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.
동북아시아문화학회 [The Association of North-east Asian Cultures]
설립연도
2000
분야
복합학>학제간연구
소개
동북아시아 문화의 다양성과 정체성을 연구 토론하고, 지역내 문화 교류의 다양한 모습을 연구하고 문화변동의 큰 틀을 집적함으로써 우리 민족 문화 및 상대 민족의 문화적 터전을 이해하여 문화공동체적 특성을 계발하고 상호 관련성의 강화를 유도하는 학술활동을 통해 동북아시아의 문화발전에 이바지함.