• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.69
• /
• pp.179-204
• /
• 2017

Hojil(虎叱) and Yangbanjeon(兩班傳) reveal the characteristic styles of Park Jiwon(朴趾源)'s writing, which is combining styles of unofficial history/biography(外傳) and allegory(寓言), and full of the senses of satire and humour which form another characteristc of his writing style or tone. This paper reexamines narrative styles, meaning structures and themes of these two works which combine the styles of unofficial history/biography and allegory, and researches methods and techniques of allegory and satire which presents the subversive and critical themes and thoughts of the author. In Hojil, combining of the two styles, the author constructs the narrative world and plot, manipulates allegoric figures to symbolize and present multilayered meaning, and criticize the decadence of confucian aristocracy [Sadaebu: 士大夫] and it's abuses. In Yangbanjeon by combining of two styles, the author weave a biography of Yangban(兩班) in general, which presents the attributes and historical position of the Yangban class. And by the nonsensical fictional event which caricatures crisis of the Yangban class, and tedious description of the manners and behaviors of the Yangban, the author and satires the snobbery of the Yangban and the absurdity of their classical privileges. As he did in Hojil, the author urges the self-examination of the reader raising a question about the position and the function or duty of the Yangban class in the changing world. And the various skills of satire together with the irony, paradox, parody and pun were used dexterously in above two works.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.41
• /
• pp.61-90
• /
• 2010

In this paper, I focused on analyzing Yeoheon Chang Hyeon-gwang's literary theory and his prose in the genealogy of Confucian scholars in Chosun. Through this study, I would like to examine the trend of concentrating on 16th century when we treat the literary tendency of Confucian scholars. With this goal, I tried to seek the direction which was pursued by Confucian scholars who lived during the 17th century. Yeoheon tried to construct the spirit of humanities cosmically as an aim of his life, study, and literature. And he had a new understanding of human independence by suffering from Japanese invasion in the late of 16th century. He insisted that only human can realize the spirit of humanities on a cosmic base. He also thought that the morality(道) could be settled only by literature(文). We may interpret this concept as a progressive idea about literature comparing to the former Confucian scholars. On the other hands, Yeoheon tried to accept the literary theory of former scholars such like Park Young, Cho Sik, and Seong Woon who embraced Taoism. Yet he erased the color of Taoism in the field of topic, and he also tried to keep his distance from them in the field of literary form. This concept actually came from Lee Hwang's opinion, while Yeoheon tried to rouse scholar's independence. Through above, we may realize that the Confucian scholars of 17th century were not just imitators of 16th century. They tried to examine the former study and also tried to renew the theory.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.70
• /
• pp.119-156
• /
• 2018

Suk Dang Kim Sangjeong (1722-1788) was one of the Big Three Noron literati of the mid-18th century, and is an author worth taking note of in that he expressed the duty to pursue the Qin-Han gomoon-ron (古文論) more clearly and radically than anyone else. The literary debates that unfolded in the letters he exchanged with Ahn Doje (安道濟) and Sin Daejeon (申大傳) are the clues that may explain the continual development of Qin-Han gomoon-ron within Joseon. His gomoon-ron is a self-reflection of the Dang-Song gomoon-ron that continued as tradition in the Noron literati after Kim Changhyeop (金昌協), and also reflects his literary and periodical confidence. At the same time, he also makes a distinction with Qin-Han gomoon-ron set forth by the Seven Masters literature from the Ming Dynasty (前後七子) in that he takes precautions against plagiarism and emulation. It has rarely been shown that his sentences plagiarize and excessively cite the classics, or that he abstrusely elaborates sentences. He sorted through things of value worth recording and cleanly reenacted them based on the scenes and conversations, further, delivered applicable normative lessons through allegoric writing. This may be discussed as the portions that are possessed by the Qin-Han gomoon-ron that he pursued, and particularly that have the esthetic and contact point of historical prose. Kim Sangjeong's writing pursued the Qin-Han gomoon-ron of a prior era, and though distinguishable from authors of difficult writings, possesses unique characteristics that make it distinct from the Dang-Song gomoon-ron that focuses on argument. The direction of Kim Sangjeong's antiquarianism seeks after imperial loyalty, and is mutually intelligible with the artistic discourse of the Noron Cheongryu literati such as Lee Yunyeong, Kim Sangsuk, Lee Insang, and Hong Naksun who preferred archaeological finds and classical prose. While their literary tastes are a reflection of their conservative worldviews, they may also have been utilized as a foundation supporting their lives which were devoted to literature.

• Cross-Cultural Studies
• /
• v.48
• /
• pp.67-106
• /
• 2017

This study focuses on two specific history of Korean literature in Chinese: the outline of The History of Joseon Literature (2010) by Li Yan and The History of Joseon Literature (1988, 2008) by Wei Xu-sheng; it was conducted to compare narrative viewpoints to the history of South and North Korean literature and therefore identify distinguishable characteristics. As a result, the following was concluded. First, The History of Korean Literature by Cho Dong-il and The History of Korean Literature in North Korea (15 volumes) include thorough discussions on division of historical eras, concept of genres as well as individual literary works and applied such discussions on writing literary history. However, Wei Xu-sheng and Li Yan's The History of Korean Literature did not illuminate theoretical discussion of South and North Korea. Li Yan's outline of The History of Joseon Literature was published in 2010 and the first edition of Wei Xu-sheng's The History of Joseon Literature was published in 1986 and later was published as revised editions in 2000 and 2008. Regarding published dates, it is a matter of course to reference Cho Dong-il's The History of Korean Literature, published in the 1980s, or The History of Korean Literature in North Korea (15 volumes), published in the 1990s; nevertheless, neither Wei Xu-sheng nor Li Yan used those texts in their works. Their works were heavily influenced by the narrative tradition of the history of national literature and therefore, entailed unsophisticated discussion on the division of historical eras or the concept of genres. Second, those two texts also emphasized external factors such as politics, society, economy and culture and explicitly mention these factors in historical overview of each chapter. Such an approach is commonly used in narratives of literary history under socialist regimes, including The History of Korean Literature in North Korea (15 volumes). Accordingly, evaluations based on 'political standards' - stress of people, nationality, practicality and so forth - in main texts are particularly accentuated, akin to narratives of literary history under socialist regimes. Finally, since those two Korean literature history works are written by Chinese scholars, they focus on correlation between Chinese literature history and Korean literature history. However, several genre-related terminologies such as Xiaopin (a kind of essay), Yuefu (a kind of popular song/poem), Yuyan (fable), Shuochang (telling of popular stories with the interspersal songs), Shizhuan (biography or/and memoirs in history) were adopted directly from Chinese literature. In analyzing Korean literature using terminologies introduced from Chinese literature, differences between original and alternative definitions were not examined in detail. While some terminologies and concepts were adopted directly without further consideration as to state of the two nations, it is also interesting to note that dichotomy, mainly used in Korean literature history, was used to discuss the genre of Cheonki (romance tale), relevant to Suyichon and Keumosinhua, rather than follow traditions of Chinese literature history.

• Sijohaknonchong
• /
• v.21
• /
• pp.77-110
• /
• 2004

This study is an exploration of a Korean-American writer, Hong-Eun's Mong-yu siga. Hong-Eun immigrated to the United States during the colonial rule of the Japanese government. He was a publisher of The New Korea Times, and contributed various literary works to it. The purpose of this study is to analyze his two Mong-yu sigas published in 1935 and 1947 and elucidate their meanings. Using dream as a primary motif, the intention of Mong-yu mode is to achieve desire which is impossible to reach in reality. While his staying in the United States, Hong-Eun could not return his home country for two reasons, that is, political and financial ones. To return Korea desperately, he wrote sigas by adopting Mong-yu mode. His first attempt was reflected as eight pieces of consecutive poetries titled This Mountain In My Dream, I am Home. This Mountain was published on the 25th of April, 1935 and In My Dream, I am Home was contributed from May the 9th of 1935 to July the fourth of the same year. These works were published in the The New Korea Times' poetry column under the pen name of Donghae-soboo , Representing gasa of the enlightenment era, this poetry depicts historical identity of Chosun dynasty, especially focusing on before and after the 1900s. As a result of it, the poetry sketches the ideology of the Middle Ages. His second attempt was A Country and Hometown written as a form of prelude on the 25th of September, 1947. In addition, A Country in My Dream was published as a form of six pieces of consecutive poetry from October the second to November the sixth of 1947. He chose sijo as a major form of poetry, and the image of the poetry seemed to be the continuation of his first attempt. Confronting the reality of the his own country which is divided, the writer expresses his antagonism toward America and Russia. Although he could eventually return his country later, he rationalized himself by saying that his it is not the ideal place to go. Mong-yu mode is a traditional poetic technique which the intellectuals of the Middle Age used to use as one pattern of allegory. In addition to this, in the period of the enlightenment of Korea, Mong-yu was used to avoid the Japanese censorship and experiment on the diverse ways of writing. In terms of literary history, the significance of Hong-Eun's creation of Mong-yu sigas is that Hong-Eun shares the same intention with Korean intellectuals of the enlightenment period.