the Korean migrant like epic poetry. He tried to associate the epic poetry and the sadness of Korean people again here, as he advocated in the glorious day of proletarian literature ten years ago. Once he submitted the narrative poem as an alternative plan, and also wrote many of such poetry which was not a simple landscape of the purity of Korean people but reminded themselves of the suffering situation of colonial Korea. It was Chongro street or Hyunhae-tan strait that he chose as a stage of his poetry then. Lim Hwa tried to find not an individual fate but the fate of one national community through .the figures of Korean people wandering from Japan to Korea or to Manchuria 10 years later. The only one point different from his argument of 10 years ago is the fact he is not trying to support aggressively of writing those situations as a epical poetry, but only agreeing with the typicality of suffering situation. The story did not arouse a kind of revolutionary situation, adverse circumstances and an extreme situation which could convert to resistance as he wrote it in his epical poetry 10 years ago, but only .confirmed the domesticated nationalism of suffering Korean people by Japan or Manchurian empire. It was an irony derived from set Korean people as a subject people in empire into the subject in his historical argument. That irony emerged at once he referred the Korean people in Manchurian empire. Charging and appealing the being subject could turn into the ideology sustaining the other empire crossing Tumangang river.

Lim Hwa, epic poem, "Pokchi Manri", Manchuria, subjectivity