해방기 북조선 시문학 형성과 미학의 정치성

Abstract

In the liberation period, clear distinction between the left and the right existed and the literature domains were also opposed sharply. In both North and South, ‘politics of literature’ was actively discussed but the forms in which the politics were revealed differed. What this writer calls into question here is the circumstances in which the boundaries of ‘the social practice of the writers’ and ‘the political deed of literature itself,’ the laborious classification by Ranciere, are mixed up. While what political effects literature has in languages and autonomous domains is the question that Ranciere set up, this writer’s question is that in what manner literature in the revolutionary/turbulent period is formed. For this, the process in which North Korean literature was formed in the liberation period was approached in the aspect of ‘politics of poetry.’In order to examine ‘the formation of North Korean poetic literature in the liberation period and the politics of aesthetics,’ this writer attempts to develop the discussion focusing on the problematic texts. The texts to be intensively discussed are the recently discovered collection of joint poetical works, ‘Collection of Gwanseo Poets’ (1946),Jo Gi-cheon’s ‘Baekdusan’ (1949), the special issue of praising General Kim Il-seong ‘Our Sun,’ (1948). These texts form the articulation in the course of forming North Korean literature. Through these newly discovered collections of poems, the process in which the aesthetic politics of North Korean poetic literature was formed, was traced. Early in North Korea, the status of poets focused on writing about “strengthening the national foundation consciousness of the people and great contribution to establishing democratic country.’ This illustrates the way the ‘politics of literature’ penetrates North Korean society in another aspect. ‘Politics of literature’ that literature deploys in common order by dividing the functions of literature was made by political power ‘Non-ideology’ and ‘political indifference’ in the role of the poetic literature were also excluded in North Korean literature in the liberation period. In this way, ideological literary works were defined as natural value within North Korean society. It can be said that it was because the political function of literature was formed by excluding ‘purity’ that North Korean poetic literature was established as hymn-type of ideological literature and as the form familiar with representation of collective sentiments rather than individual lyricism. discovered collections of poems, the process in which the aesthetic politics of North Korean poetic literature was formed, was traced. Early in North Korea, the status of poets focused on writing about “strengthening the national foundation consciousness of the people and great contribution to establishing democratic country.’ This illustrates the way the ‘politics of literature’ penetrates North Korean society in another aspect. ‘Politics of literature’ that literature deploys in common order by dividing the functions of literature was made by political power ‘Non-ideology’ and ‘political indifference’ in the role of the poetic literature were also excluded in North Korean literature in the liberation period. In this way, ideological literary works were defined as natural value within North Korean society. It can be said that it was because the political function of literature was formed by excluding ‘purity’ that North Korean poetic literature was established as hymn-type of ideological literature and as the form familiar with representation of collective sentiments rather than individual lyricism. Modern literature can exist as a variety of forms. As cultural imperialism in which modern Western literature acted as universal norm has been criticized, discussions about modernity (plural modernity) have become active. Inquiry into how ‘the effectiveness of modernity’ can have effects on non-Western regions have become important. Since the collapse of the socialist bloc in the 1990s, the attitude toward looking at ‘capitalism and socialism’ has been raised as two kinds of forms of modernity. Under the circumstances where the Korean peninsula is in the restriction of the divided system, North Korea as ‘special form of modernity’ is problematic. The origin of this uniqueness could be derived through the analysis on the liberation period. Particularly, how the ‘literature domain’ where modern autonomy operates was combined with ‘politics’ is important. When modern literature does not presuppose the Western prototype, North Korean literature also can be viewed as a ‘special form of modern literature.’ The North Korean poetic literature can be significant as an example of modern literature where the politics of literature is excessively condensed.