메뉴 건너뛰기
Library Notice
Institutional Access
If you certify, you can access the articles for free.
Check out your institutions.
ex)Hankuk University, Nuri Motors
Log in Register Help KOR
Subject

Lee Heongu's Culture and Anti-communist Logics Before and After the Korean War
Recommendations
Search
Questions

한국 전쟁 전후 이헌구의 '문화' 인식과 '반공'의 논리

논문 기본 정보

Type
Academic journal
Author
Ko, Bong-Jun (경희대학교)
Journal
The Studies Of Korean Literature The Studies of Korean Literature Vol.68 KCI Accredited Journals
Published
2020.10
Pages
7 - 35 (29page)
DOI
10.20864/skl.2020.10.68.7

Usage

cover
📌
Topic
📖
Background
🔬
Method
🏆
Result
Lee Heongu's Culture and Anti-communist Logics Before and After the Korean War
Ask AI
Recommendations
Search
Questions

Abstract· Keywords

Report Errors
This study is a literary criticism of Lee Heongu’s works written before and after the Korean war, focusing on the logics of “culture” and “anti-communism.” A graduate of French literature (Waseda University), Lee debuted in the literary circle as a member of the “Overseas Literary Group” in the early 1930s. At the time, the group advocated customized accommodation of foreign literature in a Korean way, but Lee’s presence stood out in debates with the KAPF members. For this reason, a majority of previous studies on Lee’s work focused on the activities of the “Overseas Literary Group” and his debates with the KAPF.
Lee became the strongest ideologue that advocated national literature and anti-communism. He led initiatives to organize right-wing literary and cultural groups after the liberalization of the country, and emphasized the values of nationalism, freedom, and individuality. Compared to the ideology of national literature advocated by Kim Dongli and other right-wing literary figures during the period of liberalization, Lee advocated national literature without specific logics. He divided the national culture between the timing of liberalization and the Korean War. He considered that an approach that valued national interests was nationalist in nature and a communist approach was one that defied nationalism, establishing an antagonistic relationship between “communism” and “nationality.” It was an easy way of alienating communism, while making nationalism an exclusive right-wing value. Taking a step further, Lee disparaged communism as an anti-cultural force, considered it as an ideology of subservience and submission that annihilates individuals’ freedom, and even as an ideology that negates the intrinsic value of a human being. He used these reasons to justify the legitimacy of anti-communism. In his writing published around the time of the Korean War, Lee defined communism as an anti-national ideology that denies the cultural traditions and interests of a nation, as well as an anti-civilization and anti-cultural ideology that annihilates culture and civilization propagated by mankind. Just as he defined communism as an anti-national ideology by exclusively making nationalism a right-wing value, Lee derogated communism as a fanatical ideology that negates civilization, culture, and the intrinsic value of a human being.
What is repeatedly observed in Lee’s criticism during this period is a logic that ties literature to action. He caused the reversion of considering literary men as cultured men by establishing literature as a subcategory of culture, and went on to define cultured men and intelligent men as men in “action.” According to this logic, a literary man is a cultured and an intelligent man at the same time, and an intelligent man is a man in action. The motive for action is to stand against communism that threatens individuals, nations, and humankind. With such an action, one turns oneself into a “cultural warrior.” This chain of logic seems quite odd now, but around the time of the Korean War, it was believed that defeating the invasion of communism was the only way to contribute to both nation and mankind.

이 글은 한국 전쟁 전후 이헌구의 비평을 ‘문화’와 ‘반공’의 논리를 중심으로 분석했다. 와세다 대학 불문과를 졸업한 이헌구는 1930년대 초 ‘해외문학파’의 일원으로 문단에 등장했다. 당시 ‘해외문학파’는 ‘해외문학의 조선적 수용’을 표방하면서 등장했으나, 정작 이헌구의 존재감이 부각된 계기는 ‘카프(KAPF)’와의 논쟁이었다. 이런 이유로 선행연구의 대부분은 ‘해외문학파’ 활동이나 ‘카프’와의 논쟁에 초점이 맞춰져 있다. 하지만 이헌구는 해방 직후 이른바 우익 진영의 문학 · 문화단체를 주도적으로 결성하고, ‘민족’, ‘자유’, ‘개성’ 등의 가치를 강조하면서 민족문학과 반공주의를 표방한 강력한 이데올로그였다. 해방기 좌익문학인은 물론 김동리의 ‘민족문학론’과도 달리 이헌구가 주장한 ‘민족문학’에는 특별한 논리가 존재하지 않는다. 하지만 그는 해방에서 한국전쟁에 이르는 시기의 문화를 ‘민족’의 이익을 중시하는 태도와 ‘민족’을 부정하는 태도(공산주의)로 양분함으로써 ‘공산주의’와 ‘민족’을 적대적 관계로 설정했다. 이것은 공산주의를 타자화하는 방법인 동시에 ‘민족’을 우익의 독점적 가치로 전유하는 방법이었다.
한편 이헌구는 ‘공산주의’를 문화에 적대적인 세력, 개인의 ‘자유’를 말살하는 굴종과 복종의 이데올로기, 심지어 ‘인간’을 부정하는 사상으로 폄하함으로써 지속적으로 반공주의의 정당성을 확인했다. 한국전쟁을 전후한 시기에 발표한 글들에서 이헌구는 반공주의를 ‘민족’의 문화적 전통과 이익을 부정하는 반(反)민족인 이념, 인류가 성취한 ‘문화’와 ‘문명’을 멸절시키려는 반(反)문명 · 반(反)문화의 이데올로기로 규정한다. ‘민족’을 전유함으로써 ‘공산주의’를 ‘반(反)민족’이라는 평가에 묶어두었듯이, 동일한 방식으로 그는 공산주의를 ‘문명’, ‘문화’, ‘인간’을 부정하는 광적인 집단으로 폄하했다. 이 시기 이헌구의 비평에서 반복적으로 목격되는 것은 ‘문학’을 ‘행동’의 문제와 연결시키는 논리이다. 그는 ‘문학’을 ‘문화’의 하위범주로 규정함으로써 먼저 문학인을 문화인으로 환원하고, 나아가 문화인과 지성인을 ‘행동’하는 존재로 규정한다. 이 논리에 따르면 문학인은 문화인인 동시에 지성인이고, 지성인은 곧 행동하는 존재이다. 그리고 이때 행동의 동기는 개인, 민족, 인류를 위협하는 공산주의에 맞서는 것, 그리하여 스스로를 ‘문화전사’로 개조하는 것이다.

Contents

국문초록
Ⅰ. 들어가며
Ⅱ. 두 명의 이헌구: 이헌구의 생애에 관한 몇 가지 사실들
Ⅲ. ‘민족’의 전유, 타자화의 전략
Ⅳ. 반공전사로서의 문화인
Ⅴ. 나오며
참고문헌

References (31)

Add References

Recommendations

It is an article recommended by DBpia according to the article similarity. Check out the related articles!

Related Authors

Frequently Viewed Together

Recently viewed articles

Comments(0)

0

Write first comments.

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2020-810-001589179