남정현과 손창섭의 전후소설에 나타난 남성인물의 젠더 수행성 연구

Abstract

In Korea, 'post-war novels' collectively refer to novels dealing with war experiences and life after June 25, 1950. In particular, the Korean War has a more complex historical context in that it broke out within a few years of liberation from Japanese colonial rule, than Korea became a new colony by the U.S. In the case of Korea, the transition from the pre-modern feudal patriarchal system to the modern patriarchal national state had a process of heteronomous modernization called 'colonial land'. The colonial system was resolved by Japan's defeat in the Pacific War, but the ensuing Korean War strengthened the colonial trauma rather than overcoming it. This can be called postcolonial amnesia. In this context, problematic men characters who show dual aspects in realizing their 'subjectivity' appear in postwar novels. This can be analyzed under the name of 'colonial masculinity'. In summary, ‘colonial masculinity’ refers to the act of imitating imperial logic by criticizing and identifying the male of the empire that unfairly dominates him, or by turning anger and frustration at the colony to the female colonized. In the case of Nam Jung-hyun's novel, it can be seen that he identifies with an imperial man, imitating his behavior. On the other hand, in the case of Son Chang-seop's novel, it can be seen that he relies on women and despises women at the same time. As such, Nam Jung-hyun and Son Chang-seop's novels can confirm two bipolar aspects of "masculinity" during the post-war neo-colonial period of the 1950s and 1960s, which is called gender over-performance and non-performance, respectively. The gender over-performance and psychopathological satire of Nam Jung- hyun's novel have the effect of satirizing the masculinity that the male protagonist is obsessed with. Meanwhile, in Son Chang-seop's novel, he does not perform normative masculinity, but rather visualizes masculine homosexuality excluded from the masculine homosexual society, and it shows a departure from normative masculinity. Thus, The two methods of masculinity have a paradoxical meaning in that they reveal colonial masculinity in different ways while "relativizing" their masculinity as "satire" and "deviation" of masculinity. This suggests a contradictory defect in normative masculinity.