아프리카에서 본 중국과 한국 (China vs. Korea in Africa), Op Ed in the Chosun Ilbo (original) (raw)
Related papers
대동한문학 (Daedonghanmunhak), 2019
This study examines discussions of Tangun and Kija in the ancient history discourse of Chosŏn missions to Japan in written conversation collections during the 17th and 18th centuries. First, the study observed how written conversation collections from 1636 to 1764 raised the issue of Tangun and Kija. Since the Chinese texts mentioned that Kija introduced the Eight Prohibitions to Chosŏn, the Japanese literati also took this as historical fact. Thus, they referred to Chosŏn as Kisŏng (箕域), Kibang (箕邦), and Kiju (箕疇) in poetry exchanges, praising it as a country civilized by Kija and carrying on the customs of the Shang. Tangun’s existence was known in Japan through Comprehensive Mirror of the Eastern Kingdom (Tongguk t’onggam) and was recognized along with Kija as the progenitor of Chosŏn. Tangun and Kija were frequently mentioned in poetry exchanges and written conversations from early Chosŏn-Japan exchange until the 1764 mission. Throughout the missions, the Japanese literati generally had no qualms accepting the existence of Tangun and Kija. However, Hayashi Hōkō raised doubts to Yi Hyŏn about whether Tangun lived 1,048 years and which text stated that Kija brought 5,000 Shang people with him in a 1711 written conversation. This question, though, was the repeating of questions already raised by Hayashi Razan in a letter to a Chosŏn envoy in 1643. Although it is presumed that Razan read Comprehensive Mirror and raised these doubts, he presents these questions as if they were his own. Although Razan’s questions were over the evidence and credibility of the ancient texts, this attitude is not taken by Japanese literati in later conversations. This study presents examples of the attitude Japanese scholars of the Edo period took regarding Tangun and Kija in written conversations before taking a modern approach to such myths. The author will attempt to refine this analysis by examining discussions of mythical Japanese figures such as Susanoo-no-Mikoto and Wang In in the ancient history discourse of Chosŏn-Japan exchange.
Journal of Koreanology, 2022
The aim of this paper is to ruminate on Hŏ Kyun (許筠)’s writing style by examining two farewell prose (送序) written for envoys to China, as they appear in Sŏngsobubugo (惺所覆瓿藁). Two writings are worth ruminating for they exemplify two important traits of Hŏ Kyun’s guwen (古文) writing style, respectively as regular and irregular forms of farewell prose. “Sending Kim Chachung to the Capital of the Emperor” (送金子中赴京序) explains that Kim Siyang(Chachung) was appointed as the third envoy (書狀官; official in charge of documentation during envoy trips) to restore the climate of “abiding by the law and protecting righteousness (持法守正)” from Sŏngjong era. Dignified yet powerful argument is elaborately arranged through comparison and contrast, repetition of stress and ease, and transposition of subject and object, as well as reiteration and amplification. “Sending Cho Chise to the Capital of the Emperor” (送趙持世赴京序) forefrontly employs a narrative – interestingly, writer himself is the main character of the narrative, not the recipient. The writer reminiscences about how their hope of traveling to China together was frustrated a number of times due to the ‘disruption from the naught of fate’. Five instances of ups and downs appear before the denouement; in each stage, he repeats yet variegates the doubt about human desire and heaven’s will, and thereby impressively depicts his shift in mentality - from anticipation and doubt to frustration and disappointment. In this writing, one theme – to lament the arbitrariness of fate - envelops the another, inner theme - to congratulate a friend’s envoy trip; and the writer skillfully weaves two themes by constructing a layered structure. Both writings reveal his concern for the beauty of form, best expressed as ‘discipline’ (法), yet a brimming vigor (氣勢) can be sensed from between the lines. Such vigor comes from Hŏ Kyun’ having embodied the ability to arrange the forms in his writing habit. The “relentless energy” (滔滔) visible in Hŏ Kyun’s works – said in “Thoughts on Writing” (文說) - is based on his writing style, which involves elaborate logic and composition, plenty of changes, and unique structure of narrative.
Record of a Journey to Japan and Chŏng Hukyo’s Perception of Japan
남명학연구 (Nammyonghak Studies), 2019
This study examines the characteristics of Record of a Journey to Japan (扶桑紀行, Pusang kihaeng) written during the 1719 embassy and the perception of Japan by its author, Chŏng Hukyo. Chŏng was recognized as a prominent poet among Noron literati such as Kim Chang-hŭp and Sin Chŏng-ha during the reign of King Sukjong. As a soldier of the 1719 mission to vice envoy Hwang Sŏn, he was responsible for exchanging poetry with the Japanese along with the embassy’s clerks and secretaries. Joining the mission to Japan was a form of leisure for him, and this is apparent from how his emissary record focuses on detailed such sightseeing experiences rather than on information. The record mainly focuses on sensory descriptions of scenery and unique sights as well as recreating the exchange of diaries and poetry in written conversations with Japanese literati. In particular, it is noteworthy for its vivid descriptions of diverse experiences such as whale hunting and sites of poetry exchange not found in other emissary records. Moreover, Chŏng’s perception of Japan can be analyzed from three aspects. The first of these is approval of Japan’s legal system and national strength. The second is a sensitive reappraisal of Japanese character and customs from a sympathetic viewpoint. The third is a new understanding of Japan’s civilization through an adaptation of the discourse of Sino-barbarian dichotomy (華夷論, hwa-yi-ron). The last is particularly interesting in its adaptation, or roundabout modifying, of the premises of an existing concept among Chosŏn intellectuals to produce a new understanding. The above investigation of Record of a Journey to Japan demonstrates several important points for analysis in research on emissary records. A comparison with records from the same or different time periods will broaden the scope of the study.
The Comments on the Korean Classical Texts, 2020
This paper analyzes Yang Ju-dong(1903~1977)’s research on the Korean classical poetry, focusing on its contexts of the ‘Korean Parnassus’ group in the late Japanese colonial period of Korea, from the late 1930s to the early 1940s. At the time of the second Sino-Japanese war, writers of “Munjang”, a popular coterie magazine founded in 1939, tried to ‘invent’ the language and literature of Joseon(Korea). Yang Ju-dong’s research on the Korean classical poetry, particularly interested in lexicology of ancient Korean language and literature, were related to such tendency of Munjang and its writers at that time. Concerning the discourse of ‘Korean classical literature’, Yang ju-dong conceived double boundaries of the Korean classical literature, the diachronic ‘past’ and the spatial ‘Korea=Orient.’ By fusing these concepts of time and space, he organized a singular ‘function’ of space-time of the Korean literature, that the Korean classical literature was valuable because it came from the past(classical antiquity), which meant it preserved Korean=Oriental aesthetics very well. These imagined boundaries and their function relied on two inventions. The first was the invention of the continuity of Korean language, from the language of Silla dynasty to the modern Korean. The second was the invention of the genealogical extension of Korean language toward Manchurian or Mongolian, based on the hypothesis of ‘Ural-Altaic language family.’ It seems that Yang ju-dong’s research internalized, to a certain degree, the logic of Japanese Imperialism, especially on its Orientalism or direction of ‘post/anti-westernization.’ To quote Homi Bhabha’s words, however, the invention of Yang ju-dong’s research can be analyzed as ‘resistance,’ because it interpellated Joseon(Korea), which was completely eliminated, into the Japanese imperialistic initiative of ‘Greater East Asia’, and therefore, implied “the signs of cultural difference and reimplicate them within the ‘deferential relations’ of colonial power.”