“The Influence of Russian Symbolism and Andrei Bely in 19201930’s Korean Literature”
Hye-Kyung Park
(Hallym University, South Korea)
1. The Modernization of Korean Literature
In 1908 Russian literature was first introduced to Korea by Korean modern writer Choi Namsun
(崔南善), who translated Lev Tolstoy’s story “The Victory of Love” (maybe, it is a translation of Чем
люди живы). But it was not until the 1920’s that Russian literature was accepted actively in Korea.
Russian literature was introduced to Korea primarily by Korean students who were studying in
Japan1, such as Ham Daehoon, Han Sik, Lee Iksan and Lee Kiyoung.2 Of course this situation was
not restricted to Russian literature, but almost every European literature was introduced to Korea
through Japan. “Our modern literature was not a direct acceptance from the West, but a
transplant through Japanese translation.”3 The following chart shows the ratio of translations of
European literature in 1920s and 1930s.
United Kingdom
France
Russia
1920’s
78
19.9%
91
23.3%
85
21.7%
1930’s
87
31.4%
63
22.7%
39
14.1%
Total
165
24.7%
154
23.1%
124
18.6%
And these are the numbers of translated Russian works from 1908 to 1949.
1908~1919: 38 works
1920~1929: 159 works
1930~1939: 91 works
1940~1949: 46 works
1
Korea was under Japanese rule for 36 years from 1910 to 1945, and at that time many Korean
intellectuals studied in Japan half-willingly and half not.
2
These are novelists and critics who engaged in proletarian literature after 1930’s.
3
조동일, 『한국문학과 세계문학』, 지식산업사, p. 92
One remarkable thing in this chart is that Russian literature was intensively translated in 1920s.
It was because Japanese colonial policy had changed from military to cultural after The March
First Independence Movement of 1919 in Korea. At that time the popular Russian writers in Korea
were Turgenev, Tolstoy, Chekhov, Dostoevsky, Sologuv, Gorky, Andreev, and Artsybashev. The
popularity of Artsybashev was also an influence of Japan. Actually he was not so popular in Russia
as other writers above-mentioned, but curiously enough he enjoyed public popularity in Japan.
From 1920’s to 1935(year of break-up of KAPF), the distinct characteristic of an acceptance of
Russian literature was an active introduction of Russian realism and a socialist realism. But after
1935 the influence of Russian literature was rapidly reduced. In 1935 after leaving League of
Nations, Japanese government took a hostile attitude to most European countries, and began
prohibit Western literature not only in Japan, but also in Korea. The effect was more dramatic in
Korea which was a Japanese colony at that time.
Korea had suffered a great deal under Japanese colonial rule from 1910 to 1945. Constraining
the Korean government to accede to the Korean-Japanese Annexation Treaty, Japan installed a
Governor-General in Korea and enforced military rule. Restrictions governing speech and
publications were especially severe. The March First Independence Movement of 1919 is
significant for the Korean literature under Japan during the colonial period. Strengthened by
feelings of national self-awakening which had been stirred up by this March First Movement, the
literature of that period began to show an interest in themes of self-discovery and individual
expression, as well as an increased interest in concrete reality. Literary coterie magazines emerged,
and literary circles were formed. This period also gave rise to a new and modern Korean poetry as
it borrowed from the French symbolism.
In the mid-1920s, Korean literature was divided into national and class literatures, in accordance
with the democratic and socialist ideals that were popular at that time. By 1925 the class literature
movement began to solidify with the organization of the Korean Proletarian Artists’ Federation
(KAPF). The proletarian literature movement, by expanding its organization and targeting the
elevation of class consciousness through literature, sought to strengthen class ideology in society.
During the 1930s, Korean literature underwent important changes as Japanese militarism was
strengthened and ideological coercion began to be applied to literature. New and various literary
trends developed. Many poems, short stories and novels written during this period experimented
with new styles and techniques by the influence of Modernism.
2. The Acceptance of Russian Literature and Russian Symbolism
Korean students who had studied in Japan published a various literary journals, such as
Hakjigwang (學之光), Samgwang(三光) and Taeseo-munye-sinbo(泰西文藝新報). Among these,
Taeseomunyesinbo particularly aimed to translate and introduce European literary works, and as a
result many new European works were introduced to Korea. Though French and Russian works
were translated by a similar amount4, much more intensively translated writers were Russian, such
as Tolstoy, Turgenev, Chekhov and Gorky. The pathfinder of Korean ‘modern poetry’ Joo Yohan
(朱耀翰) wrote in his journal Changjo(創造): “If we do not have prominent writers (to tell the truth,
there is no one), we have to translate foreign works first. How much stimulus did translations of
Russian works by Hutabatei Simei(二葉亭四迷) give to Japanese literary world?”
After 1930s, the influence of Russian literature in Korea had greatly decreased. According to a
remark of the representative realist writer Yeom Sangsub(廉想涉), one of the main reason was the
repression of Japanese government. He wrote that “even though it is hobby, the study of Russian
literature is considered dangerous by Japanese authority.” In Yeom’s context Russian literature
means Socialist Realism. Of course Japanese police kept watch on the socialist movement in Korea
and Japan, but its censorship was more severe in Korea. Many writers in colony, especially
KAPF(Korea artista proleta federatio in Esperanto) members and supporters of socialism,
worshiped Russian literature and tried to be translators of Russian literature. They considered
Russian literature as means of resistance to colonial reality.
In these social circumstances, the role and meaning of symbolism also underwent some
changes. During the colonial times, symbolism was imported from the West into Korea, but
through Japan. Korean writers read Japanese symbolist works as well as Japanese translations of
European symbolist novels and poems. “Korean symbolism is the result of adopting foreign
concepts through, for instance, the borrowing of modern words and cultural practices by Korean
writers from the non-Koreans, specifically the Japanese who were advanced in their own
importation of symbolism.”5 It results in a second-hand borrowing since it has been thought that
symbolism is European products.
4
The reason why French and Russian novels are translated more than any other European literature in
Korea was due to an influence of Japanese literary trend after the Meiji Restoration.
5
Seong-woo Choi, “A Comparative study on Korean Modernism in Colonial Modernity: A Literary-Historical
Approach to Transformation on Modernism” (Comparative Literature, Vol 65, 2015, 2), p. 507./ This
explanation is about Korean Modernism, but it can be applicable to symbolism too.
Symbolism in Korea was closely connected with external influences. Particularly, in the late 19 th
century, the emergence of modern Japan and its intrusion into Korea stimulated and provided a
direct model to build a nation-state. Korea did not take up a positive attitude toward
westernization before the colonial times. It began to import Western culture through Japan
because the Joseon Royal Court placed its confidence in Japan rather than in other Western
countries which were pressing Korea to open its doors in the late 19 th century. Since Korea
accepted Western culture through Japan, in many cases, the terms, “new”, “modern”, or “Western”
were understood as meaning “Japanese” by the Korean people.
Korean modern literature developed as a result of its indirect contact with Western literature
through Japan during the colonial times in the early of the 20 th century. Unlike the case of Japan,
“modernity” or “modernization” was not only a goal for achievement but also a target of rejection
in Korea. It is because modern or Western culture had begun to be accepted in Korea through
Japan. For this reason, the Korean writers had ambivalent attitude toward modernity. Moreover,
although Korean modern literature began to be affected by the literary fashions of the West via
japan, Western influence was not absorbed in its entirety because any literary theory or school of
one nation cannot be transplanted intact onto the soil of another in its pure form. (Choi, p, 492)
Symbolism was introduced in Korea in the end of 1910s, and developed as a literary movement
in the 1920s through Japanese symbolism. Korean Symbolism was influenced mainly by French
symbolism. In the beginning, Korean people could not import Western literature directly, except
through Japan. Since Korean readers chanced upon Western literature through Japan before
becoming discriminating in their literary taste, they accepted it wholly including those that were
misunderstood or altered by Japanese translators and writers. The Korean receivers could not
distinguish between the features of the original European modern literature and any alterations or
embellishments done by the mediators.
Although Korean writers in the 1920s were more highly educated than those in the 1910s, and
a few of them could understand the original European literary texts, most Korean writers and
intellectuals read them in Japanese translations, along with Japanese symbolist works and
criticisms. Thus, Korean symbolism cannot be discussed to the total exclusion of the influence of
Japanese symbolism. Korean symbolism is the result of adopting Western symbolist literary
thoughts and styles indirectly through Japan, more advanced in the importation of Western
symbolism. This is a kind of “translation,” and can be called “translated symbolism.”
3. Some Features of Korean Symbolism
Korean modern literature began with the import of European symbolism. In 1918, the literary
journal Taeseomunyesinbo (泰西文藝新報)made its first appearance aiming at an introduction of
European literature to Korea, and through this journal Korean writers and critics as Kim Uk(金億),
Hwang Seokwoo (黃錫禹)and Chu Yohan(朱曜翰) introduced eagerly Symbolism. The introduction
of symbolism was not only an acceptance of new literary trend or a change of literary technique,
but rather it can be understood as a turning point of Korean literature going forward to a
western-oriented modern literature. In Korea, symbolism was divided into two trends, one of them
was a direct acceptance of French symbolism, and the other a second-hand acceptance of
European symbolism through Japanese translation.
The representative of the former tendency is a poet and critic Kim Uk. In his article “French
Poetical World” Kim Uk explained French symbolism from its birth to the characters and the
limitations of Decadence and Parnassian schools. He described symbolism as follows: “What is
Symbolism? Symbolists seem to give us mystic answers about matters that transcend our
understanding. But the answer is very simple. Therefore, do not explain it. The medium to make
communicate each other the visible and the invisible world, the material and the spiritual world,
and the infinite and finite world is a symbol. It is allusion and mystery.”6 He was impressed by
French symbolists Mallarmé, Rimbaud and Baudelaire, but most of all he showed enthusiasm in
introducing Verlaine. Also he had translated Sologuv’s poetry. He was especially affected by
Verlaine’s poetical feeling, the feeling of grief, and it was because of the social circumstances of
that time. The failure of March First Movement and frustration of Korean people made him to be
absorbed in this poetical feeling.
Unlike Kim Uk, another symbolist Hwang Seokwoo had an interest in Japanese symbolism. In
the article “Two trends of Japanese Poetical World,” he explained systematically about Japanese
Symbolism, and introduced representative works of major Japanese symbolists. The significance of
this article is that it broadened the territory of Korean symbolism which having been under
influences of French Symbolism up to that time.
To sum up, symbolism played an important role in establishing Korean Modern literature.
First, after an acceptance of Symbolism, Korean poet could become aware of modern poetic
sense. Second, by accepting Symbolism, the base of verse libre(free verse) was established in
Korean literature.
6
Kim Uk, “French Poetical World,” Taeseomunyesinbo, 1918.12
4. Influence of Russian Symbolism
We cannot exclude the influences of Russian symbolism in a discussion of Korean modern
literature. As pointed out earlier, Korean symbolism was established under the influence of French
and Japanese symbolism. Otherwise, the influence of Russian symbolism is found in a little bit
different area. In regard to this we have to pay attention to Kim Kijin(金基鎭)’s role. In 1920s
Korean literature was divided into two trends, symbolism and socialism, and he was an actual
leader of the latter. Kim Kijin was one of a founding member of KAPF which was organized in
1925 professing an Anti-Conventional School and a proletarian literature. He studied English
literature from 1921 to 1923 at Rikyo University(立敎大學) in Japan. After the Great Kanto
Earthquake(關東大震災) in 1923, he returned to Korea and concentrated on Proletarian Literature
Movement. He tried to connect the art and the reality instead of the principle of “art for art’s sake,”
and in the process of establishing this thought he was influenced a lot from Japanese ideology of
socialism and Russian literature. First of all, it is known that Japanese novelist and socialist Aso
Hisasi(麻生久), with whom Kim met in Rikyo University years, had an important influence in the
formation of his socialist ideas. Aso advised Kim, “Kim sang, what is the use of doing literature?
Didn’t you tell me you like Turgenev? Your Chosun is similar to Russia fifty years ago. Sow seeds
in the virgin soil. You don’t have to study in Japan any more, but go back to Korea and sow seeds
there. That is more important to Chosun.” Kim believed that if the revolution of laboring class of
Russia would reach to Korea through Japan, Korea could recover its sovereignty. Besides, Japanese
socialist writers, Isikawa Dakuboku(石川啄木) and Nakanisi Inoske(中西伊之助) also gave influences
to the formation of his thoughts. It is said that the former made him to realize a mission of poetintellectual and the latter made him to realize an intellectual’s national consciousness under the
rule of colonization.
In 1923, after returning to Korea, he asserted to start a Proletarian literature movement in two
essays “Promenade, Sentimental” and “Globalization of Clarté Movement.” In “Promenade,
Sentimental” Kim introduced social ideas of Turgenev7 and Blok who occupy a prominent place in
a history of Russian mentality. What I am more interested in regard to this paper is why Kim
introduced Russian symbolist Blok in his article about proletarian literary theory. What attracted
Kim’s attention was that Blok participated eagerly in Russian revolution despite his symbolism.
Summarizing Blok’s “Intellectuals and Revolution” (Интеллигенция и революция, 1918), Kim, Just
7
Kim Kijin translated a part of Nezhdanov’s poem in Turgenev’s Nov’(Новь) and published it in
this journal.
like Blok, emphasized the role of poet-intellectuals, and at the same time expressed a reproach to
Bourgeois and an expectation of intellectuals.
In the period of Korean modern literature, there were some influences of Russian symbolism and
social theories. On the one hand, it came to Korea through Japanese translations, and on the
other hand, directly from Russia. But it turned out that there were little influences of Bely on
Korean literature. For Kim Kijin, Bely was just one of symbolist poets who supported Russian
revolution, and he was not interested in Bely’s symbolist works. Though he enumerated the names
of representative Russian symbolists, like Bryusov, Blok and Bely, for Kim these symbolists just had
a meaning as advocates of Revolution. In this period Bely’s poem “Christ is Risen”(Христос
Воскрес, 1918) was translated only two times in Korea. Kim wrote that “Let’s consider that Russian
symbolists supported Revolution.” The translator of Bely’s “Christi is Risen”, Dokin(毒人) published
an article “Literary World of Laborer’s and Farmer’s Russia” in 1927. He said that revolutionary
poems began from the period of restaurant literary when people read poems loudly, and there
was not enough time. Bely became the object of study in Korea only after the collapse of Soviet
Russia.
5. Acceptance of Bely in Korea after the 1990s
[Translated works]
«Серебряный голубь» (1992), trans. by Park Hyekyung
«Петербург» (2006) trans. by Lee Hyunsuk
[Articles]
Bae DaeHwa (2001) Нарративный аспект в Петербурге: перформативная повествовательная
ситуация и шизофреническое повестовование
Kim Heesook (2014) Орфей в русском символизме (Orpheus in Russian Symbolism)
Kim Yeonkyung (2010) Literature : Mythologization of Dostoevsky and Bely`s 「Petersburg」
Lee Hyungu (1998) 'From Kant to Rickert and Beyond' : A Study on the Ontological Nature of
Andrei Bely's Theory of Symbolism
Lee Hyungu (2002) A Reinterpretation of Russian Iconography - The Rediscovery of Russian Icons
in the Silver Age and Andrei Bely's 《The Silver Dove》
Lee Hyunsuk (2006) Poetics of Leitmotif in Petersburg
Lee Myunghyun (2014) К вопросу духовности русского символизма - Теургическая идея у В.
С. Соловьева и А. Белого
Park Hyekyung (1999) Silver Dove of Andrei Bely – Confrontation between East and West
Park Sunyoung(2011) «Апокалипcический ритм времени» у Андрея Белого (1) «Петербург»
как «роман Конца»
Park Sunyoung(2013) «Апокалиптический ритм времени» у Андрея Белого (2) «Петербург»
как «роман Начала»
Park Youngeun (2005) Steiner's Theosophical Usage of Color in Andrei Bely's Novel «Petersburg»
Bibliography
김영철(1983), 「한국 상징주의의 수용양상 – 김억, 황석우, 주요한의 대비적 고찰을 중심으로」,
『인문과학연구』.
박은미(2006), 「일본 상징주의의 수용 양상 연구」, 『우리文學硏究』 21 집
손성준(2015), 「동아시아 근대번역문학사 시론 – 1930 년대까지의 소설을 중심으로」, 『비교문학』
제 65 집, pp. 189-225.
엄순천(2008), 「한국문학 속의 러시아문학 – 한국근대문학으로의 러시아문학 수용 현황 및
양상」, 『인문학연구』, 제 35 권 제 1 호, pp.93-124.
한계전(1983), 『한국현대시론연구』, 서울: 일지사.
한국현대문학연구회(1992), 『한국근대장편소설연구』, 서울: 모음사.
Choi, Seong-woo(2015), “A Comparative Study on Korean Modernism in Colonial Modernity: A
Literary-Historical Approach to Transformation on Modernism”, 『비교문학』 제 65 집.