만주국은 독립국이되, 일본 제국의 비공식적 식민지이며, 복합적 민족국가의 성격을 지닌바, 만주국이 지닌 국제적 개방성과 탈국민국가의 속성은 1930년대 후반 파시즘 체제의 전횡이 더욱 가속화되는 식민지 지식인에게 매혹의 대상이었다. 유진오의 「신경」과 이효석의 「하얼빈」은 이와 같은 식민지 지식인의 내면풍경을 여실히 드러내고 있는 수작(秀作)이다. 만주국의 주요 도시인 신경과 하얼빈을 배경으로 한 이 두 작품은 일제말의 대부분의 작품들이 그렇듯, 표면적으로는 일본 제국의 시선을 취하고 있다. 만주국에서 실험되고 있는 일본의 동아시적 근대를 향한 호기심과 그에 대한 동경은 이 두 작품에서 공통적으로 읽을 수 있다. 하지만, 그렇다고 이 두 작품을 단순하게 ‘식민주의적 무의식’이 반영된 것, 즉 식민지 본국인의 의식을 투영시킨 것으로 볼 수만은 없다. 도리어 일본의 만주국 식민주의 경영이 낳은 문제점들을 에둘러 비판하는 서사적 태도를 보이며, 조선과 다른 형태의 식민주의 경영으로 추구되는 만주의 근대가 온전한 모습을 띠고 있지 않다는 것을 목도하는 가운데 새롭게 주체를 정립하고(유진오의 「신경」), 음울한 근대의 모습에 대한 애수와 회의주의자적 태도를 보인다(이효석의 「하얼빈」). 이러한 식민지 지식인의 내면풍경은 일제말 더욱 가속화되는 파시즘 체제의 동아신질서에 무비판적으로 매몰되는 게 아니라 비판적 거리를 확보하는 지식인의 곤혹스러움을 보여준다. 안타까운 것은, 그 곤혹스러움이 조선의 구체적 현실과 부딪치는 가운데 표출되지 않고, 조선과 식민주의 경영이 현저히 다른 만주국의 현실과 부딪치는 가운데 표출되고 있다는 점이다. 하지만, 조선이냐 만주국이냐가 중요한 게 아니라, 일제말 대동아공영권과 팔굉일우(八紘一宇)를 통해 일본 중심의 근대초극(서구의 근대주의를 부정하는)을 추구하는 것을 목도하는 가운데 그에 맹목화되지 않으려는, 지식인의 내면풍경을 보이고 있다는 점은 소중한 서사적 자산이 아닐 수 없다.

Manchuria was an independent nation, and an unofficial colony of the Japanese Imperialism. Due to its combined nature of a nation-state, Manchuria’s international open policy and characteristics of a post-nation -state was the object of attraction to the colonial intellectuals experiencing still more acceleration of despotism of the fascist system at the end of 1930s. Yu Jin-o’s 「Shinjing(신경)」 and Lee Hyo-Seok’s 「Harbin(하얼빈)」 are outstanding works that realistically disclose the inner prospect of those colonial intellectuals. The two works with Manchuria’s main cities, Shinjing and Harbin, for the backgrounds superficially take the prospect from the Japanese Imperialism, as do most works during the period. Both works read, in common, Japan’s inquisitiveness toward East Asian modernization and the admiration of it. Nonetheless, they cannot merely be taken to reflect ‘colonialist unconsciousness’; that is, a projection of the colonized nation’s consciousness. On the contrary, the works expose a narrative attitude of roundabout criticism on the problems of Japan’s colonialist administration of Manchuria. Manchuria’s modernization which is considered a different sort of colonialist administration from Joseon has been witnessed not being taken on a sound status and, hence, brought up a new subjectivity (Yu Jin-o’s 「Shinjing(신경)」) and it reveals pathos and a skeptical attitude toward the manifestation of melancholy modernization (Lee Hyo-Seok’s 「Harbin(하얼빈)」). The colonial intellectual’s inner prospect is not indiscriminately buried by the new order in East Asia under the fascist system which still more accelerates in the end of the Japanese Imperialism. Instead, it demonstrates the intellectual’s perplexities while trying to secure a critical position. It is, however, pathetic the perplexity is not exposed in the midst of the confrontation with Joseon’s concrete reality, but with the reality in Manchura, a nation with conspicuously different colonialist administration from Joseon. What is important is, however, not whether it is Joseon or Manchuria. The intellectual’s inner prospect revealing a position in order not to be blind-folded, while witnessing a pursue for Japan-oriented modernization perseverance (criticizing the modernization of the West) by way of The Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere and Universal Brotherhood (hakkouichiu), can only be a precious narrative asset.

Manchuria was an independent nation, and an unofficial colony of the Japanese Imperialism. Due to its combined nature of a nation-state, Manchuria’s international open policy and characteristics of a post-nation -state was the object of attraction to the colonial intellectuals experiencing still more acceleration of despotism of the fascist system at the end of 1930s. Yu Jin-o’s 「Shinjing(신경)」 and Lee Hyo-Seok’s 「Harbin(하얼빈)」 are outstanding works that realistically disclose the inner prospect of those colonial intellectuals. The two works with Manchuria’s main cities, Shinjing and Harbin, for the backgrounds superficially take the prospect from the Japanese Imperialism, as do most works during the period. Both works read, in common, Japan’s inquisitiveness toward East Asian modernization and the admiration of it. Nonetheless, they cannot merely be taken to reflect ‘colonialist unconsciousness’; that is, a projection of the colonized nation’s consciousness. On the contrary, the works expose a narrative attitude of roundabout criticism on the problems of Japan’s colonialist administration of Manchuria. Manchuria’s modernization which is considered a different sort of colonialist administration from Joseon has been witnessed not being taken on a sound status and, hence, brought up a new subjectivity (Yu Jin-o’s 「Shinjing(신경)」) and it reveals pathos and a skeptical attitude toward the manifestation of melancholy modernization (Lee Hyo-Seok’s 「Harbin(하얼빈)」). The colonial intellectual’s inner prospect is not indiscriminately buried by the new order in East Asia under the fascist system which still more accelerates in the end of the Japanese Imperialism. Instead, it demonstrates the intellectual’s perplexities while trying to secure a critical position. It is, however, pathetic the perplexity is not exposed in the midst of the confrontation with Joseon’s concrete reality, but with the reality in Manchura, a nation with conspicuously different colonialist administration from Joseon. What is important is, however, not whether it is Joseon or Manchuria. The intellectual’s inner prospect revealing a position in order not to be blind-folded, while witnessing a pursue for Japan-oriented modernization perseverance (criticizing the modernization of the West) by way of The Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere and Universal Brotherhood (hakkouichiu), can only be a precious narrative asset.

, , , , , ,

the end of the Japanese Imperialism, Manchuria, colonial intellectual, inner prospect, modernization, imperialism, colonialism