이 논문은 이청준의 1960년대 중단편소설을 중심으로 전통과 근대성의 양가성을 밝히고자 하였다. 우선 그의 체험세대 콤플렉스와 성적외상에서 어떻게 이념과 근대의 페티시즘에 대한 혐오가 발생했는가를 분석하고, 이러한 정신현상이 근대에 대한 비판을 드러내는 작품과 전통의 복원불가능성을 다루고 있는 작품군에 어떤 내용과 구조로 변주되고 있는지 해석하였다. 전자를 통해서는 작가가 근대에 저항하려고 하지만 그 과정에서 근대담론을 내면화하는 60년대 근대주체를 날카롭게 포착하고 있으나, 후자에서는 근대의 페티시즘으로부터 전통의 순수성을 보호하려는 노력이 오히려 전통을 오리엔탈리즘적인 시선으로 왜곡하는 결과를 낳음을 확인할 수 있었다. 본고는 이러한 점을 4.19세대가 가진 정치적 무의식의 한 면모로 파악하였다.

This article aimed to verify the ambi-valence of 1960's modernity and tradition focused on Lee Chung-jun's contemporary short and medium-length stories. In first, analysing how compulsive disgusting about the fetishism of ideology and modernity is originated from his complex about War-experiencing generation and private event of sexual trauma, And second, intend to explain the variation of these psychicphenomenon in the works which criticize the modernization by military dictatorship and deal with impossibility or restoring tradition to its original state. The author is grasping sharply the aspect of character who wish to resist the modernity but, in this process, internalize the modern-discourse in the first type works, nevertheless the purity of tradition itself is distorted, on the contrary, by the effort to prevent the tradition from exclusive possession of modernity, because of his internalized orientalism. It is understanded as one feature of political unconsciousness of 4.19 generation.

This article aimed to verify the ambi-valence of 1960's modernity and tradition focused on Lee Chung-jun's contemporary short and medium-length stories. In first, analysing how compulsive disgusting about the fetishism of ideology and modernity is originated from his complex about War-experiencing generation and private event of sexual trauma, And second, intend to explain the variation of these psychicphenomenon in the works which criticize the modernization by military dictatorship and deal with impossibility or restoring tradition to its original state. The author is grasping sharply the aspect of character who wish to resist the modernity but, in this process, internalize the modern-discourse in the first type works, nevertheless the purity of tradition itself is distorted, on the contrary, by the effort to prevent the tradition from exclusive possession of modernity, because of his internalized orientalism. It is understanded as one feature of political unconsciousness of 4.19 generation.

, , , , , , ,