Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Cold War, Two Chinas, and acceptance of China and Chinese literature in 1950s and 60s Korea
|Keywords: ||冷戰 ; 台灣 ; 共產中國 ; 冷戰對外政策 ; APACL（亞洲人民反共聯盟） ; ASPAC（亞太協議會） ; 藝術團 ; 檢閱 ; 中國文學史 |
Cold War ; Taiwan ; Red China ; Foreign Policy in the Cold War ; APACL (Asian Peoples Anti Communist League) ; ASPAC(Asian and Pacific Council) ; art delegation ; censorship ; history of China literature
|Issue Date: ||2020-11-24 10:22:24 (UTC+8)|
After the end of the Cold War, Korean government broke diplomatic relations with Taiwan and established diplomatic relations with Communist China. These actions transformed Koreans' attitude toward China fundamentally. Behind these turn, there is a difficult history of acceptance of Chinese literature in Cold War Korea. It is a good example that the acceptance of Cao Yu's ＂Thunderstorm＂ in Cold War Korea. Korean approaches to china and acceptance of Chinese literature in Cold War period can't be just characterized by a binary structure: selecting Taiwan and excluding Communist China. As Korean intellectuals' continued interest in Mao Zedong shows, what is officially considered excluded had promoted another way to understand China. In 1950s and 60s Korea, relationship with two Chinas was promoted or, conversely, limited by Korean governments' Cold War controls and diplomatic policies. It was foundations of Asian People's Anti-Communist League (APACL) in 1954 and Asian and Pacific Council (ASPAC) in 1966 that materialized Korean governments' Korean-led Asian regional initiative. Though these organizations couldn't be military alliance such as NATO because it would conflict American East Asian policies, it promoted paradoxically Korean cultural exchanges and cooperations with other Asian countries. In 1950s, Cultural exchanges between Korea and Taiwan were mostly taken in form of goodwill missions' Southeast Asia tour held by APACL, these tours are nothing but a ideological solidarity based on Anti-communism and dictatorship. Korean journalism's discussions on Communist China also followed Cold War antagonism because their sources was very limited and depended on American materials. However, It began a new phase of Korean approach to China in the 1960s. As détente mood has arrived and Park's Administration began to implement a more Asia-conscious foreign policies, it improved that studies of Communism and Modernization in Asia, especially Communist China. While American private foundations including Ford and Asia Foundations assist the development of international cold war networks, it became to broaden transnationally that area of study on Communist China. Koreans' main interest about Taiwan was shifted from cultural issues to economic issues, focusing issues of Modernization in Taiwan. These changes on way to understand Two Chinas also work translating and accepting of Chinese literature. There are very little Chinese works in world literature anthologies in the late 1950s, and it were just traditional Chinese literature or Taiwanese writers' works in them. Koreans didn't think that Chinese literature have significant for world literature a whole. However, Chinese literature is second only to Anglo-American works in the number of translations, most of them included traditional Chinese literature, Taiwanese wuxia fictions, and some of Taiwanese post-war literature. Many of those translations are the excluded works in both Communist China and Taiwan. In 1950s and 60s, Korean translations and acceptance of foreign literature were generally controlled by Cold War censorship, as well as its lack of academical and journalistic infrastructures: related department in high education system, scholarly societies, and academic journals. In 1960s, Lin Yutang's and Lu Xun's works were accepted as ideological and cultural materials which support Cold War Anti-communism. Besides Chinese literature were inevitably translated and got acceptation in Cold War context, a series of histories of Chinese literature were steadily published. These works have merits as systemic approach, but generally give Taiwanese literature legitimacy as a successor to Chinese modern literature. It also shows that the boundaries of Korean understanding Two Chinas was limited by Cold War.
|Relation: ||臺灣文學學報,36, 137-163|
|Data Type: ||article|
|DOI 連結: ||https://doi.org/10.30381/BTL.202006_(36).0005|
|Appears in Collections:||[臺灣文學學報 THCI Core] 期刊論文|
Files in This Item:
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.