지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
In this article, the emergence of high-ranking Joseon civil officials under Japanese ruling and the identities they developed are examined. Persons who passed the administrative examination for high-ranking civil officials are primarily analyzed in this study.
Number of Joseon applicants who successfully passed the administrative examination for high-ranking civil officials increased rapidly during the 1930s. People were desperately searching for jobs in the 1930s, and the national liberation movements were slowing down a little. The Imperial university was providing the society with specialized people who could apply for various governmental seats, and people were eagerly pursuing this path of social advances by applying and passing the examinations. For the Joseon people, it was fairly difficult even for the college graduates to get a job and stretch out their potentials, and to them the status of a high-ranking official which meant significant career advance was very much appealing. And to the young talents of the Joseon population, the idea of a ‘healthy competition(national examinations)’, also accompanied by a certain level of economic background and their own intelligence, was an attractive one.
The applicants who passed the examination for high-ranking civil officials developed a strong sense of being an elite. The pride and connectedness they developed as they went through a fierce competition had the effect of strongly binding them together. All the common and special knowledge acquired through their efforts of taking classes and examinations gave confidence to them, and that confidence enabled them to devise policies and perform their duties. After going through this elitist course, they came to not regard themselves as Joseon officials but rather to identify themselves with the group of people to whom they developed a sense of connectedness. Sometimes they identified themselves as officials who had all studied together at a particular high school, or officials who had all graduated from a particular imperial university, or officials who had all passed the exam for high-ranking civil officials in the same year. These kinds of identification did not require the person’s nationality, Joseon or Japanese, to be recognized.
It was when they received their monthly wages or received written appointments that they were reminded that they were indeed Joseon in nature. Salaries and assignments often turned out to be unjust, but they were systematic problems and were not to be solved through efforts taken by an official upon an individual basis. They were problems to be solved outside the hierarchy, through efforts to abolish discrimination.
They faced discriminative practices, and were reminded that they were Joseon in nature, but did not engage in active efforts to abolish such discrimination. They were successful cases to achieve superior capabilities and rise above ordinary Joseon people, and constituted the highest class in the society which would also legitimize the Joseon Governor General office’s argument of ‘bettering’ the Joseon people’s quality(民度), a cause that also served as a rationale for discriminative practices. Any kind of action they chose to follow out of frustration of the situation meant giving up all the things they had worked for, their background, and their hopes for career advancement. Their strong pursuit of social advances remained fairly strong even after the liberation, and served as a source of mentality which sustained the officials support of a dictatorship government.
Number of Joseon applicants who successfully passed the administrative examination for high-ranking civil officials increased rapidly during the 1930s. People were desperately searching for jobs in the 1930s, and the national liberation movements were slowing down a little. The Imperial university was providing the society with specialized people who could apply for various governmental seats, and people were eagerly pursuing this path of social advances by applying and passing the examinations. For the Joseon people, it was fairly difficult even for the college graduates to get a job and stretch out their potentials, and to them the status of a high-ranking official which meant significant career advance was very much appealing. And to the young talents of the Joseon population, the idea of a ‘healthy competition(national examinations)’, also accompanied by a certain level of economic background and their own intelligence, was an attractive one.
The applicants who passed the examination for high-ranking civil officials developed a strong sense of being an elite. The pride and connectedness they developed as they went through a fierce competition had the effect of strongly binding them together. All the common and special knowledge acquired through their efforts of taking classes and examinations gave confidence to them, and that confidence enabled them to devise policies and perform their duties. After going through this elitist course, they came to not regard themselves as Joseon officials but rather to identify themselves with the group of people to whom they developed a sense of connectedness. Sometimes they identified themselves as officials who had all studied together at a particular high school, or officials who had all graduated from a particular imperial university, or officials who had all passed the exam for high-ranking civil officials in the same year. These kinds of identification did not require the person’s nationality, Joseon or Japanese, to be recognized.
It was when they received their monthly wages or received written appointments that they were reminded that they were indeed Joseon in nature. Salaries and assignments often turned out to be unjust, but they were systematic problems and were not to be solved through efforts taken by an official upon an individual basis. They were problems to be solved outside the hierarchy, through efforts to abolish discrimination.
They faced discriminative practices, and were reminded that they were Joseon in nature, but did not engage in active efforts to abolish such discrimination. They were successful cases to achieve superior capabilities and rise above ordinary Joseon people, and constituted the highest class in the society which would also legitimize the Joseon Governor General office’s argument of ‘bettering’ the Joseon people’s quality(民度), a cause that also served as a rationale for discriminative practices. Any kind of action they chose to follow out of frustration of the situation meant giving up all the things they had worked for, their background, and their hopes for career advancement. Their strong pursuit of social advances remained fairly strong even after the liberation, and served as a source of mentality which sustained the officials support of a dictatorship government.
목차
머리말
1. 고등문관시험과 조선인 합격자
2. 고등문관시험 응시 동기
3. 조선총독부의 고등관 인사
4. 식민지 엘리트의 정체성
맺음말
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
일제하 조선인 군수의 사회적 위상과 현실 인식 : 1920~30년대를 중심으로
역사와현실
2007 .03
-
[논문] 고려 현종대 정치와 이계(吏系) 관료
역사와현실
2005 .03
-
秦代 ‘新地’ 吏員의 구성과 그 한계
중국고중세사연구
2018 .08
-
독일 제국말기 사법부 중간직 관리운동의 의의 : 법원서기 연맹의 기관지를 중심으로
역사교육
2004 .09
-
조선 후기의 역서(曆書) 간행에 참여한 관상감 중인 연구
한국과학사학회지
2015 .01
-
중국소설 《西遊記》 번역본의 조선후기 유통에 관한 연구 : 영남대 소장 번역필사본을 중심으로
중국어문논역총간
2017 .01
-
고려 공민왕~우왕 때 정치ㆍ사회의 변동
역사와 담론
2003 .04
-
[기획1 : 한국고대사회를 어떻게 볼 것인가] 신라 중위제의 추이와 지배신분층의 변화
역사와현실
2003 .12
-
『삼국사기』직관지 관등규정의 유형과 정비과정
한국사학보
2016 .05
-
1920년대 전반 조선총독부의 선전영화 제작과 상영
지방사와 지방문화
2006 .11
-
Transformation of Official Rank and Salary System in the Late Koryŏ Period
International Journal of Korean History
2002 .12
-
1930년대 중후반 식민지 조선 금융기구 개편론의 전개와 함의
한국사연구
2020 .09
-
6~7세기 삼국의 관료제 운영과 신분제 : 衣冠制에 대한 검토를 기반으로
한국고대사연구
2009 .06
-
조선총독부 고적조사사업에 대한 평가와 인식 -패전 후 일본 학계의 동향을 중심으로-
한일관계사연구
2020 .05
-
일제시기 조선금융조합연합회의 운영주체와 ‘금융조합주의’
한국사연구
2009 .06
-
조선 후기 무신의 중앙 관료생활 연구 : 《盧尙樞日記》를 중심으로
한국사연구
2008 .12
-
고려전기 公服制의 정비 과정에 대한 연구
사학연구
2016 .03
-
환웅, 삼조선과 부여ㆍ고구려ㆍ요ㆍ금ㆍ원ㆍ청의 계보 : 지식형태사에 입각한 한국과 방계의 역사
고조선단군학
2007 .06
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-911-016563143