earticle

영어

The purpose of this study is to compare Kim Su-young with Gu cheng, a Chinese poet representing modernism, and lay the ground to compare the two in several aspects. First, they faced a similar background of society. After ‘4․19’ in Korea and ‘the Cultural Revolution’ in China, the two nations had different systems as capitalism and socialism each; however, only the names were different, but both were under dictatorship. It made the poets’ consciousness of participation rise to describe reality. Second, aside from that background of society, the two poets transcended the borders of genres or concepts like ‘realism’ or ‘modernism’ with their critical view and realized ontological ‘participation’ already. They were more faithful to their own awareness of reality as well as poetic sense, and with this keen sense of criticism, they realized aesthetics in the poetry of participation. Kim Su-young deems that the true poetry of participation is not about the theoretical concept in which ‘the poetry of participation’ has originated from but the substantiality itself which is already internalized in unconsciousness. In other words, he sees that the true aspect of the poetry of participation is not the ideology as a concept preceding political ideology but what does not even have to be defined as a genre with the behavior itself. Gu cheng also did not separate politics from aesthetics and saw ‘the consciousness of participation’ was one of the prerequisites. When it comes to beautiful poems, he says aestheticity is not the only condition but participation for the sake of ‘participation’ is not the goal, either. He thinks that aesthetics is a preceding condition in the relations between politics and aesthetics but political consciousness is also essential and the combination of them forms the power to change the world. Writing the poems of participation combined with aesthetics, both Kim Su-young and Gu cheng stuck to ‘seeing’, and here ‘seeing’ implies a lot of things. It is not mere ‘seeing’ but the manifestation of subjective power involved in rebuilding the world. Also, the view they sees is what gets to be reconstructed by being dismantled and turned over under the internal criteria not just remaining hidden, and it is the most essential prerequisite for participation.