동아시아 근대의 문화론적 전환과 3.1운동

초록

Japan and China’s adoption of the German concept of culture before World War Ⅰ was marked with confusion. Culture, as used in those times, had few distinctions from the traditional concept depicted in the Chinese character for civilization: 文化. This German concept, however, failed to spread into a practical cultural movement in Japan, despite the widespread growth of ‘culturalism’ philosophy after World War Ⅰ. In contrast, the introduction of the German concept of culture into China after the failed Xinhai Revolution catalyzed the New Culture Movement. China, unlike Japan, and with few philosophical groundings adopted ‘the concept of culture’ and developed a strong cultural movement that made struggles with old ways a powerful slogan. In the case of Korea, the importation of ‘the concept of culture’ into Korea via Japan led to renewed interest in Korean traditions. The concept, at the time, equated to nationality in ways that emphasized Korean characteristics and reinforced national self-awareness. And while the movement to preserve national characteristics prior to Korea’s annexation to Japan carried signs of a new cultural movement, a full development failed to take place in the 1910s (despite Lee Kwangsoo’s activities in ‘spiritual civilization’). Regardless, the flow of principle of national self-determination and reconstructionism in world history had great influences on Korea, which culminated in the March First Declaration of Independence. The overarching logic at the time aimed at using civil disobedience to gain national self-determination and to embark on a new civilization and culture while reordering the world order. Combined with the concept of culture, the principle of national self-determination and reconstructionism became a powerful weapon. The March First Declaration of Independence thus became a ‘cultural bill of rights’ that ushered in a new era of culture to Korea and the world. In this regard, the March First Movement may be called a ‘struggle for culture.’ The article presents three major shifts in East Asian modernity that the March First Movement encouraged. First, the March First Movement undermined preexisting hierarchies within the civilizational paradigm. Second, the movement was predicated on an “era of culture” endemic of the 1920s. Third, the movement opened new opportunities to further strengthen reciprocity of the ‘colonial modern’ in East Asia and the world, which became part of a new modern society through Wilson-Roosevelt’s post-WWII liberal planning.

키워드