구한말의 개혁가들은 국가 만들기에 먼저 관심을 가졌지만, 이러한 시 도가 실패로 돌아가고 대한제국이 국권을 상실해감에 따라 국가에 대한 기대를 접고 ‘아래로부터’ 네이션(nation)을 우선 만들고 이를 통해 궁극 적으로 ‘네이션 스테이트’(국민국가 또는 민족국가)를 만들어내려 했다. 그들은 서양이 성공한 이유를 연구하면서 마르틴 루터 등이 이뤄낸 ‘종 교개혁’이 중세적 마비를 이기고 개인의 주체성을 해방시켜 이를 통해 기개 넘치는 ‘네이션’을 만들어낼 수 있었다고 생각했다. 그래서, 개신교 를 배우기도 하고 박은식이나 한용운처럼 전통적인 유학이나 불교를 안 으로부터 개혁하려고도 했다. 박은식이 결정론적 경향이 강해 사람들을 수동적으로 만드는 경향이 있는 주자학의 대안으로 관심을 가졌던 것은 양명학, 정확히는 일본에 기원을 둔 ‘근대 양명학’이었다. 하지만, 박은식 의 경우 양명학을 철학적으로 깊게 천착했던 것은 아니고 개인적 주체성 이나 기개를 강조한다는 정도로 이해하고 있었으며, 이는 그의 왕양명 선생실기에서 잘 드러난다. 나라를 잃고 만주에서 망명생활을 하며 저 술한 몽배금태조는 좀 더 정치사상적 저작인데, 상무(尙武)을 강조하고 문약(文弱)의 폐단을 지적하는 것과 함께 공화주의적 요소와 혈연민족주 의 요소가 강조되고 있는 점이 주목된다. 그는 국내 통치자에 맞서는 기 개가 없이 어떻게 국외의 침략자들에게 맞설 수 있느냐면서 공화주의 내 지 민주주의가 독립의 필수요소임을 강조한다.

This article attempts to excavate Korean literary works influenced by modern Chinese literature during the Japanese occupation of Korea, based on which it also analyzes the ways in which Korean writers and intellectuals received, perceived and transformed modern Chinese literature. Research findings in this article are to be summarized as follow. Firstly, writers such as Guangsoo Yi and Nanson Choi, who lived during the nascent period of modern Korean literature, approached China in the image of a looser and Japan in the image of an empire. Thus, they completely excluded Chinese literature from the world literature since the Japanese occupation of Korea. This was a dark side of modern Korean literature as a result of Korea’s marginality in the colonial age. Secondly, Baekhwa Yang is generally regarded a first writer that received modern Chinese literature; but most of his works and translations related to China were from Japan since he introduced them to Korea by translating Japanese. Consequently, the perspective that Yang applied in approaching Chinese literature was not his own but Japanese during the colonial age. Although Yang’s contribution to the translation of modern Chinese literature needs to be fairly appreciated, one may not arguably say that he was the first writer who received Chinese literature based on a proper understanding of the trajectory of China’s intellectual history. Thirdly, Dong-gog Yi and Myung Yang are the critics who for the first time accepted Chinese modern literature into Korea on their own perspective. This study has a considerable significance in excavating, introducing and analyzing the large amount of their works. Dong-gog Yi had deep interest in the value and spirit of the Chinese New Cultural Movement, and was the first critic in Korea who accepted the value and spirit of modern Chinese literature in its full measure. Myung Yang was pursued ceaselessly in what direction Korean should lead their lives under the rule of Japanese imperialism, and for the first time accepted and blended Chinese modern theory with Korean reality. This was consequential of their struggles to overcome the dual problem of particularity and universality that Korea confronted during the colonial period. Thus they approached Chinese culture and literature in terms of the world historical conjuncture of decolonization and yearnings for modernity. They did not follow the trajectory of the reception of modernity via Japan as many Korean intellectuals did but groped for a way to receive it via China.