초록 열기/닫기 버튼

역사물을 다룬 매체는 난무하지만 정작 역사가 부재하는 포스트모던 시대에 역사와 총체성을 복원하는 것이야말로 역사가의 과제이다. 그런 면에서 ‘항상 역사화하라’고 우리에게 주문하는 제임슨의 태도는 비평가의 그것이면서 동시에 역사가의 태도이기도 하다. 본고는 제임슨의 방법론을 통해 현시대에 문학과 문화현상을 어떻게 역사화할 것인가에 대한 조언을 구하고, 역사연구자로서의 정체성의 재확인을 시도하고 있다.


Unlike other Marxist critics, Fredric Jameson has set forth the criticism which approves the postmodernism positively as dialectical method toward totality. Moreover he maintains that his own criticism is the logical result of his previous work. Like postmodernists' claims, Jameson asserts that we can reach the ‘History’, or ‘the Real’ only through ‘histories’. From 1980's on, he has dived into the dispute over postmodernism. He diagnoses the postmodernism as the cultural logic of late capitalism and as the concept of a period, not a style. The postmodernism is characterized by forgetfulness of History. So he uses the idea of ‘political unconscious’ groping for Historicity or totality in the postmodern culture. For him, the film among mass media is the most proper text which we can find out the political unconscious of mass media of late capitalism. In his book The Political Unconscious, Jameson groped for totality in the postmodern culture using the idea of “cognitive mapping.” As he used the concept “thought to the second power” in Marxism and Form, he asserted the slogan “Always historicize!” for the marxist dialectical method in The Political Unconscious. After then, he has extended his discourse to the third world cinema. In Geopolitical Aesthetic, he uses the idea of “national allegory” to assert that the essence of the late capitalism has been characterized in cinema and space of third world. Because “die Gleichzeitigkeit des ungleichzeitigen” is apparent in third world cinema. In short, according to Fredric Jameson, the postmodernism is the cultural logic of the late capitalism which is more modern than the modern times. And it is this episteme that Fredric Jameson attains over the period of late capitalism.