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.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2019.11
- 수록면
- 63 - 83 (23page)
- DOI
- 10.38080/crh.2019.11.129.63
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This paper examines the texts of Night on March 1st by Gwon Bodeurae and 1919 by Park Chan-seung. The two books are representative and symbolic contrasting writings on theme of March 1st Movement in terms of literature and history, as a result of long study. The two prominent writings, Marking the 100th anniversary of March 1st Movement, were reviewed, with attention drawn to the two texts’ narrative tension, and based on book review, meta-criticism was attempted to sound out the incident’s current position and prospect in the study of culture history.
The two books are of different character and yet complementary to each other. For instance, the authors were compared regarding the text of ‘33 People Representatives’ and “Declaration of March 1st Independence”―which are deemed to be the representative symbol of March 1st Movement,―revealing this: Gwon Bodeurae discussed the various versions and multiple representatives, but Park Chan-seung reconfirmed the representation and symbols of the 33 Representatives and derived truthfulness of the text. Therefore, with the continuous development of world thoughts and cultures since 1910, various leaders based their interpretation of reality and their exploration of the future on the challenging mode of March 1st Movement. Thus, March 1st Movement became the origin of Korea’s democracy, encouraging Koreans to establish a provisional government so as to prepare the thought and political system of democratic republic system.
The two books could derive a different historical interpretation of March 1st Movement, because the cultural and political methodology work while literary composition and empirical narration method also work. The commentary on the two books revealed the empirical limitations in Night on March 1st, and a lack of diverse interpretations in 1919. However, historical emissions could happen due to limitations of raw materials, and a critical review is required as to writing the textbook-like right theory differently for reading markets requiring popular historical description. Night on March 1st and 1919 present different methodologies and historical narration, enabling readers to form a critical knowledge of March 1st Movement, and further requiring re-understanding of complementary relationships of the two books wherein literary and cultural studies contrast historical narration.
The two books are of different character and yet complementary to each other. For instance, the authors were compared regarding the text of ‘33 People Representatives’ and “Declaration of March 1st Independence”―which are deemed to be the representative symbol of March 1st Movement,―revealing this: Gwon Bodeurae discussed the various versions and multiple representatives, but Park Chan-seung reconfirmed the representation and symbols of the 33 Representatives and derived truthfulness of the text. Therefore, with the continuous development of world thoughts and cultures since 1910, various leaders based their interpretation of reality and their exploration of the future on the challenging mode of March 1st Movement. Thus, March 1st Movement became the origin of Korea’s democracy, encouraging Koreans to establish a provisional government so as to prepare the thought and political system of democratic republic system.
The two books could derive a different historical interpretation of March 1st Movement, because the cultural and political methodology work while literary composition and empirical narration method also work. The commentary on the two books revealed the empirical limitations in Night on March 1st, and a lack of diverse interpretations in 1919. However, historical emissions could happen due to limitations of raw materials, and a critical review is required as to writing the textbook-like right theory differently for reading markets requiring popular historical description. Night on March 1st and 1919 present different methodologies and historical narration, enabling readers to form a critical knowledge of March 1st Movement, and further requiring re-understanding of complementary relationships of the two books wherein literary and cultural studies contrast historical narration.
목차
1. 3·1운동 100주년 기념의 열기와 학술장의 발전(發電)
2. 3·1운동을 무엇으로 ‘대표’할 것인가
3. ‘역사적 실증’과 ‘문학적 구성’ 사이에서
4. 100주년의 바람에 바라는 바
참고문헌
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
3 · 1운동 수업 동향과 전망
역사교육
2019 .09
-
북한 정부의 3‧1운동 기념과 표상 - 『로동신문』(1946~2019)을 중심으로 -
동방학지
2020 .01
-
‘비폭력의 스펙터클’을 넘어서 -3·1운동 100주년의 폭력론
역사비평
2019 .11
-
The March 1st Movement and the Red Thread of International Peace History
Korea Observer
2019 .01
-
3·1운동 100주년의 연구와 ‘3·1혁명론’
역사비평
2020 .02
-
일본 역사 교과서의 3 · 1운동 서술 분석
역사교육
2019 .09
-
“비록 이름은 알려지지 않았지만, 꿈은 이루어졌나요?” : 초등학교 3․1 운동 역할극 수업 실행과 성찰
역사교육논집
2016 .01
-
3·1운동 100주년 연구와 현재의 시선 -민주주의와 다양한 주체들
역사비평
2019 .11
-
3 · 1운동 관련 교과서 서술의 변천 분석
역사교육
2019 .09
-
3ㆍ1운동의 마지막 만세시위 검토
사림
2019 .01
-
Special Discussion on the March First Movement’s Centennial 〈The March First Movement in East Asian History〉
Journal of Northeast Asian History
2018 .12
-
3.1운동 사례를 통해 본 역사 교과서의 시각과 구성에서의 변화 가능성 모색
사림
2021 .10
-
3‧1 운동의 낯선 얼굴들 – 권보드래, 『3월 1일의 밤-폭력의 세기에 꾸는 평화의 꿈』(돌베개, 2019) –
어문론총
2020 .01
-
A Paradigm Shift of The March 1st Movement: From Independence to Restoration, From Anti-Japanese Struggle to Peaceful Coexistence, and From Nationalism to Cosmopolitanism
Korea Observer
2019 .01
-
Achievements and Challenges in the Centennial Anniversary Studies of the March First Independence Movement
Korea Journal
2021 .03
-
3·1운동 100년의 기억과 기념 - 3·1운동 100주년 기획위원회 좌담 -
역사와현실
2019 .12
-
해방직후 3.1운동 역사상의 분화
사림
2018 .01
-
전후 일본 조선사학계의 3.1운동 인식
역사와현실
2018 .06
-
한국 근대문학의 알레고리 - 김남천의 희곡 ｢삼일운동｣에 관한 몇 개의 주석
동방학지
2024 .09
-
한국의 민주화운동과 ‘3.1운동 기억’: 4.19혁명에서 6월항쟁까지
동방학지
2018 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2020-905-000080182