초록 열기/닫기 버튼
본고는 새로 발간된 열아홉 권의 『김우창전집』의 미국문명과 문학을 논한 글들을 통해, 김우창의 미국문학론 성격과 한국문학론에의 영향을 검토한 글이다. 김우창의 미국문학론, 미국문명론은 식민화 시기에서 건국기에 이르는 숲의 로망스, 19세기말 20세기의 미국을 지배한 프래그머티즘과 그에 내재한 순응주의, 1968 전후의 미국 사회와 대학의 변화, 소수자들의 요구와 시민권 운동의 경험을 포함한 구체적 보편성에의 요구, 1980년대 이후의 미국이 대면해야 했던 개척지의 고갈과 문화와 역사의 시대의 도래, 오바마 및 트럼프 시대의 차모임이 노정한 개척지 없는 자유주의의 모순과 강경한 비개입주의, 서부와 남부의 하층 노동자와 농민들의 다문화사회에 대한 위기감과 심술들 등에 걸쳐 있다. 김우창의 미국문학론은 중심의 지역, 문명의 자연, 구체적 개인의 자유라는 문제틀 하에 구성되었다. 그의 비평에서 미국이라는 자유의 장소는 중심보다 지역, 지역보다 개인, 문명보다는 자연, 도시보다는 개척지, 북부보다는 남부적인 것과 관련된 것으로 검토되었다. 지역, 개인, 자연, 개척지, 남부와 같은 후자의 문제들은 신비평적 정독의 과정을 통해 재해석되었는데, 이는 개인 삶의 구체성, 경험의 내재성을 핵심으로 하는 시의 근원에 대한 김우창의 생각에 맞닿아 있는 것이었다. 김우창의 내재적 초월에 대한 요구는 공히 ‘단독강화’로 비판된 한국문학의 직시적 초월과 미국문학의 수평적 초월이라는 양 경향을 지양하려는 과정에서 구상된 것으로 판단된다. 한국근대문학에서 산견되는 압도적 삶으로부터의 퇴장을 암시하는 직시적 초월, 전체와 역사를 거부하는 나날의 삶으로의 체념, 이 두 경향에 대한 그 나름의 유보와 비판(‘단독강화’론)은 김우창의 한국문학 읽기의 핵심적 술어에 해당한다. 그의 한국근대문학론은 수평적 초월로 요약되는 미국문학론과 상당한 논리적 연관을 지니는데, 이는 양자를 관류하는 평가어의 순환을 통해서도 확인된다.
This paper examines the relationship between Kim Uchang's theory of American literature and its influence on Korean literature through the articles on American civilization and literature in 『The Collected Works of Kim Uchang』 1-19. Kim's theory of American literature and American civilization is based on the romance of the forest from the period of colonization to the founding of the country, the pragmatism that dominated America in the late 19th and 20th centuries and its inherent conformism. Kim's theory of American literature and American civilization mainly focuses on the romance of the forest from the colonial period to the founding of the nation, the pragmatism that dominated America in the late 19th century and the 20th century, and the conformism inherent in it. However, he has not only intervened in contemporary themes such as the experiences of the anti-war movement and the civil rights movement of minorities before and after 1968, the depletion of frontiers and the crisis of culture and history that the United States had to face after the 1980s, but also the Obama and Trump era. He has also written important critiques of the contradictions of liberalism and backlashes from the perspective of his own theory of American literature. He reinterprets American literature through close reading from new criticism, which is an attitude related to Kim's belief in the foundation of poetry, which focuses on the specificity of individual life and the immanence of experience. Kim's theory of American literature is structured under the problematic framework of region rather than center, nature rather than civilization, and specific individual freedom rather than community. His demand for immanent transcendentalism is judged to have been conceived in the process of avoiding both the direct transcendence of Korean literature and the horizontal transcendence of American literature. Kim points out the two symptoms of Korean modern literature: direct transcendence, which implies withdrawal from overwhelming life, and resignation to daily life, which rejects totality and history. And as a way to overcome this tendency of a separate peace, he advocated immanent transcendentalism and concrete universality. This shows a significant logical relationship and circulation of evaluation words with criticism of American literature summarized as horizontal transcendence.This paper examines the relationship between Kim Uchang's theory of American literature and its influence on Korean literature through the articles on American civilization and literature in 『The Collected Works of Kim Uchang』 1-19. Kim's theory of American literature and American civilization is based on the romance of the forest from the period of colonization to the founding of the country, the pragmatism that dominated America in the late 19th and 20th centuries and its inherent conformism. Kim's theory of American literature and American civilization mainly focuses on the romance of the forest from the colonial period to the founding of the nation, the pragmatism that dominated America in the late 19th century and the 20th century, and the conformism inherent in it. However, he has not only intervened in contemporary themes such as the experiences of the anti-war movement and the civil rights movement of minorities before and after 1968, the depletion of frontiers and the crisis of culture and history that the United States had to face after the 1980s, but also the Obama and Trump era. He has also written important critiques of the contradictions of liberalism and backlashes from the perspective of his own theory of American literature. He reinterprets American literature through close reading from new criticism, which is an attitude related to Kim's belief in the foundation of poetry, which focuses on the specificity of individual life and the immanence of experience. Kim's theory of American literature is structured under the problematic framework of region rather than center, nature rather than civilization, and specific individual freedom rather than community. His demand for immanent transcendentalism is judged to have been conceived in the process of avoiding both the direct transcendence of Korean literature and the horizontal transcendence of American literature. Kim points out the two symptoms of Korean modern literature: direct transcendence, which implies withdrawal from overwhelming life, and resignation to daily life, which rejects totality and history. And as a way to overcome this tendency of a separate peace, he advocated immanent transcendentalism and concrete universality. This shows a significant logical relationship and circulation of evaluation words with criticism of American literature summarized as horizontal transcendence.
키워드열기/닫기 버튼
Kim Uchang, American Literature, Korean Literature, a Separate Peace, Horizontal Transcendence, Direct Transcendence, Immanent Transcendentalism, Influence, Predicate Exchange
