한국 아동문학은 1990년대 이후 비약적으로 성장했다. 창작이 활발해지자 비평과 연구의 필요성 또한 자각되었다. 그리하여 오늘날은 아동문학이 더 이상 비평과 연구의 사각지대는 아니게 되었다. 아동문학 분야는 일차자료뿐 아니라 이차자료조차 제대로 정리되지 않은 탓에, 선행연구를 파악하는 데에서 곤란을 겪는다. 과거로 갈수록 비평과 연구를 엄격하게 구분하기도 쉽지 않다. 아동문학의 개척기에는 방정환의 동화론과 동요론이 그나마 이론적인 성격을 띤 것이고, 그밖에는 대개 소박한 작품평들이다. 카프(KAPF)문학운동 시기에는 계급성을 내세우는 글들이 많이 나왔다. 1930년대 중반부터 동화의 본질을 탐구하는 논의가 나오기 시작했다. 해방이 되자 일제시대를 돌아보면서 새로운 시대의 과제를 내오는 이론비평이 등장했다. 1960년에는 아동문학의 유산을 정리하는 흐름이 나타났다. 아동문학의 서지와 연표, 회고적 성격의 문학사가 씌어졌다. 이들 기록은 실증적인 오류를 많이 안고 있다. 이런 오류들은 이재철 교수의 연구로 와서 대부분 극복되었다. 1990년대 이후 아동문학 전공자들이 꾸준히 증가했다. 이들을 대상으로 하는 수많은 정기간행물들에서 아동문학 평론과 논문을 찾아볼 수 있다. 아동문학 강좌를 개설하는 대학원이 꾸준히 증가하고 있다. 2000년대에 발표된 아동문학 연구논문은 그 이전의 것들을 모두 합한 것보다도 많을 것으로 짐작된다. 아동문학 연구는 이제 비로소 궤도에 들어섰다고 할 수 있다. 핵심적인 과제는 기초연구 영역에서 이재철 교수의 성과를 보완하는 일이다. 개척의 공로가 큰 선행연구의 미비점을 넘어서지 못하고 실증적인 오류를 반복하는 것은 전반 연구의 위신을 떨어뜨리는 일이다. 과거의 문학유산을 다룰 때에는 힘들더라도 서지연구와 원본비평에서 출발하려는 학문적 성실함이 요구된다.

Korean children’s literature has developed greatly since the 1990s. As lots of children’s books have been written, necessity of literary criticism and other researches on children’s literature has been realized and now there is no lacks of literary criticism and researches on children’s literature. Because there is no well-organized secondary data of children’s literature, not to mention primary data, it is very difficult to find data of relevant existing studies, and moreover, as we approach older data, we find the boundary between criticism and research blurs. At the pioneering stage of children’s literature, the only theoretical works were theories of children’s story and children’s poem by Bang Jung-Hwan and others were mostly simple comments on children’s books. A number of books propagandizing for proletarian literature were written during the period of KAPF movement. It was the mid 1930s when discussions were made about the essential nature of children’s literature. After the emancipation from the Japanese occupation, a literary criticism which reflected on the period of Japanese occupation and asked about challenges of new times appeared. In the 1960s, there was a trend of arranging the heritage of children’s literature and many bibliographies and chronologies and literary history were written in that period, which, however, had not a few objective fallacies which were mostly corrected by Lee Jae-Chul. Since the 1990s, number of people studying children’s literature has gradually increased. Numerous commentaries and theses on children’s literature have been published in various periodicals and number of postgraduate courses for children’s literature have been increasing, and it is estimated that more theses on children’s literature were written in the 2000s than the whole theses of the same kind written before combined. It can be said that study of children’s literature gets on the right track now. What’s to be done is to supplement the work of Lee Jae-Chul in the area of basic research. It will be an undermining of excellence of his pioneering research if we repeat the same objective fallacies without improving his work. To study literary heritages, it will take academic sincerity to start the study from bibliographical research and critical reading of original texts.

Korean children’s literature has developed greatly since the 1990s. As lots of children’s books have been written, necessity of literary criticism and other researches on children’s literature has been realized and now there is no lacks of literary criticism and researches on children’s literature. Because there is no well-organized secondary data of children’s literature, not to mention primary data, it is very difficult to find data of relevant existing studies, and moreover, as we approach older data, we find the boundary between criticism and research blurs. At the pioneering stage of children’s literature, the only theoretical works were theories of children’s story and children’s poem by Bang Jung-Hwan and others were mostly simple comments on children’s books. A number of books propagandizing for proletarian literature were written during the period of KAPF movement. It was the mid 1930s when discussions were made about the essential nature of children’s literature. After the emancipation from the Japanese occupation, a literary criticism which reflected on the period of Japanese occupation and asked about challenges of new times appeared. In the 1960s, there was a trend of arranging the heritage of children’s literature and many bibliographies and chronologies and literary history were written in that period, which, however, had not a few objective fallacies which were mostly corrected by Lee Jae-Chul. Since the 1990s, number of people studying children’s literature has gradually increased. Numerous commentaries and theses on children’s literature have been published in various periodicals and number of postgraduate courses for children’s literature have been increasing, and it is estimated that more theses on children’s literature were written in the 2000s than the whole theses of the same kind written before combined. It can be said that study of children’s literature gets on the right track now. What’s to be done is to supplement the work of Lee Jae-Chul in the area of basic research. It will be an undermining of excellence of his pioneering research if we repeat the same objective fallacies without improving his work. To study literary heritages, it will take academic sincerity to start the study from bibliographical research and critical reading of original texts.

, , , , , ,

children’s literature, history of research, bibliography of children’s literature, history of children’s literature, Lee Jae-Chul, bibliographical study, criticism of original text