2018, Vol., No.77

Journal of Japanese Culture 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 0.36

pISSN : 1226-3605 / eISSN : 2733-8908
https://journal.kci.go.kr/JJC

This study aims to examine self-representation of Korean writers in Japan and the others-representation of Japanese writers by focusing on the most-cited crimes committed by Korean residents in the post-war Japan, including the case of Lee Jin-woo in 1958 and the case of Kim Hee-ro in 1968. As a result, in his work, Kim Seok-beom has come to the conclusion of the asymmetrical relationship, which is just built when the identity of Korean residents in Japan passes through Japanese as perpetrators, as the defeat of the Koreans themselves in Japan. This is consistent with the need for self-reliant self-construction in the relationship of irrelevance, emphasized by Kim Seok-beom in the dispute of the contemporary 'third way'. In addition, Mishima Yukio's 『A Defense of Culture』 has been criticized so far for its jump in the logic, but it sharply points out that the Japanese as both victims and as perpetrators, who refer to the Kim Hee-ro incident, misuse ‘nationalism as a means’ as needed. In this sense, it can be seen that contemporary Korean-Japanese media reports and the Korean government's recognition of Kim Hee-ro also relied heavily on 'nationalism as a means' rather than considering the specificity of Korean residents in Japan.

Korean-Japanese literature started to be noticed in the late 1960s; it has become a part of Japanese literary history and has been mentioned in Japanese literary circles since the 1980s. In this process, a dozen writers who maintained the flow of Korean-Japanese literature have won prestigious literary awards in Japanese literary circles, leaving marks on literary history. This made them parts of Japanese literary circle, but the others expelled from it, and, as a result, in turn oversimplified the potentials of Korean-Japanese literature. In this study, the narratives that have been unnoticed in Korean-Japanese literary history were analyzed from the perspective of “double minorities.” These double-minority narratives show that Korean-Japanese writers have been identified as a double minority (first by their nation or ethnic group as a Korean-Japanese [Zainichi], and second as another minority due to the hierarchy within Korean-Japanese literary circles). In this regard, this study focused on interpreting the possibility of embracing and, at the same time, transforming the historicity, that is, the ethnic and nation-centric meaning of Korean-Japanese narratives in double-minority narratives.

This study is a research to examine Hachiemon's statement appered in『TAKESIMATOKAIIKENKI』. Hachiemon was executed in 1836, because he went over the water to go to Takesima which was forbidden island. He wrote untruth in his book. The fakes are that he didn't know the truth which Takeshima is the territory of The Joseon Dynasty and he went to the Takeshima just one time at 1833. He and Hamadahan knew that the central government. forbade the traffic to the Takeshima. Although knowing the prohibitional law he went to the island under the name of going to the Matushima. The political backing of Hamadahan makes the voyage possible. He promise a large profit. In this book, We can see the description which he got arms from a retainer. A smuggling of arms were popular at that time. The word of smuggling is not appeared in this book, there were similar contents in scontemporary books such as『Tenpozakki』・『Takeshimakijiryakudan』・『takeshimakoshow』. There are reports like that Hathiemon secretly trades arms which got from Edo with Chinese and Koreans at Takeshima, Hachiemon and Hamadahan expected a large profit from smuggling. So they knew the prohibition law, Hamadahan allowed Hachiemon sailing to the island under the name of going to the Matushima.