三○年代韓國文壇對現代主義詩的受容

On the Acceptance of Modernist Poetry into the Korean Literature in the 1930s

三O年代韓國的現代主義文學，一方面反映了資本主義發展所帶來的社會變化，另一方面對殖民統治的體驗，做出了多樣的文學應對。其中，透過技巧和形式上的實驗，捕捉現代感覺，達到全新的美學效果，是不同於以往文學的主要特徵，可以說，西方現代主義思潮的接受及大量生產，對殖民資本主義現代做出的文學反應，是具有審美現代性特徵。本文主要是以西方現代主義文學的影響關係、對當代殖民資本主義現代的認知，以及韓國變容樣貌為基準，考察了三○年代現代主義文學的三個面向共六位作家的詩作。 首先，屬於早期作家的金起林和金光均：在文學風格上兩者雖有差異，但大體來講，技法上他們受到英美現代主義系列意象主義影響較為深刻，其詩儘量排除情感，以意象的堆砌來表達訊息，突顯出較為理智的態度；在內容方面，則偏重描寫現代都市的外面風景，並間接表達對現代的看法。第二個面向為李箱和吳章煥：他們分別受到達達主義和象徵主義影響，對現代的屬性和本質，進行更深層及內面性的探索，共同呈現負面的現代認識。第三個面向，以鄭芝溶和白石為代表：他們透過韓國民族的情感和前現代農村共同體的美好記憶，來尋找能夠擺脫現代不安和自我分裂危機的方法。

The Modernist literature in Korea in the 1930s reflects social changes caused by capitalist development on one hand, and it gives diversified literary responses to the experience of colonial rule on the other hand. In particular, the key difference from the literature in the past lies in the capture of modern feeling by experimenting with different techniques and styles to achieve brand-new aesthetic effects. In other words, iterary responses made to colonial capitalism via the acceptance and production of Western Modernism have the characteristics of aesthetic modernity. From the perspective of the influence of Western Modernist literature, the modern recognition of contemporary colonial capitalism, and the transformation of Korea, this study performs an analysis on three dimensions of Modernist literature in the 1930s by discussing the poetic works of six poets. To begin with, this study discusses the poems written by the earlier poets, Kim Ki-Rim and Kim Kwang-Gyun. Regardless of slight differences in writing styles, technically they are deeply influenced by imagism, a movement of Modernism in Britain and the United States. In their poems, emotions are seldom seen, and messages are delivered by means of numerous images, to present a more rational style. In terms of the content, they prefer to depict the scenery of urban areas, and indirectly express their viewpoints in modern times. Secondly, Yi Sang and O Chang-Hwan are influenced by Dadaism and symbolism, respectively. They carry out a deeper and more internal exploration of properties and the nature of modern times, and finally obtain a negative understanding of modernity in common. Thirdly, Chong Chi-Yong and Paek Sok attempt to figure out solutions to modern unrest and the risk of self-splitting by means of the national sentiment of being Koreans and pleasant memories of pre-modern rural communities.